Muriel e suo marito Lee stanno per iniziare una nuova vita brillante, ma sono sorpresi dall'arrivo del fratello di Lee. Lei si imbarca in una vita segreta, scommettendo sui cavalli da corsa ... Leggi tuttoMuriel e suo marito Lee stanno per iniziare una nuova vita brillante, ma sono sorpresi dall'arrivo del fratello di Lee. Lei si imbarca in una vita segreta, scommettendo sui cavalli da corsa e scoprendo un amore impensabile.Muriel e suo marito Lee stanno per iniziare una nuova vita brillante, ma sono sorpresi dall'arrivo del fratello di Lee. Lei si imbarca in una vita segreta, scommettendo sui cavalli da corsa e scoprendo un amore impensabile.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 3 candidature totali
Andrew Keenan-Bolger
- Rosie
- (as Andrew Keenan Bolger)
Recensioni in evidenza
USA FILM FESTIVAL
Greetings again from the darkness. One need only watch a couple of episodes of "Leave it to Beaver" to comprehend just how ideal and perfect family life in the 1950's was. Only that was a Hollywood façade and real life was much different, especially for anyone who wasn't a straight white male ... and even many of those served in the military during the Korean War and/or faced the pressure of being the sole breadwinner. Daniel Minahan (known mostly for his TV work) directs the screenplay from Bryan Kass (LIZZIE, 2018) who adapted the 2019 novel from Shannon Pufahl.
Daisy Edgar-Jones (TWISTERS, 2024) stars as Muriel, a young woman who reluctantly accepts the wedding proposal from Lee (Will Poulter, DEATH OF A UNICORN, 2025; MIDSOMMAR, 2019). In keeping with the times, Lee assumes his dreams of a new house in the growing suburbs of California are shared by his new partner ... so he's a bit annoyed by her reluctance to sell her childhood Kansas house she inherited from her recently deceased mother. A third wheel pops up in the form of Lee's rudderless younger brother Julius (Jacob Elordi, PRISCILLA, 2023), who has recently been discharged from the Navy.
An intriguing connection forms between Muriel and Julius, and it continues playing out through the entirety of the story. While Lee strives for the traditional American dream, Julius and Muriel separately maneuver through their own internal emotions that don't easily slide into the life respectable folks are expected to follow. Both have a bit of hustler in them as Muriel uses her alert ears during shifts as a diner waitress to pick up tips on the next horse race, while Julius capitalizes on his casino surveillance job - one that brings him money and love.
Two excellent supporting roles are courtesy of Diego Calva (BABYLON, 2022) and Sasha Calle (THE FLASH, 2023). To disclose specifics would be to reveal spoilers that I refuse to serve up. What I can say is the story takes us from Kansas to California to Las Vegas to Tijuana. Along the way, we witness the challenges faced by those out of step with society. We see the deceits required as these characters walk the line between what's expected and the path to follow their own dreams. It can be heartbreaking and frustrating, and Minahan's film expertly shoots down the façade of the perfect 50's. The acting is superb, with Daisy Edgar-Jones seamlessly capturing the look of the era, while Jacob Elordi beautifully fulfills the more difficult role. This is a film for those who appreciate climbing inside the characters to understand their longing.
Now playing in theaters.
Daisy Edgar-Jones (TWISTERS, 2024) stars as Muriel, a young woman who reluctantly accepts the wedding proposal from Lee (Will Poulter, DEATH OF A UNICORN, 2025; MIDSOMMAR, 2019). In keeping with the times, Lee assumes his dreams of a new house in the growing suburbs of California are shared by his new partner ... so he's a bit annoyed by her reluctance to sell her childhood Kansas house she inherited from her recently deceased mother. A third wheel pops up in the form of Lee's rudderless younger brother Julius (Jacob Elordi, PRISCILLA, 2023), who has recently been discharged from the Navy.
An intriguing connection forms between Muriel and Julius, and it continues playing out through the entirety of the story. While Lee strives for the traditional American dream, Julius and Muriel separately maneuver through their own internal emotions that don't easily slide into the life respectable folks are expected to follow. Both have a bit of hustler in them as Muriel uses her alert ears during shifts as a diner waitress to pick up tips on the next horse race, while Julius capitalizes on his casino surveillance job - one that brings him money and love.
Two excellent supporting roles are courtesy of Diego Calva (BABYLON, 2022) and Sasha Calle (THE FLASH, 2023). To disclose specifics would be to reveal spoilers that I refuse to serve up. What I can say is the story takes us from Kansas to California to Las Vegas to Tijuana. Along the way, we witness the challenges faced by those out of step with society. We see the deceits required as these characters walk the line between what's expected and the path to follow their own dreams. It can be heartbreaking and frustrating, and Minahan's film expertly shoots down the façade of the perfect 50's. The acting is superb, with Daisy Edgar-Jones seamlessly capturing the look of the era, while Jacob Elordi beautifully fulfills the more difficult role. This is a film for those who appreciate climbing inside the characters to understand their longing.
Now playing in theaters.
