Zeiten des Aufruhrs

First, for the chemistry between Winslet and DiCaprio, Second - for the amazing performances of Kathy Bates and Michael Shannon. Not the last for the accuracy of recreated atmosphere. A splendid film because it seems escape out of script. And because it has the potential to be a film about its public. Each of us has dreams and regrets and desire of beginning. Each of us is confronted with decisions, responsabilities, duties. And the answer is not alwazs the best. So, a magnificent film about people, vulnerabilities, crisis and the cold solution.

I went to see this at an advanced screener in Leicester Square last night. Kate Winslett chatted about the film on stage afterward. I went as one of those people who'd read the book and consider that source material to be amongst the best literature I'd ever read. I was wondering if and how the film could match up. My prior concerns were about how accurate the film would be. Well, there's nothing to worry about there. Mendes has created a near carbon copy of the book, the locations, characters and scenes are all exactly as I 'saw' them on the page. Nothing (as far as I could tell) is portrayed out of order, no extra characters are introduced, and no primary characters are dropped or altered. The acting is 100% perfect. The mies-en-scene is perfect. Absolutely nothing could or should have been done differently. So why not 10/10? The problem lies in the fact that Yates' novel is a literary one, much of the essence of the experience of the story is realized by Yates with just the right turn of phrase or choice of word. How does a director set about depicting or capturing this visually? I don't think he really can, he needs to use cinematic tricks and devices to inject resonance, the same resonance Yates achieves with that turn of phrase. But in being so (probably rightly) concerned about being true to the source material, the film somehow comes up a little flat as a film going experience, a sort of American Beauty without the crucial stylistic bells and whistles. Kate Winslett said afterward that (interestingly) it was she who had brought the book and the project to her husband, not vice versa and that it took some consideration for Sam Mendes to convince himself that he hadn't already told this story before, and by the final credits, I too was thinking just that, it felt like I'd watched a prequel to American Beauty, but without the pizazz and the rapture and the delight. So, the book, 10/10, the film, 8/10.

Having been a 50s housewife with children at home and a husband who wanted to be anywhere but there, this movie was familiar territory. How many of us in those years simply packed our dreams away for the immediate necessity of putting food on the table and paying the mortgage? Di Caprio is outstanding, as is Winslet, she having to deal with an American accent along with the tearing emotions. I didn't see that anyone picked up on the final scene, of Kathy Bates and her husband, but to me that was the whole moral of the story - here is where you will end up if you give in to what you know is not right for you. Overall, though, well done - except women in the 50s did NOT wear hats to work!!

Leonard DiCaprio and Kate Winslet star in "Revolutionary Road," a 2008 film directed by Sam Mendes. The film also features Kathy Bates and John Givings.

It's 1955. Frank and April Wheeler have been married seven years, live in the Connecticut suburb and have two children. Frank works for a company that his father worked for, and he hates his job. April is a stay-at-home mom who wanted to be an actress.

While it might look good on the outside, this isn't the life either one envisioned. But April has an idea. They have enough money saved so that they can move to Paris, a city Frank loves. She can get a job as a secretary, which pays very well over there, and Frank can stay at home and decide what he really wants to do with his life. It sounds possible but maybe not practical, though Frank ultimately agrees to it.

Frank can't seem to find the right moment to give his notice; and then April discovers that she is pregnant. What now? There are lots of layers in this emotionally resonant, magnificently acted film. It's very much a story of its time for several reasons. The first is that it's obvious that April suffers from very bad depression. Though post-war psychological problems were recognized, actual depression, especially in a woman, probably wasn't given much attention. It was the returning soldiers who had suffered trauma who had the psychiatric focus. If by some means she had been discovered to have clinical depression, the medicine was horrible.

The second thing is that it was 1955. The ideas of picking up and moving to Europe with your family and the woman as breadwinner were outrageous back then. Now, not so much.

The third reason is that April at least had an artist's mentality and an artist's way of looking at the world. In this world, we have the practical and the artist, as in the O'Neill play Beyond the Horizon, where one brother is a farmer and the other brother is a poet who dreams of going out to sea. The problem is, there's no way to kill those attributes, and if you try, you won't be happy. April shouldn't have been married, shouldn't have been living in the suburbs, and shouldn't have stayed home.

Frank is more practical, though he'd like to be different, would like to do something he loves, if only he knew what that was. April thought he was cosmopolitan, adventurous, and that together, they'd be special. The idea that they're not special is something she can't tolerate.

This is such a fascinating movie about life's disappointments, punctuated with some humor by Kathy Bates as Mrs. Givings, a loquacious woman, whose son (Michael Shannon) has been institutionalized. When he meets the Wheelers, he has an uncanny way of speaking exactly the truth no one wants to hear. Shannon does a fantastic job in these disturbing scenes.

A shattering movie. I like to be entertained in films. I feel like we all have so much to reality to face, why not be able to turn away from it - but a beautifully realized film like this about dysfunction - somehow, I don't mind.

Revolutionary Road is not a very joyful film, or is it easy to watch. Instead of being simply entertaining, it achieves what not many films these days do. It wants to be a learning lesson.

This film is superbly crafted, in both the writing and the amazing direction by Sam Mendes. After his great film 'American Beauty', he comes back with strong will to do this project. His direction is the best of the year for sure. It feels so professional, so alive. The writing, both of the characters, Frank and April Wheeler, I feel they are so open and 3-dimensional characters, but the screenplay wants to let us inside their lives, and it does so with great passion. Leonardo Dicaprio plays Frank with such intensity, with such force. Dicaprio gives his best performance here without a doubt, since I don't really think he has ever done something like this before. Then there is Kate Winslet. My favorite actress, and certainly one of the most talented out there. Winslet has surprised me before in a lot of movies, but here, she surprises me in a whole other way. Her silent, unlikeable, and sometimes human and cold portrayal of April Wheeler is one of the best performances of the decade. She gives the best female performance of the year, and I truly hope she finally wins the Oscar she deserves.

The film itself is so beautiful, so alive, yet at the same time, so dark to what the film is about. The cinematography is amazing, as well as the costumes and the whole set designs. The music, the original score, was so unsettling, perfectly balanced to what each scene brought.

Revolutionary Road is not a film for everyone. I can definitely see some critics will hate it, but it should certainly be respected, for its ambition, for the things it accomplishes and every thing it portrays. I think this is Mendes' masterpiece. I have not seen a better made film this year.