Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:16 am



Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 
 The Hours 

What grade would you give this film?
A 53%  53%  [ 8 ]
B 13%  13%  [ 2 ]
C 20%  20%  [ 3 ]
D 13%  13%  [ 2 ]
F 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 15

 The Hours 
Author Message
College Boy Z

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
Post The Hours
The Hours

Image

Quote:
The Hours is a 2002 drama film directed by Stephen Daldry, and starring Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Ed Harris. The screenplay by David Hare is based on the 1999 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel of the same title by Michael Cunningham.

The plot focuses on three women of different generations whose lives are interconnected by the novel Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf. Among them are Clarissa Vaughan (Streep), a New Yorker preparing an award party for her AIDS-stricken long-time friend and poet, Richard (Harris) in 2001; Laura Brown (Moore), a pregnant 1950s California housewife with a young boy and an unhappy marriage; and Virginia Woolf herself (Kidman) in 1920s England, who is struggling with depression and mental illness whilst trying to write her novel.

The film was released in Los Angeles and New York City on Christmas Day 2002, and was given a limited release in the US and Canada two days later on December 27, 2002. It did not receive a wide release in the US until January 2003, and was then released in UK cinemas on Valentine's Day that year. Critical reaction to the film was mostly positive, The Hours received nine Academy Award nominations including Best Picture and Nicole Kidman won an Oscar at the 2003 Academy Awards for her portrayal of Virginia Woolf.


Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:05 pm
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 34875
Location: Minnesota
Post 
Image


THE HOURS (2002)


The Hours was, unfortunately, a pointless, pretentious film. It's too bad to, because it looked great, and I love Julianne Moore. But all the three main characters needed were some friggin' anti-depressants, and they would have been fine. None of their problems were all that big or severe, nothing to commit suicide over. They just seemed like they were a big deal to them. I sadly found it very disappointing. It was all about the acting, and short on any real story. It was just a movie to display the talent of three excellent actresses and try to win them some Oscars. The movie itself is nothing without them.

I found Julianne Moore's other 2002 film, Far From Heaven (9/10 or A-), to be much better, and her performance was certainly better too. She did what she could here, but just couldn't show off her real talent playing such a thinly written character. It wasn't just her character, it was all of the characters. While watching this I soon understood why it got such negative Cinema Score ratings. I couldn't picture any mainstream audience member liking this movie, well, not most anyway. And it's not just mainstream audience members, I can't picture a lot of people enjoying it. I could have written something with very thin characters, gotten three excellent Oscar-caliber actresses to take the leads, and then watched the great reviews and Oscar buzz flow in too. I'm sorry, but I just don't really see how someone could not think the story is thinly written. There's just no character development. Don't get me wrong, if someone likes it I don't care, it doesn't bother me and I don't think they are wrong, I just personally don't see what they saw in it. We all have our own opinions, and if someone loved this film, I can respect that. I just happened to be very letdown by it.

Nothing really happens in this movie, and it might seem like you've spent "hours" watching it.

Grade: 5/10 ( C )


Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:51 pm
Profile
Extra on the Ordinary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:50 pm
Posts: 12821
Post 
Mike wrote:
Image


THE HOURS (2002)


The Hours was, unfortunately, a pointless, pretentious film. It's too bad to, because it looked great, and I love Julianne Moore. But all the three main characters needed were some friggin' anti-depressants, and they would have been fine. None of their problems were all that big or severe, nothing to commit suicide over. They just seemed like they were a big deal to them. I sadly found it very disappointing. It was all about the acting, and short on any real story. It was just a movie to display the talent of three excellent actresses and try to win them some Oscars. The movie itself is nothing without them.

I found Julianne Moore's other 2002 film, Far From Heaven (9/10 or A-), to be much better, and her performance was certainly better too. She did what she could here, but just couldn't show off her real talent playing such a thinly written character. It wasn't just her character, it was all of the characters. While watching this I soon understood why it got such negative Cinema Score ratings. I couldn't picture any mainstream audience member liking this movie, well, not most anyway. And it's not just mainstream audience members, I can't picture a lot of people enjoying it. I could have written something with very thin characters, gotten three excellent Oscar-caliber actresses to take the leads, and then watched the great reviews and Oscar buzz flow in too. I'm sorry, but I just don't really see how someone could not think the story is thinly written. There's just no character development. Don't get me wrong, if someone likes it I don't care, it doesn't bother me and I don't think they are wrong, I just personally don't see what they saw in it. We all have our own opinions, and if someone loved this film, I can respect that. I just happened to be very letdown by it.

