Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA younger boy falls in love with a tragic girl who flirts with, and manipulates, her older suitors in 1800s Russia.A younger boy falls in love with a tragic girl who flirts with, and manipulates, her older suitors in 1800s Russia.A younger boy falls in love with a tragic girl who flirts with, and manipulates, her older suitors in 1800s Russia.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 candidatura in totale
James Fox
- Old Vladimir
- (voce)
Recensioni in evidenza
The only comment I have read thus far that encapsulated this film was by a Russian woman from Moscow. Everthing in this film evokes Russia in Summer for the period intended. There is a quality of innocence that is captured by the characters and lost in metaphor. The father represents Europe seducing a young capricious Russian female. Her young lover is the true Russian unable to save his love from her fate until in the end he stands as witness to her ruin and death. Turgenev felt very strongly, as do all Russian writers, that Russians must look to themselves for the future and they felt a duty to warn their country of the temptations that would lead to Russia's downfall. Kirsten Dunst does a very good job of portraying Zinaida as a young woman desperate to grow up and at the same time hold onto her past, much like Russia. Her older lover, Valdemar's father (Europe) cannot understand her devotion to him and abandons her to her fate. He doesn't have the endurance her real lover (Valdemar)has - or the patience.
The only reason I gave it a 2 instead of a 1 is because amid the crazy plot, there was some good acting. It seemed like it was going to be a typical period movie. It was far from that. I am not sure if it was me, but I was quite confused throughout the entire movie. Until the end of the movie, I still hadn't figured out if Zinaida was just as pix-elated (as in Mr. Deeds Goes to Town)as her mother or if she was just a very selfish, egotistical young lady who enjoyed playing with people and their feelings. I was confused at what was going on with Vladimir's father and his thought process at the end. If you gave that cast a good plot and script, it would have been a wonderful movie. Its too bad it was wasted on that one.
During the 1800's Britain, a somewhat younger boy finds love with a girl who, as a young princess, manipulates her older suitors. But he finds, instead, a game of deceit played by the most shocking suitors of all.
Nick Stahl and Kirsten Dunst hold their own very well in this film. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a fan of time pieces such as this, but once I gave the plot a chance (I had to re-start the movie twice), I found myself wanting to see the end of it and find out what happens to the main characters. Based on two other short stories, the two are combined by the director to keep one's interest, as long as they're in the mood for a film such as this.
5 out of 10 stars.
Nick Stahl and Kirsten Dunst hold their own very well in this film. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a fan of time pieces such as this, but once I gave the plot a chance (I had to re-start the movie twice), I found myself wanting to see the end of it and find out what happens to the main characters. Based on two other short stories, the two are combined by the director to keep one's interest, as long as they're in the mood for a film such as this.
5 out of 10 stars.
Yes, this is a period piece -- pre-WWI Russia, to be precise. I only caught the last third of the movie or so, but it was enough to captivate me. The characters were interesting; the music poignant, the scenery stunning. The acting is top-notch with the notable exception of Stahl, who never reflects the agonies and the ecstacies of growing up; he never lets the struggles of the character make their way to his countenance or his actions, and so appears as a painted-face marrionate simply reciting lines and moving about from place to place. The problem is that the retrospective English narrator is used in place of acting; while it's well done and appropriate, it is used to suture up the devestation caused by the poor acting of Stahl instead of complimenting him. But anyhow, enough on that topic. Again, it captivated me, and not many films can do that. Either there's too much trash, or the characters are stupid, unbelievable, or unheroic. This doesn't feel like a cheap Hollywood throwaway flick, and that has something to do with the source material -- Anton Chekov! There is a human warmth about it all and an artistry that is all too often abandoned in pursuit of a quick dollar. Now this isn't to say that this film is the best thing ever put on a reel. But it is enough to make me want to go watch the whole thing, and that is a rare thing.
Visually beautiful with pretty characterisations and some fine acting particularly from Julie Walters. But I had more interest in the love triangle of the serf's that I did of the aristrocracy. It really doesn't come together, but could have been quite a compelling drama if the story had peaked and resolved itself a little more poignantly. I wouldn't spend the two hours of viewing time to sit through this again because it seem's to have been directed by someone with the emotions of granite. Pity because it's so pretty and romantic in a visual sense. Too few scene's from Ms Walters. The character portrayed by Ms Dunst (Zinaida) irritated the hell out of me. Pity I had to wait until the end for her exit !!!!!!!
Lo sapevi?
- QuizFilmed in the Czech Republic, doubling for Russia.
- ConnessioniVersion of The Wednesday Play: First Love (1964)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Lover's Prayer?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti