Biopics didn't get the kind of recognition and acclaim they deserved back then. Not like Eddie Redmayne's portrayal of the famous physicist in "The Theory of Everything."
Perhaps that's the reason this film has gotten such an unfair average rating of 6.5. Cause, this film clearly deserves much higher recognition, and that's coming from a movie buff who is quite stingy when it comes to giving high marks.
This period quasi-biopic film entertained, educated, touched with a top notch cast. Jeremy Irons embodied the character playing the tormented soul of perhaps the greatest American novelist FSF in his role. But, then again, no one would expect any less from a superb actor of his caliber.
It's Neve's acting that captivated me so very much. Her ability to immerse herself in the character of an impressionable 23 yo in the presence of an acclaimed, giant of a writer in such close quarters was uncanny. Those vulnerable scenes with FSF (eg, in the car, outside the door, in evening out dancing); her expressions of restraint desire, dissonance and struggle to maintain a professional boundary were sublime.
Neve's acting shone just as brightly as did Jeremy's. She counter balanced FSF's (JI) torment soul so superbly on display with a sublime portrayal of Francoise' own agony of falling for a man she spends every day with knowing she can never love; one who has already lived so much of his life by the age of 44, haunted by demons and memories, while her life is just getting started.
The dialogues, editing, set-design and period costumes and no-bells-and-whisltes cinematography were also on par with the gravity of the story line, which is a based on a true story. I don't understand what do viewers want.
