ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,7/10
1,2 k
MA NOTE
Une jeune fille juive à Londres au XIXe siècle rêve de devenir actrice de théâtre.Une jeune fille juive à Londres au XIXe siècle rêve de devenir actrice de théâtre.Une jeune fille juive à Londres au XIXe siècle rêve de devenir actrice de théâtre.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Prix
- 2 victoires et 1 nomination au total
Avis en vedette
Boring and appallingly acted(Summer Pheonix). She sounded more Asian than Jewish. Some of the scenes and costumes looked more mid 20th century than late 19th century. What on earth fine actors like Ian Holm & Anton Lesser were doing in this is beyond me.
Sleepwalking, dead, boring, an endurance test for the audience - all have been said before so why am I adding to the comments I agree with? There is this:
"...it isn't before a man treats her badly that she realizes on stage, that she has talent and that she connects with the audience and emerges as a stronger human being."
This must be the reviewer's imagination talking. One can tell that this is the point of the movie that its makers are trying to make but they failed. Utterly. The only reason I kept it going in the machine was to see if they could redeem themselves. But they did not. It's a very big disappointment. There is no connection with the audience - either in the theater's audience inside the story itself or the movie audience watching this.
Too many close-ups, just way too many. I'd call it possibly a workshop on close-ups - if you're in the business. Otherwise, why waste money on this? It's just pointless.
"the film never reveals more than it needs to."
Honestly, it reveals nothing.
And yes, why was so much money thrown at this movie? I seriously wonder if the backers needed to lose money for tax purposes.
"...it isn't before a man treats her badly that she realizes on stage, that she has talent and that she connects with the audience and emerges as a stronger human being."
This must be the reviewer's imagination talking. One can tell that this is the point of the movie that its makers are trying to make but they failed. Utterly. The only reason I kept it going in the machine was to see if they could redeem themselves. But they did not. It's a very big disappointment. There is no connection with the audience - either in the theater's audience inside the story itself or the movie audience watching this.
Too many close-ups, just way too many. I'd call it possibly a workshop on close-ups - if you're in the business. Otherwise, why waste money on this? It's just pointless.
"the film never reveals more than it needs to."
Honestly, it reveals nothing.
And yes, why was so much money thrown at this movie? I seriously wonder if the backers needed to lose money for tax purposes.
I kept hoping this dispirited young woman would bring some life not only to her own, but to mine. Alas...that never happened.
Esther Kahn, a young Jewish woman, falls inwardly in love with the theatre, strives to become an actress...but no amount of help, even from the wonderful Ian Holm as tutor, brings her out of her flat, unresponsive stupor. Why she is eventually given the lead in "Hedda Gabler" stands as the most unconvincing development I think I've ever seen in a film.
The only plus I can offer for this movie are the lovely filmic moments with intimate still life images that say more than all the rest. Life stilled to near-death. What does that add to the viewers experience? Nothing in the evidence given accounts for her early alienation and therefore we can't truly go with it.
Esther Kahn, a young Jewish woman, falls inwardly in love with the theatre, strives to become an actress...but no amount of help, even from the wonderful Ian Holm as tutor, brings her out of her flat, unresponsive stupor. Why she is eventually given the lead in "Hedda Gabler" stands as the most unconvincing development I think I've ever seen in a film.
The only plus I can offer for this movie are the lovely filmic moments with intimate still life images that say more than all the rest. Life stilled to near-death. What does that add to the viewers experience? Nothing in the evidence given accounts for her early alienation and therefore we can't truly go with it.
I rented this thinking it might be interesting, and it might have been an interesting story except that is was told in such an uninteresting manner. Hard to follow, strange editing, disjointed storyline, the characters mumble, all in all a dreadfully dull waste of time. I just couldn't get into it and didn't care what happened to the characters - not even Ian Holm could save this film. Unless you need a cure for insomnia, I'd skip it. 3/10, and that's being generous.
10agaluro
Summer Phoenix did a great performance where you really feel what she's not able to feel and you just cannot understand what she has on her mind. Besides, she portrays a jewish girl who behaves really confronting the status quo of that century.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesChosen by "Les Cahiers du cinéma" (France) as one of the 10 best pictures of 2000 (#01)
- Citations
Nathan Quellen: Because what has to happen, is that every step you take has to be more unbelievable than the step before. E-Every step has to be - well it has to have an idea behind it, an idea t-that is so complex, it would take, 10 philosophers just to decipher it. Each step has to stretch like a rope - in the audiences mind. Until they can't bare it anymore and they wan to cry out, "Careful Esther you're going to break it".
- Autres versionsPremiered at the Cannes Film Festival with a Running Time of 157 minutes (2 hours 37 minutes), which was then cut down by 15 minutes, against director Arnaud Desplechin's wishes, for theatrical release in France and elsewhere. The cut version essentially removes three scenes: a dream sequence of Esther, and two scenes fleshing out the Philippe Haygard character. The full uncut version was released on DVD in France and has screened in a few places such as the Lincoln Center in New York in 2019.
- ConnexionsReferenced in I'm Still Here (2010)
- Bandes originalesSuite algérienne
[by] Camille Saint-Saëns
Performed by Orchestre Philharmonique de Monte-Carlo (as The Monte Carlo Philharmonic Orchestra)
Conducted by David Robertson
courtesy of Naïve Auvidis
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Esther Kahn?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 23 371 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 5 124 $ US
- 3 mars 2002
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 23 371 $ US
- Durée
- 2h 37m(157 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant