Sex révélations

I have to admit that I approached the viewing of this movie with some apprehension. But as it turned out, I enjoyed it very much.

The film consists of three separate stories dealing with lesbianism set at different times and featuring characters from three distinct age groups.

The first, set in 1961, and the best of the three, features an outstanding performance by the marvellous Vanessa Redgrave as a retired school teacher who suddenly loses her lifelong companion. She suddenly finds that all of the things she has taken for granted are suddenly gone, including the roof over her head. The vignette shows how lesbianism was never talked about in public in the 60s as evidenced in the hospital scenes where Redgrave attempts to find out what has happened to her "friend". Paul Giamatti plays the deceased's nephew who has to tell Redgrave that she no longer can remain in her home of 30 years. Elizabeth Perkins effectively plays his scavenging wife.

The second story, set in 1972, deals with the relationship between a college co-ed (Michelle Williams) and a girl who likes dress in macho male attire (Chloe Sevigny). I found myself actually hoping that they would live happily ever after.

The last story concerns the often humorous efforts of two mature companions (Ellen DeGeneres, Sharon Stone)to "have a baby".

Although not for everyone, I found that this movie was tastefully done and very well acted.

I absolutely loved this movie. I probably wouldn't have written a review, except I read the review that says unequal, and I completely disagree. I believe this movie was pretty accurate in each decade. The one that depicts 2000 was very moving and a lot different from the first decade. I think they were very brilliant to focus on the pregnancy issue. Lesbians and gay men these days want children and realize this can be a reality. I don't believe that was an issue until recent years. There is always a big focus on discrimination and unequal rights. This decade focused on the people and not only the huge issue of discrimination. It gave everyone just a little insight that lesbians and gays are people too with normal desires and needs.

I think it was a super movie and I highly recommend it.

This new HBO movie far exceeded my expectations. In the first of the three mini-movies, Vanessa Redgrave gives a stirring performance as the survivor of a lesbian couple in 1961. The message of this first movie serves well to remind people of the tragedy that ensued when one's life long partner passed on previous to the 70's.

The second movie, set in 1972, depicts an accurate portrayal of what lesbians faced during the rise of the feminist movement where even sisters were divided over who should be allowed to participate and promote the feminist cause. Chloe Sevigny's portrayal of a "butch" lesbian, comfortable with herself is phenomenal. Ms. Sevigny should be nominated for an Emmy for her fantastic acting.

The third and final movie, features a current day lesbian couple who are trying to have a child. Billed as a romantic comedy, this episode has an underlying message amid the laughter and tears which is common to all couples regardless of gender. Ellen Degeneres and Sharon Stone are funny, yet convincing as a couple. Their chemistry radiates throughout and both women deserve accolades for their performances.

Finally, a comment must be made about the fact that Anne Heche made her HBO directing debut with the third episode. Having written the story as well, it is clear to this viewer that Anne Heche has a brilliant future not only as an actress but as a writer and director.

"If These Walls Could Talk 2" is a cinematic achievement and may very well be the first movie of the new Millennium which accurately shows where there is love and truth, gender is nothing but an afterthought.

I see this movie as an attempt to help conservative people to see gay life (male or female) as something natural, or normal (which I think is very OK). The three segments represents three steps for that recognition : 1961 : Hide it! 1972 : It is shown as some kind of feminist fashion and shows intolerance between the lesbians. 2000 : acceptance. The problem is that the three segments are very unequal. We all accept that the first part is very moving, with a very very fine performance from the great Vanessa Redgrave. The second part is O.K. But the third is very weak. Despite these little defaults, this is a very fine movie, with honorable good intentions. I say bravo to everyone involved in it and also say bravo to every viewer who accepts it. But for a little superior movies on the same subject, I suggest two Canadian films : When the night is falling, and Revoir Julie. I wonder what would be the reaction if there was a similar film with men... You know the story : lesbians are more cute...

Three tales of lesbian couples having different struggles across three different time periods. In the sixties a lifelong lesbian couple who have never come out find the difficulties that occur due to them having no legal connection to one another. In the seventies a university student who is a feminist faces her friends' disapproval when she falls for a stereotypical `butch john' lesbian. In the nineties an openly gay couple decide to try for child and start looking for sperm.

I first heard of this film because I always have time for anything that Nia Long does. This caught my eye on her CV and when it came on TV I watched it. I wasn't sure what to expect but most of it works quite well. As the stories are pretty distinct (the only connection being the house) so I'll deal with them so. The first is easily the best and is the most emotionally involving. It is a little too happy and unreal at the start but the tragic situation that Edith finds herself in because of her love is very moving. The second story is a little less real to me as it deals with a problem within the lesbian community (of which I have no experience to speak of). It is less moving and also a little more explicit and may satisfy those who are only interested in lesbians in terms of male arousal! I don't think it is very sexual or overly done but I didn't think there was too much need for it - regardless of the participants sexuality I didn't think it really added to the subject. However the story again is pretty good and is interesting as it is not an issue I was aware of.

The final story is the most optimistic but also the weakest. The `issue' is a lot less serious and the film treats it as such with the whole segment being very light-hearted and bright. It doesn't really add anything to the film and doesn't fit with the first two segments. The cast are pretty much all good. In the first part Redgrave is excellent and her plight is made very real by the strength of her performance. In the second film Sevingy steals the show easily with a good performance. In the third DeGeneres happily underplays and isn't `zany' or `wacky', she is funny but not in an annoying way. Stone is weak because her character simply doesn't fit with her body - far too youthful and carefree to suit Stone. The support add to the feel that this is full of `stars' with Perkins, Giamatti, Long, King and others all doing OK in support.

Overall this film starts strong but gets progressively weaker as it goes, with the final section being quite frivolous compared to the emotion of the opening. It is an interesting film but it doesn't quite work as well as it should have done.