User reviews

Don't get me wrong, I did like this film. The fashion style and the two main actresses don't disappoint. However, I'm not sure why they chose to diverge so much from such a well done book and the happy ending of it? The departure from the flow of the book made the last half hour feel clunky.

I can feel the warmth in the chemistry between Anna Paquin and Holliday Grainger. Two lonely and sad characters finding happiness in each other. The movie was better than expected. And the message and narrative are still relevant today. Because lesbian relationships are still frowned upon in some societies.

Tell It To The Bees, is a beautiful film set in a time that those, who gave this film one star, possibly wished would return. A time when to choose who we loved was considered a vile act, but to act vilely to those that did was expected behaviour. The film tells its story with grace, leaving the audience to decide who, if anyone in particular, are the victims. Special mention for Gregor Selkirk who is captivating as the young son, caught in the middle of the storm. Even though several have seemingly chosen to make a moral judgement in their score (for a film that isn't really that contentious) I will simply give what I hope is a more reasoned assessment. An excellent film and well worth your time.

Greetings again from the darkness. Secrets and lies become a tangled web of messiness that impacts lives and relationships in this story adapted from Fiona Shaw's 2009 novel. Annabel Jankel (known for her music videos and as a creator of Max Headroom) directs the script from sisters Henrietta and Jessica Ashworth, and we learn that this rural community in 1952 Scotland is filled with judgmental and close-minded folks unable to accept that some don't live and love according to society's general rules of the time.

Holliday Grainger ("The Borgias") stars as Lydia, mother to young Charlie (Gregor Selkirk), and the two have recently been abandoned by husband -father Robert (Emun Elliott). Charlie is a sensitive boy - in touch with nature, and observant to his mother's emotional strains. After a schoolyard scuffle, Charlie is treated by the town's new doctor, Dr. Markham (Anna Paquin, "True Blood"), who not only treats his bruises, but also teaches him about the bees and hives in her garden. She lets him know that telling your secrets to the bees keeps them from flying away.

Dr. Markham has returned to the community where she grew up, and the rumors of her teenage years have not faded. Her father recently passed and she has returned to her roots to take his place as the local doctor. When Lydia gets sacked at the factory where she works (by Kate Dickie's Pam, her spinster sister-in-law/supervisor), Dr. Markham hires Lydia as a housekeeper and invites her and Charlie to move into the house left to her by her father.

"This town is too small for secrets" is not simply a line of dialogue, but easily could have been the title of the films. As Charlie tells his secrets to the bees, Lydia and Dr. Markham grow closer ... creating confusion for Charlie, challenges for the two women, and disgust within the community. Robert is a brut of a man, and threatens Lydia in every way a simple man might. There is also a subplot around Lydia's younger sister-in-law Annie (Lauren Lyle), who is pregnant from a secretive interracial relationship. What follows is a vicious response from the close-minded folks previously mentioned.

An older Charlie is our narrator, and most of the story is told from his point of view. Secrets kept by children are contrasted by those of adults, and it's clear that both cause harm. The first part of the movie is beautifully filmed, though the story structure wobbles a bit in the second half. There are many fascinating close-ups of bees and hives, although a mystical/supernatural sequence is difficult to buy. Excellent acting is on display throughout, especially by young Gregor Selkirk and Ms. Grainger, whose face the camera loves. The film is quite tastefully done, and focused as much on the small-minded town folks reaction as the blossoming relationship between the two leads. A stronger third act would have elevated the film, though the first half hour is well done.

Another tragic lesbian love story. For all those who love lesbian movies as much as I do, we're very familiar with the majority of the heartbreaking plots that tend to leave us with an ache in our hearts by the end.

The beginning was hard to follow. It was clunky with the slow story and for awhile I was struggling with liking the way Anna Paquin played the character of Jean. But as the movie went on the characters and story began to grow on me. Holliday Grainger was fantastic. Her energy really brought life and emotion to the love story. Her character really shone.

From the very first opening scenes of the film, as narrated by older Charlie, he foretells how the movie will end. It was disappointing that he gave it away in the first five seconds of the movie. But in a way it also prepares you for what's to come. The movie has a lot of deeper messages in it. It's not just about a love story, but about a boy learning to grow up and learning some of the harsh realities of the adult world. It shows us how brutal the 50's could be for women or anything out side of the normal. It shows how society can effect our decisions and make life difficult. Some people loved the ending in the reviews. But personally I did not. It felt like there were some holes in the logic of the ending.

The footage of the bees and facts told in the film was impressive. And very educational.

