Mujeres en conflicto

Beautifully photographed in the English countryside, this odd film about three English women assigned to work on a farm during World War II provides the promise of heat but never delivers. None of the characters (perhaps the director should have focused on fewer characters to provide proper depth) nor the relationships between the characters are remotely believable. This film exhibits a dangerous trend in films today where the mentality of the 90's is transposed onto the 40's. Directors and screenwriters would be well advised to do more homework on the period in which their films take place. Further, good acting and excellent production values cannot overcome a mediocre script or lackluster direction.

I always love period dramas, especially films that focus on women and their friendships but this movie left me wondering what the point was after two hours. The three girls come to work on the farm with three totally separate personalities. You have Prue the party girl, Ag the uptight college girl, and Stella who is supposed to be the mainstay of the entire movie, the sensible one. In fact, it is Stella who narrates the movie and opens it with how she moved to the farm to help and be closer to her fiancee. So we establish that she's committed and in love with her fiancee, but within the first 30 minutes, she's falling in love with the farmhand Joe, even after saying how unspeakable he is, for no good reason. Worst of all, the reason is never explained on how she fell out of love with her fiancee and fell in love with Joe. And she seems to have no problem with Joe falling in love, or at least in bed, with everyone else around her. The movie did not make sense to me at that point. Still it is a quiet film with gorgeous English scenery and if you just want a movie that focuses on friendship, then this is the movie for you. I watched it once and that's enough.

The main interesting points of the film are the beautiful English countryside and the three actresses -Catherine McCormack, Rachel Weisz and Anna Friel... they're charming and witty, they're well together.

The film instead is quite boring -the story is not so intriguing, honestly. Many actions are quite predictable, emotions go not very high. The director doesn't propose anything special, the film is formally correct but it misses something...

It's a pity, because the period chosen for telling the story deserved a more accurate way of telling the facts.

I found the movie to be a well-acted warm, personal story of three women and the English farming family that they work for as members of the Ladies' Land Army during World War II. However, at times it makes chronological leaps without much warning and it may take a few minutes to figure out exactly what has happened and what the new season is or how much time has elapsed.

It was a very interesting insight into a period of England and the life-circumstances of the country in early World War II. At times though, I had a difficult time distinguishing the subtle English accents and found myself backing up to attempt to re-hear what had been said. Sometimes I still couldn't make sense of the accent, and I'm not referring to the usual colloquial British terms that are at times foreign to Americans, although the movie is full of those as well, which adds a very quaint touch.

All in all, it was a sort of feel-good movie that possibly could have had a little more punch in the ending. I was left with the feeling that it was a nice experience emotionally and educationally, but which falls a bit short of some movies of the genre, more so probably because of the production.

Another very good example of an understated British flick being elevated by a strong cast into something worth notice. In a refreshing take on the WWII drama, the focus is on the ones who stayed behind in the war-torn south of England, like the farmers to feed the impoverished nation; the women to keep the factories running and, as in "The Land Girls", to work the land in place of the absent men.

Stephen Mackintosh, my favourite underrated Brit actor, gives the film's best performance as Joe, the farmer's son who wishes he was anywhere but home, but he's well supported by Catherine McCormack, Rachel Weisz and Anna Friel as the unfeasibly but mercifully smouldering girls of the Women's Land Army. Tom Georgeson brings gruff character as Mr Lawrence, the farmer, and check out an early Paul Bettany appearance.

Thousands of women found a new freedom in work during the War, but they were expected to return to their domestic, invisible lives once the men returned. "The Land Girls" is not cinema verité; and doesn't pretend to tackle the grimness my mother talks of in England in the 40s and 50s. But who cares? – when I want grim I'll watch a documentary; I'll settle back happily any day to watch fine actors in a quiet, 'little' film with gorgeous Dorset scenery (it really is that beautiful, visit if you can) and a tender story.

It will be too slow, too uneventful, for some. Perhaps they'd have preferred a blowsy Hollywood version, where Antonio Banderas plays the farmer's son and Renee Zellwegger the upper crust beauty (hooray for the ghost of a UK film industry). But I found it gentle and charming just as it was; and when the ingredients are so fine to begin with, that's good enough for me. If you like this sort of thing I recommend Powell & Pressburger's magical "Canterbury Tale".