Nothing really happens in this movie, and it might seem like you've spent "hours" watching it.

Grade: 5/10 ( C )


See, that's the problem with most people I think. They SIMPLY DONT GET IT.


It's not that they had terrible lives. Or terrible events that caused their depression. It just was.


Great movie with great performances from all three leads.

A

_________________
Image

Best Actress 2008


Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:03 pm
Profile WWW
You must have big rats
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
Post 
This is the only Best Picture nominee 2003 that I haven't seen yet. But too depressing for me to see at the moment...

_________________
The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!

Image


Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:47 pm
Profile WWW
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 34875
Location: Minnesota
Post 
Rod wrote:
Mike wrote:
Image


THE HOURS (2002)


The Hours was, unfortunately, a pointless, pretentious film. It's too bad to, because it looked great, and I love Julianne Moore. But all the three main characters needed were some friggin' anti-depressants, and they would have been fine. None of their problems were all that big or severe, nothing to commit suicide over. They just seemed like they were a big deal to them. I sadly found it very disappointing. It was all about the acting, and short on any real story. It was just a movie to display the talent of three excellent actresses and try to win them some Oscars. The movie itself is nothing without them.

I found Julianne Moore's other 2002 film, Far From Heaven (9/10 or A-), to be much better, and her performance was certainly better too. She did what she could here, but just couldn't show off her real talent playing such a thinly written character. It wasn't just her character, it was all of the characters. While watching this I soon understood why it got such negative Cinema Score ratings. I couldn't picture any mainstream audience member liking this movie, well, not most anyway. And it's not just mainstream audience members, I can't picture a lot of people enjoying it. I could have written something with very thin characters, gotten three excellent Oscar-caliber actresses to take the leads, and then watched the great reviews and Oscar buzz flow in too. I'm sorry, but I just don't really see how someone could not think the story is thinly written. There's just no character development. Don't get me wrong, if someone likes it I don't care, it doesn't bother me and I don't think they are wrong, I just personally don't see what they saw in it. We all have our own opinions, and if someone loved this film, I can respect that. I just happened to be very letdown by it.

Nothing really happens in this movie, and it might seem like you've spent "hours" watching it.

Grade: 5/10 ( C )


See, that's the problem with most people I think. They SIMPLY DONT GET IT.


It's not that they had terrible lives. Or terrible events that caused their depression. It just was.



Well, it sadly just wasn't that great ;). It's too bad too because this seemed like a movie I'd love. I love depressing stuff.


Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:54 pm
Profile
Veteran

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 3014
Location: Kansai
Post 
I've said it elsewhere, but while I respect many things about this movie, I didn't care for the story. I did watch it again recently on cable and appreciated it a little more the second time around. I thought Nicole's performance was great and much more than simply a prosthetic nose. And yes, it is a lead performance. Julianne Moore did well with a character that isn't allowed to say much. Surprisingly I didn't care for Meryl Streep much in this. I guess I just couldn't relate to some of the characters and the depression that they were experiencing. My grade: B.


Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:07 pm
Profile WWW
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am
Posts: 18842
Location: San Diego
Post 
One of my favorite films of 2002. A


Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:20 am
Profile
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:24 pm
Posts: 16061
Location: The Damage Control Table
Post 
So heavy handed the director could have beat Stallone in Over the Top.

I was waiting for even one moment where a single one of the characters might have something bordering on even a good day. Not a good life, not a good year, even one moment of joy. I completely failed to get involved in a movie where three out of the four characters attempt suicide at one point, and the fourth one (Streep) still has breakdowns every twenty minutes. Its one thing to explore people who are disillusioned and depressed, even as a common bond. But its another thing to hit the audiance over the head with externalization of that depression so many times out of lack of trust that we as an audiance may fail to understand that these women might be unhappy.

C+


Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:17 am
Profile
La Bella Vito
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 11:56 pm
Posts: 9146
Post 
I didn't like it very much, but it does have some redeeming qualities about it. The only thing that saves this film is the incredible performances, and I thought the scene with water rushing in Julianne Moore's hotel room was fantastic. Nicole Kidman is amazing, and so is Meryl Streep, as usual. So I guess you can say that the performances kind of make up for the mediocrity of the film, but not quite enough for me to recommend it.