The adaptation of Shannon Pufahl's novel by Daniel Minahan with a script by Bryce Kass, leaves the feeling of a film that doesn't quite fit together, in which it seems to have good ideas, but not fully developed ones that end up leaving us with the feeling of a film that lacks strength.
With a star-studded cast led by Daisy Edgar-Jones, Jacob Elordi, Will Poulter, and Diego Calva, they are the ones who allow the film to function in terms of intensity, thanks to their solid, dedicated performances. This relationship of indomitable characters is perfectly portrayed by the cast and sustains the weaker moments of the script.
Daniel Minahan's direction is sensual and seductive, complemented by his excellent photography and artistic design, but it is also limited in what his script offers to exploit. We find ourselves with a decent script, but it doesn't explode when it seems it should and feels somewhat chained to the correctness of a proposal that should please everyone, rather than finding its own space and time to invite the viewer to be part of this game of forbidden, seductive, and incorrect romance. Unfortunately, this limitation prevents us from enjoying an intense drama, that of a period romance and the epic of romanticism that is sometimes so lacking in cinema.
What's worth saying is that the film does have a feeling, and it brilliantly applies it to this forbidden love about sexual identity and finding oneself. It's a powerful vision of the fissures that simmer beneath the surface of the United States. It could have been much more intense, but that doesn't mean we're in the presence of an interesting proposal, one that, in its imperfection, hides the old Hollywood cinema it wants to resemble. At times, it succeeds thanks to its star-studded cast, and at others, it remains only with good intentions.
It's a film worth giving a chance to, to bring out your own feelings and emotions.
With a star-studded cast led by Daisy Edgar-Jones, Jacob Elordi, Will Poulter, and Diego Calva, they are the ones who allow the film to function in terms of intensity, thanks to their solid, dedicated performances. This relationship of indomitable characters is perfectly portrayed by the cast and sustains the weaker moments of the script.
Daniel Minahan's direction is sensual and seductive, complemented by his excellent photography and artistic design, but it is also limited in what his script offers to exploit. We find ourselves with a decent script, but it doesn't explode when it seems it should and feels somewhat chained to the correctness of a proposal that should please everyone, rather than finding its own space and time to invite the viewer to be part of this game of forbidden, seductive, and incorrect romance. Unfortunately, this limitation prevents us from enjoying an intense drama, that of a period romance and the epic of romanticism that is sometimes so lacking in cinema.
What's worth saying is that the film does have a feeling, and it brilliantly applies it to this forbidden love about sexual identity and finding oneself. It's a powerful vision of the fissures that simmer beneath the surface of the United States. It could have been much more intense, but that doesn't mean we're in the presence of an interesting proposal, one that, in its imperfection, hides the old Hollywood cinema it wants to resemble. At times, it succeeds thanks to its star-studded cast, and at others, it remains only with good intentions.
It's a film worth giving a chance to, to bring out your own feelings and emotions.
I am a big fan of Edgar-Jones and desperately wanted to love this film. I saw the film at SXSW in the beautiful Paramount theater with Edgar-Jones appearing on stage with several of the other actors. She is the producer of the film.
I found the story very disjointed and the overall flow of the film fighting against itself. Yes it is super glossy with beautiful actors across the entire cast so great eye candy but for myself uninspiring acting.
So what is the point of the story here? Is it we keep secrets or one needs to follow their own path? Honestly the end of the film was a complete let down and was thinking riding horse into the sunset was a final joke.
I found the story very disjointed and the overall flow of the film fighting against itself. Yes it is super glossy with beautiful actors across the entire cast so great eye candy but for myself uninspiring acting.
So what is the point of the story here? Is it we keep secrets or one needs to follow their own path? Honestly the end of the film was a complete let down and was thinking riding horse into the sunset was a final joke.
10thebwort
On Swift Horses is a film about social control; how dominant collective ideology puts us in boxes and forces us to perform the status quo. As such, it's going to alienate a less discerning audience who, to be fair, have never questioned anything within their social lexicon.
Whilst the other user reviews on here currently denote mainly the dangers in trying to introduce a film with a bit of meaning to the kind of people who watch maybe 10 movies per year (and, in particular years, 6 of those movies are Top Gun: Maverick) at a Cineplex promo screening best suited for crap starring Jason Statham, I can assure you that it is a very intentional and very thoughtful film.
It's about the balance between being true to oneself and appeasing those around you out of fear of isolation and rejection; the gradual evaluation and awareness of such in one's own life and the amount of sacrifice that assimilating to your socio-economic peer group can entail.
The plot of the film is already described in the synopsis and to say much more than that may inadvertently spoil it.
Admittedly, the pacing is deliberate and the tone sombre, which, again, will alienate those who stare at Instagram reels all day. But for those who appreciate film whose form matches its content and that doesn't patronize its audience, they will find it rewarding.
This is a film about nuance; about reading non-verbal cues; and, as the title suggests, about the balance between personal freedom and being a controlled rider of your own journey.
We all have to decide if we want to race and enjoy it or take cautious steps without risk.
Whilst the other user reviews on here currently denote mainly the dangers in trying to introduce a film with a bit of meaning to the kind of people who watch maybe 10 movies per year (and, in particular years, 6 of those movies are Top Gun: Maverick) at a Cineplex promo screening best suited for crap starring Jason Statham, I can assure you that it is a very intentional and very thoughtful film.
