Un profesor de arte de libre pensamiento enseña a las conservadoras niñas Wellesley de los años 50 a cuestionar sus roles sociales tradicionales.Un profesor de arte de libre pensamiento enseña a las conservadoras niñas Wellesley de los años 50 a cuestionar sus roles sociales tradicionales.Un profesor de arte de libre pensamiento enseña a las conservadoras niñas Wellesley de los años 50 a cuestionar sus roles sociales tradicionales.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 6 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
I don't share the many negative comments about this movie. It is a fine drama, one that merits repeat viewings once or twice a year. It is NOT simply a 'Dead Poet's Society' for the girls. To call it that is to overlook all the fine, unique points about this movie.
Update: Saw it again March 2013, I enjoyed it as much as the first two times.
Update: Saw it again June 2017, I enjoyed it as much as the first three times.
But...
"The devil is in the details," as they say, and this picture has just enough surprises, just enough charm, just enough fine acting to make it worth watching. Movies do not have to be real to be worthwhile, they just have to be about real things. The questions "Mona Lisa Smile" covers are still very much with us, and may provoke considerable discussion in your house. This film is respectful enough of its subject matter and well-enough executed to make it a much better way to spend your time than most of what's out there now. Don't believe the sourpusses, this one's a good'un.
Well, I had that feeling indeed. It felt like Dead Poet's Society during some periods in the movie. But overall, it was still different. The surface story isn't that complicated and easy to follow. It's nothing new either. But it was displayed very well.
Sure, it's about a teacher... her passion to teach and the way she outwitted the students to get the best out of them... It also shows the way a good teacher cares for their students and so forth... and the way contradicting ideas may blind one's ideas and actions, towards those who they are meant for. Did that sentence sound weird or what? :).
You can't go wrong with the cast here. You've got Julia Roberts, Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Ginnefer Goodwin, etc. They played great in the movie.
Julia Roberts is just great at playing these emotional roles. It was believable as well. I at least could feel the frustration which she had. Her character is more of a confused type. She reminded me of Michelle Pfeiffer in Dangerous Minds... There was basically a mixture of confusion and dedication... thus as a teacher, despite how sure of she may be of her teaching methods, you also sense a nervousness in her... a feeling of uncertainty as to whether her methods of getting the messages across to the students or not will work. I thought Julia Roberts did a great job in that area.
Kirsten was just excellent. You could feel the internal turmoil going through her throughout the movie. One might argue that she had a pretty wack role and that she overacted etc. but I don't agree with that. She's practically a heartless b**** through the movie, but you can't help but understand why. The same goes for Julia and Maggie. Just the way they were depicted in the movie, you really felt for them. Ginnefer Goodwin's character was also funny and emotional to watch.
Marcia Gay Harden, as Julia's friend was great. She was a pretty funny character to watch, but at the same time, you just can't help but feel sorry for her.
Times have changed... from those times and now. Many might watch this movie and go, "Uhm, okay, what's the big deal?" But the problem is that women have gone through a great ordeal and struggle to get to where they are today in society. Even today, they still fight to gain respect in many areas in the world today.
I've heard many bad comments about this movie. And funnily enough, most of them come from guys... whilst the females found it a bit better. There were some negative comments but many said that they loved it, but felt that it wasn't a movie for everyone.
The movie tackling the issue of feminism only touches upon a small part of it all of course. One cannot tackle the whole aspect of feminism in any one single movie at all, and I found the focus to be good enough. There are many stereotypes here and I found them necessary to get the points across. If it were not for the stereotypes, people would be wondering what the point really was. But now that there are stereotypes, people will complain about them.
I thought that it was a bit too short. It could have focused a bit more on the other characters in the movie... i.e. the girls in school. A few more subplots and build ups may have been better. There was a little foreshadowing in the movie but one couldn't help but wonder where the movie was going. But what overcame this, from my point of view, was that you just felt that you wanted to get to know the characters in the movie more. The more you knew about each character, the more the characters knew about one another. I thought that was quite nice.
I would advise everyone with an open mind for dramas to go watch this movie. If guys see this movie as a "chick flick"... they really won't know what to expect cause this would be "the most THE chick flick for chicks" if you get my drift. I'm a guy and I found it entertaining... Whether it was insightful or not, I wouldn't say it was, due to experiences and stories throughout my life.
The movie isn't without flaws... There could have been even more character build up if only the director's were given more film to record the picture. But do watch this if you can :). It'll be worth the time, if you're patient enough :).
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaIn order to prepare for their roles, the leads were all put through a finishing school two weeks prior to filming. However, in contrast to the film's depiction, Wellesley College was never a finishing school. It was a private women's liberal arts college which emphasized social activism.
- ErroresAt the wedding, champagne is served in flute glasses. They were rarely used until the 1970s, when drier vintages became preferred. In the 1950s, champagne was served in champagne coupe (or saucer) glasses. They are still used in champagne fountains at weddings.
- Citas
Betty Warren: [Narrating] My teacher, Katherine Watson, lived by her own definition, and would not compromise that. Not even for *Wellesley*. I dedicate this, my last editorial, to an extraordinary woman who lived by example and compelled us all to see the world through new eyes. By the time you read this, she'll be sailing to Europe, where I know she'll find new walls to break down and new ideas to replace them with. I've heard her called a quitter for leaving, an aimless wanderer. But not all who wander are aimless, especially not those who seek truth beyond tradition, beyond definition, beyond the image.
- Créditos curiososThe end credits for the prominent cast and crew are set in front of vintage footage and advertisements showing women in the 1940s and '50s.
- Bandas sonorasLift Thine Eyes
from "Elijah"
Written by Felix Mendelssohn
Performed by Wellesley College Chamber Singers
Lisa Graham Conductor
Under license from Wellesley College Chamber Singers
Selecciones populares
- How long is Mona Lisa Smile?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Mona Lisa Smile
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 65,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 63,860,942
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 11,528,498
- 21 dic 2003
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 141,337,989
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 57 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1