Histeria

It's 1880 London. Stress out women of all kinds are diagnosed with hysteria. The remedy is pelvic massage and the release of orgasm. Medicine still uses leeches and germs are a new concept. Dr. Mortimer Granville (Hugh Dancy) is fired from the hospital for changing with clean bandages. After many rejections, he gets a job with Dr. Robert Dalrymple (Jonathan Pryce) who treats only women. Charlotte (Maggie Gyllenhaal) is his rebellious suffragette daughter and Emily (Felicity Jones) is the obedient one who studies phrenology. The constant 'treatments' are wearing out Mortimer's hand. His gentleman inventor flatmate Edmund St. John-Smythe (Rupert Everett) helps develop a vibrator for the work.

The subject matter is titillating amusement. Everybody plays it straight with a smile. It's light fun with a bit of serious issue. It's not big laughs but it's an enjoyable little rom-com. They all play the roles great especially Gyllenhaal's firecracker act.

this film is absolutely a gem of comedy, so enjoyable and right on the money. i never knew the origin of the portable massager, now i know, and that's a plus after fully enjoyed this wonderful British film. great screenplay, great directing and of course, with nice casting job, making this comedy an undisputable winner. this is a model comedy that Hollywood should learn how to make comedies being able to be titled in the genre of real comedies instead of turning out just farces. to me, about 98% of the so-called 'comedies' are actually nothing but. comedy does not mean casting some jerk-like clowns with exaggerated facial expressions or pretentious unnatural way of talking, some moronic gestures with lot of abnormally crazy dialog, ridiculous scenario, impossible twists of plots....so and so, then you call it a 'comedy'. absolutely not.

this film is the real deal that we can officially title it as a comedy and, a great one,

an admirable work. and this is not a surprise. first - for the cast. second - the script, subtle, seductive, mixture of accuracy and precise lines of joy. an old fashion style romantic comedy. same rules, same science of detail. and history of a classic pleasure instrument. the Victorian atmosphere is perfect spice in this case. and good plate for rehabilitation of masterclass humor. I admit , I am subjective. Hugh Dancy and Rupert Everett are two of my favorite actors. and Maggie Gyllenhaal seems be, in this film, a version of Katherine Hepburn. but, more that, it is just an adorable, lovely, seductive comedy. and it is enough !

Happy, happy happy;

After a good dose of Hysteria, i am as happy and exhausted as the women depicted in this gem of a film.

Hysteria is the not-exceedingly-accurate story of the man who invented (of all things) the vibrator, in the midst of Victorian England and the laughable ideals of the time. As a light hearted comedy, it succeeds above and beyond the call of duty. As historical document, it lets itself slip into more comfortable Hollywood territory, but not in any reproachable way - it's a delightful character romp, getting heaps of help from the astounding weirdness of the Victorians themselves, if only in stereotype.

Jonathan Pryce (The Master, anyone?) is brilliant, overshadowing lead Hugh Dancy who is slightly uncomfortable in his too-simplistic role. The sets are splendid, and so is all of the production - good direction, excellent photography and pretty decent score round out the package to let the film rise to a pretty decent standard.

All considered, i would recommend this film to anyone looking for a laugh and an easy evening. There are the occasional "drags on" moments (after all, it's hard to find enough masturbation-related jokes to fill 90 minutes), and the serious sections aren't all that great; after the first hilarious 20 minutes, it's kind of difficult to swallow the romance bits, and you can almost find yourself yearning for a descent into total silliness (where unfortunately Hysteria does not deliver). I feel that a stronger hand (pardon the pun) in the script might have made more of this film. But, as it stands, there is still very little to complain about.

A film recommended to all the family - at least, that is Hysteria's thinly-veiled message: sex is good, and thank god for that.

My final vote - 7/10, funny (if slightly inconclusive), and better than A LOT of stuff out there. (add 1 point if you have never seen Woody Allen's "all you wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask")

A simple engaging movie which employed me throughout, courtesy some vivacious performances, some light-hearted moments and most importantly the story of a popular invention, oh! and i don't give a darn about the historical accuracy, just bought the preface that the movie was based on true events. Really. :-D Is this movie a class apart? Definitely not, coz the loosely stringed screenplay loses its sheen many a time.

The plot progresses erratically, which however is saved by some comic elements - unintentional though - and some defined acting from the lead pair Hugh Dancy & Maggie Gyllenhaal. Hugh Dancy resembled Hugh Jackman on many occasions; he never came close even in "King Arthur". Maggie Gyllenhaal steals the show as the erratic, volatile, generous & compassionate woman of the 19th century. Nothing worth a debate stands out in this period piece - the depiction, the sets, the attire, the diction all very neat except for the proposal scene towards the end which resembled a modern day Romcom ending! :-P

To sum it up, I enjoyed the movie, albeit i wish had it been stringent and stuffed with some substance, a plot which tries to tell the once-common medical diagnosis of female hysteria definitely deserved better treatment and appreciation, that said, it's an appeasing watch in the end. 6.5/10