The director draws excellent performances from the two female leads (playing Lydia and Dr Jean) and also from the very capable supporting cast. The cinematography and production design capture the ambience and restrictive social mores of the "small" 1950s Scottish mill town quite convincingly. The story is less convincing about the symbolism of the bees (which is presumably derived from the book). We see too many random extreme close-ups of bees, Lydia's son Charlie sharing his secrets with the bees in their hives, and in the last 20 minutes of the movie, an incident which implies that the bees have developed some sort of preternatural relationship with the boy. This latter aspect, particularly, seems rather incongruous with the otherwise quite adult themed lesbian romance story. It strikes me as a movie primarily to be enjoyed for its great character acting.

Tell it to the Bees plays like a grittier Scottish version of "Carol".

It's 1952 ("Carol" was also set in 1952, but in New York). Many married men have come back from the war forever changed. Life is financially tough for most families. In particular, attitudes to multi-racial relationships and (particularly) homosexuality are appalling, and never more so than in the small Scottish mill town where the film is set.

Holliday Grainger plays Lydia, separating from her rough and ready war-veteren husband Robert (Emun Elliott). This is all really hard for 7-year old Charlie (Gregor Selkirk) who without sexual guidance from either parent or school is trying to make sense of his world. Charlie is a sensitive child and finds solace by talking to the bees kept by local doctor Jean Markham (Anna Paquin) where she lives alone in the large family home. "You should tell the bees your secrets. Then they won't fly away." Jean tells the young lad.

As Lydia's circumstances change, she and Jean grow ever closer and scandal is set to envelope the community.

The story comes from a book by Fiona Shaw (the the action moved from Yorkshire to Scotland) and the screenplay is by Henrietta and Jessica Ashworth. Just as in "Carol" the film deliciously builds (if that's not too lascivious a thing to say) the sexual tension that grows between the two women.

But aside from this main love story there are some beautifully crafted sub-stories in there. One in particular, featuring Lydia's cousin Annie Stock (Lauren Lyle) leads to a truly nightmarish scene that will upset some viewers.

An issue I personally found with the Scottish setting is that (like "Under the Skin") much of a dialogue is delivered in a very strong regional accent. This made understanding the dialogue for non-Scots very difficult: I had a particular problem with Emun Elliott in this regard. (Sorry if this comment upsets any Scots reading this: it's just a statement of fact!).

Anna Paquin holds the current record for the youngest-ever Oscar winner ("Best Supporting Actress" in 1993 for "The Piano"), but here proves she hasn' t lost her touch. Because, here she is both determined and vulnerable in equal measure and acts this out brilliantly. Paired with the free-spirited Holliday Grainger they make for a powerhouse performance together, and the sex scene (when it comes) is wonderfully realised: genuinely sensual, but in more of a 50's way than for similar scenes in films like "Desert Hearts" or "Blue is the Warmest Colour".

A late scene on a railway platform - although somewhat clichéd - is an acting masterclass, and memorably done.

Also noteworthy is young Gregor Selkirk in what is his 2nd feature film role. Many of the scenes live or die on this young man, and he does a great job.

This is a small but beautifully crafted film that kept me enthralled. I'm not sure it necessarily needed the bees (some beautiful macro photography by Bartosz Nalazek) but as a simple tale of prejudice in a small community it was well told and delivered the goods.

I really enjoyed this film... so it comes with my recommendation. "Pride" made you appreciate just how far tolerance has come in the UK in 30 years. But "Tell it to the Bees" illustrates that the 80's were just a step along a journey that started long before that.

(For the full, graphical review please visit One Mann's Movies on the internet or Facebook.

I would like to answer "SadnessNeverGoes" who in 139 words, 8 punctuations and no capital letters whatsoever ecxept the first word "Is", gave it a 2. Are you liveing in the same time as me ? It might not be a masterpiece - I read the book, and it contained much more of the reality of the times, but the film also contains an awareness that the book lacked. I liked it. I did not like "SadnessNeverGoes".

So many lost opportunities here...Holliday Grainger was the best part of this film. Really read the book, it doesn't disappoint.

I'm a Conservative, Straight guy, but this movie tugged hard at my heartstrings. The acting of the three principal players was exceptional throughout the entire film. The storyline was completely believable and powerful. I don't want to say too much about the plot, but I really emphasized with the players. The love shown was real and palpable. That is significant.

Tell it to the Bees, the book, is a beautiful, atmospheric love story set in the 1950s. Tell it to the Bees, the movie, is a cowardly dud with a 1950s performative morality that wastes the talents of the of a brilliant cast. It is however, thankfully, one step short of "the lesbian must die" trope, so there's that.