C+


Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:58 am
Profile YIM WWW
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8626
Location: Syracuse, NY
Post 
THE HOURS seems like a film I'd love. It's depressing, it has amazing actresses in it and it got some amazing reviews. After I watched the film I was wondering if this was the Oscar nominated film made back in 2002. I thought it was boring and the acting was average at best. The story never goes anywhere, normally it wouldn't bother me but what was happening in the movie was just too boring, I didn't care about any of the charactors at all. THE HOURS could have been a great film but was a big ol' bore.

5/10 (C-)

_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016

1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water


Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:37 am
Profile YIM WWW
The French Dutch Boy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:28 pm
Posts: 10266
Location: Mordor, Middle Earth
Post 
One of the best directed films I have ever seen, as well as one of the strongest casts I have ever seen. This film is an easy A+, and one of my all-time favourites. There's just so much going on in this film in terms of thematic and visual value, as well as the top-notch acting and the great joint work of the director and editor.

PEACE, Mike ;)


Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:28 pm
Profile
Christian's #1 Fan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:25 pm
Posts: 28110
Location: Awaiting my fate
Post 
Great film with absolutely amazing performances by Kidman, Streep and Moore. While it is quite heavy-handed it is still an incredible film to watch. A

_________________
See above.


Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:10 pm
Profile
The French Dutch Boy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:28 pm
Posts: 10266
Location: Mordor, Middle Earth
Post 
dolcevita wrote:
So heavy handed the director could have beat Stallone in Over the Top.

I was waiting for even one moment where a single one of the characters might have something bordering on even a good day. Not a good life, not a good year, even one moment of joy. I completely failed to get involved in a movie where three out of the four characters attempt suicide at one point, and the fourth one (Streep) still has breakdowns every twenty minutes. Its one thing to explore people who are disillusioned and depressed, even as a common bond. But its another thing to hit the audiance over the head with externalization of that depression so many times out of lack of trust that we as an audiance may fail to understand that these women might be unhappy.

C+


I completely and utterly disagree. I cannot express how wrong I think you are.

The comment that the director played this heavy handed is news to me, because one of the things that I see in positive reviews of the film is the fact that Stephen Daldry played this film really tightly. There is no overbearing melodrama in this film, like the countless other films about depression. He plays it really clean and tight until only certain breaking points in the film for all three women; the trip to the hotel, Richard's death, and the train station scene. The film has elements that makes the viewer feel sad, no doubt. These are required. But ultimately I regard it as a positive experience, and the films ending, with absolutely NO doubt in my mind, is a positive one. The fact that Virginia's suicide was shown at the beginning of the film, instead of just the end, shows the directors knowledge of this. Immediately this is shown and gotten out of the way, so that when we view Virginia throughout the film, we don't think "okay, come on already, we know she's going to commit suicide, let's just get on with it." Instead we are able to focus on the real details. I also firmly maintain that Virginia's suicide is a good thing, and can be wrongly interpreted as a morbid, depressing ending. Virginia says herself: "Someone must die, so that others may live." She felt unhappy, and knew it was unavoidable, and she felt she was a burden on her husband Leonard.

When Richard commits suicide, I hardly consider it heavy handed. Infact, I consider that the positive breaking point; the point at which Clarissa is finally free from Richard and his illness and the opression he brought with him. Again, the director made the perfect choice in not showing his dead body like in the book, which would insight a more morbid, unrealistic feeling.

And Laura, instead of choosing death, chooses life. Yes, she left her family, but she NEEDED to. She was not happy in her required role as dutiful housewife. The fact that she chose to live on instead of commiting suicide is incredibly moving, especially in regards to the way the director built it up. Credit also goes to the editor. And I cannot remember an exact quote at the moment, but at the end when Laura is speaking to Virginia, she talks about guilt and her leaving her family, as she is in a way judged by Clarissa. But she goes on to say what is guilt, when she had to leave her family? What is guilt, when the pressures from her husband and child made her so unhappy? She chose to live life, and that is what counts.

And back to Clarissa again. At the end of the film, I don't see how this can be mistaken, but Clarissa is clearly much happier. The perfect touch was the scene when she is finally not so neurotic that she is able to turn off the hallway lamp and go to bed for the first time.