It's about the balance between being true to oneself and appeasing those around you out of fear of isolation and rejection; the gradual evaluation and awareness of such in one's own life and the amount of sacrifice that assimilating to your socio-economic peer group can entail.
The plot of the film is already described in the synopsis and to say much more than that may inadvertently spoil it.
Admittedly, the pacing is deliberate and the tone sombre, which, again, will alienate those who stare at Instagram reels all day. But for those who appreciate film whose form matches its content and that doesn't patronize its audience, they will find it rewarding.
This is a film about nuance; about reading non-verbal cues; and, as the title suggests, about the balance between personal freedom and being a controlled rider of your own journey.
We all have to decide if we want to race and enjoy it or take cautious steps without risk.
Be prepared for a lot of butts...both human and cigarettes.
Here's my 2nd "Mystery Movie" (or as AMC calls it, "Screen Unseen.") All I knew was the Rating (R) and length. My guess was "Sinners." Wrong. My friend's guess, and he's almost ALWAYS right, was "The Accountant 2." Also, wrong. In fact, neither of us could be FURTHER from what this movie was.
And I bet this was a very, very big surprise to the almost-packed audience. I had to not-so-secretly smile to all the heterosexuals in the audience who would've never paid to see a LGBTQ+ period piece melodrama...in their lives.
As stated, this movie takes place in the 1950s and explores an unconventional love triangle. Two brothers, two Korean War veterans couldn't be further apart, but still love each other. In-between is one of the brother's wife. All three have dreams...and two of which were really hard to come by with 1950s homophobia.
I liked the movie, there's really nothing wrong here. I like that there were two heartbreaking leads vs. The typical one. The acting was fine and the stakes were real. Was it anywhere close to the similar Brokeback Mountain?
Absolutely not. Not even in the same league. But, it's a good update to how homosexuals struggled in the 1950s. I can't even imagine what it was like then. I will forever salute the brave men, women and everyone who stood up to homophobia to make it easier - no, 1000x easier for future generations.
I don't suspect so, but it would be interesting to see if this gets any award buzz next Awards season. Maybe I'll have to revisit this and see something different. For right now: I did like it, I didn't love it and I didn't regret seeing it.
***
Final Thoughts: I do love to go into a movie cold. Not knowing much about it, other than the title, usually at least one of the leads, maybe genre/subgenre and a recommendation. This is by far, the coldest I've ever experienced. I never once heard of this movie, the background or absolutely anything. In fact, I was worried I wouldn't remember the title since I never heard of this before to write this review. Well, I finally got my #1 wish...to be completely frozen over.
Here's my 2nd "Mystery Movie" (or as AMC calls it, "Screen Unseen.") All I knew was the Rating (R) and length. My guess was "Sinners." Wrong. My friend's guess, and he's almost ALWAYS right, was "The Accountant 2." Also, wrong. In fact, neither of us could be FURTHER from what this movie was.
And I bet this was a very, very big surprise to the almost-packed audience. I had to not-so-secretly smile to all the heterosexuals in the audience who would've never paid to see a LGBTQ+ period piece melodrama...in their lives.
As stated, this movie takes place in the 1950s and explores an unconventional love triangle. Two brothers, two Korean War veterans couldn't be further apart, but still love each other. In-between is one of the brother's wife. All three have dreams...and two of which were really hard to come by with 1950s homophobia.
I liked the movie, there's really nothing wrong here. I like that there were two heartbreaking leads vs. The typical one. The acting was fine and the stakes were real. Was it anywhere close to the similar Brokeback Mountain?
Absolutely not. Not even in the same league. But, it's a good update to how homosexuals struggled in the 1950s. I can't even imagine what it was like then. I will forever salute the brave men, women and everyone who stood up to homophobia to make it easier - no, 1000x easier for future generations.
I don't suspect so, but it would be interesting to see if this gets any award buzz next Awards season. Maybe I'll have to revisit this and see something different. For right now: I did like it, I didn't love it and I didn't regret seeing it.
***
Final Thoughts: I do love to go into a movie cold. Not knowing much about it, other than the title, usually at least one of the leads, maybe genre/subgenre and a recommendation. This is by far, the coldest I've ever experienced. I never once heard of this movie, the background or absolutely anything. In fact, I was worried I wouldn't remember the title since I never heard of this before to write this review. Well, I finally got my #1 wish...to be completely frozen over.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizBased on the novel of the same name by Shannon Pufahl. The character of Muriel (played in the film by Daisy Edgar-Jones) was inspired by Pufahl's grandmother and her experiences in the world of gambling in the 1950s.
- Colonne sonoreMr. Blue
Written by DeWayne Blackwell
Performed by Loren Kramar featuring Amber Coffman and Zsela
Guitar Solo by Sean O'Brien
Produced by Sean O'Brien
Courtesy of Secretly Canadian
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is On Swift Horses?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 1.030.309 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 542.360 USD
- 27 apr 2025
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 1.173.998 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 59 minuti
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for On Swift Horses (2024)?
Rispondi