By the way, this film is about one day in the life of the women, not a whole bunch of days or their life, as you seem to imply. Simply an observation of the day in the life of these women, and one that connects them all and shows the communality of life. The film essentially teaches us about life and how we should not just let the hours pass by. It makes us reflect onto our own life and question ourselves. It makes us think. Life has its ups and downs, and it is continually changing, but it’s when you chose to manoeuvre yourself within it and accept your journey that allows you to realize that happiness is right around you.

So, this is has turned out longer than I ever expected, but I certainly had to comment on your comments, as I didn't and don't feel they are justified. This film would join the ranks of the rest of the manipulative films about life and depression if it weren't for all of the people involved in this film, including the director, the amazing writer, the editor, and the superb group of actors involved (including the supporting males) that prevented that, and made this one of the most impecible films about life. And all I have talked about only addresses certain themes of the film. There are others, including some amazing visual touches (including the use of symbolic yellow flowers throughout the film) and some fabulous use of editing.

PEACE, Mike ;)


Sun Jul 31, 2005 4:09 am
Profile
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
Post 
Just caught this on Netflic Watch Now.
Surprisingly, I didn't find it at all boring. I really, really enjoyed it. The performances were great all around, although I felt Claire Daines was completely overqualified for her role, but this movie was such Oscar-bait they had to give even the inconsequential roles to brilliant actors.
But yeah, I liked it a lot, although I felt the connection between the two American stories was unnecessary and was just included to appease people who saw the movie as pointless.
And although short, the water scene was beautiful...one of the most stunning shots I've ever seen in a movie.
Nicole was in-fucking-credible. Meryl was good as always, and Julianne was even better (she had more to work with). It was very effective and exceptionally well written.
So my only problems with this movie were that it was overtly Oscar-baity, and the "twist/connection" at the very end.

A-


Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
The Hours: Seemed Like Days...


...but I fell in bittersweet love with the profound themes of this uber-chick-flick.

What happens when it ends? It goes back to where it came from. I don't remember where it came from. Neither do I.

If you choose to visit these three women, all's I can say is fare well...

:cry:

7 out of 5.


Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:51 pm
Profile
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
Post 
Melodramatic, but really well-made. The acting is fabulous, especially Nicole Kidman (and her nose). B+


Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:30 pm
Profile
The Lubitsch Touch
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:48 pm
Posts: 11019
Post 
I thought it excrutiating.

_________________
k


Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:42 pm
Profile
Cream of the Crop
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 2913
Location: Portugal
Post 
I've loved it since I saw it years ago, and strangely enough (or not) it's still one of those rare movies I like to revisit from time to time. At least parts of it.

Still the most deserving BP nominee that year, by far and one of my all time faves too. :happy:


A


Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:58 am
Profile WWW
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
yoshue wrote:
I thought it excrutiating.


Yes, I agree -- wasn't it great!

(Excrutiating is so hard to do well...)


Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:16 pm
Profile
ef star star kay
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:45 pm
Posts: 3016
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Post 
One of my all-time favorite movie...

A+

_________________
Image


Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:01 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:41 pm
Posts: 25109
Location: San Mateo, CA
Post 
bradley witherberry wrote:
yoshue wrote:
I thought it excrutiating.


Yes, I agree -- wasn't it great!

(Excrutiating is so hard to do well...)


Yep, I agree. The depressing movies feel so good when they are done well, and this one is top notch.

_________________
Recent watched movies:

American Hustle - B+
Inside Llewyn Davis - B
Before Midnight - A
12 Years a Slave - A-
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - A-

My thoughts on box office


Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:22 pm
Profile WWW
life begins now
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:09 pm
Posts: 6480
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Post 
Other than the acting, I wasn't overly impressed. It was still a good film, though.

B+


Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:01 pm
Profile YIM
llegó a la casa vía marítima
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:53 pm
Posts: 6129
Location: la gran casa de la esquina
Post Re: The Hours
A masterpiece. Stunning acting all-around, incredible editing and score...and most importantly, a story anyone can relate to, even if they don't know it.

A+

_________________
.


Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:23 pm
Profile
The Lubitsch Touch
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:48 pm
Posts: 11019
Post Re: The Hours
Stephen Daldry is a clown.

_________________
k


Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:08 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 24 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.