Fiona Shaw's tender and patient 2010 novel has every element for a successful movie, but the studio decided to shoot itself in the foot by exchanging an emotionally uplifting ending, which satisfactorily resolves the story lines of both of Charlie's parents, for a bastardized faux-moralistic dangling ending stitched on to avoid frightening straight homophobes.

Read the marvelous book instead of wasting time on a movie you'll want to throw your shoe at.

This is not so much a love story about a "forbidden" love, but it is also about a child who slowly discovers how things work in the adult world.

This film has a slow start (after about 30 minutes the pace picks up), but my patience is well rewarded at the end. An ending that raises some questions. Yet I didn't feel it had a very strange ending. Only after talking to someone about it for half an hour did I find out why the ending felt good to me. So does the aforementioned quote get a completely different meaning in the end. I think the filmmakers intended to make a film that makes you think.

The acting is very good. Especially Gregor Selkirk, who plays the son, is excellent. I have seen few young actors acting so convincingly and realistically. I had to get used to Anna Paquin, who plays Dr. Jean Markham, because she reminded me a bit of BBC Kate Bliss (Bargain Hunt, Flog it !, Put your money where your mouth is). If you would say that Kate Bliss and Anna Paquin were sisters, I would believe it. I had to suppress a chuckle when Jean said she didn't have any teaspoons. Kate Bliss being the silver expert. I think I have seen Steven Robertson before in the detective series "Shetland" and I had wondered if his accent was realistic. In this film the Scottish accent feels to me more realistic than the one he had in "Shetland". (But I'm not Scottish so it's just a feeling of someone who's second language is English).

Apart from a scene with too many bees (which looks almost surreal), I think this is an excellent film.

I'm not sure how this one got past me, but I really enjoyed it. Sometimes I get slight ptsd watching films like this set in the not too distant past. I feel so overwhelmed by the daily misery wonderful, caring, compassionate, intelligent, people suffered over their entire lifetime, just for being gay, it's heartbreaking, can you imagine the pain and trauma of having to live your life in fear? It's easy to understand how the daily stress would inevitably lead to mental health issues. The film was interesting and the end not as bleak as it probably would have been if this film was made 10 years ago,as everything 'lesbian' was quite grim until recently. Acting was good by everyone, though I have to say Anna Paquin (the Dr) is not a great actress imo but did a fairly good Scottish accent. Sexual tension builds, but you can see how the Dr tries to fight her feelings for the boys mother as she knows it will just cause pain and trouble for all, then there is the young son who talks to the bees, which is quite charming. I found the bee sequences fascinating and humans should take note of our destruction of the bee population and the impact it will eventually have on us. This was a film about good decent people being vilified by nasty people, and it happens every day around the world. Cinematography, sound, all that stuff on mark too. Recommended (by a gay woman).

It does not hurt if you are a friend of bees. But the movie has a lot more to offer. It actually is about inclusiveness ... it tells us the story of a forbidden love. Of a time where people who loved each other couldn't publicly say or show so.

Not that the whole world has changed already and we accept love in all its forms. I never understood the shaming or outrage people felt for what other people felt or did in their own free time ... that was not hurting people (no pun intended), but actually is about loving someone else. If a man loves a man and that man loves him back - why would you have an issue with that? Same goes for the women combination or any other combo that does stray from the "norm".

Having said that, the love story and the connection between characters is quite strained. And while there is some nudity and some mature situations (in the woods for example), the movie is not trying to make the viewer a voyer - well not too much. We see things, but we hopefully understand why they happen and how the characters feel (I'd say the actors do a good job conveying just that and again no pun intended)

The film looks and feels authentic to the period, which I loved. Acting is top rate, although the boy's character is confusing. He's also really annoying to watch, but that may have been intentional, I'm not sure.

However, the main problem is that in a short film it tries to inject so many modern political statements - women's rights, gay relationships, interracial relationships, abortion rights, and even universal health care. I know that is part of the point of the film, but altogether feels a little politically contrived and lacks subtlety.

Charlie is a young boy trying to understand the world. His father Robert Weekes (Emun Elliott) is a brutal man who has abandoned him and his mother Lydia (Holliday Grainger). Charlie befriends Jean Markham (Anna Paquin) who keeps bees in her yard. She had recently returned home after her father's death. She's a woman's doctor and a lesbian which must be kept secret back then in a small village. When Lydia and Charlie get evicted, they move in with Jean. Slowly, Jean succumbs to Lydia and the secret cannot be kept hidden.

Charlie is a problem. His turn is a problem. It's hard to understand his action when the movie doesn't seem to know him either. It needs to be set up better. His motivation is like a swarm of bees. It's hard to know which one is important and which one is not. Does he like his father? He fears being taken away but he's running away. Does he expect his family to be reunited? He's obsessed with secrets but what exactly does he know? What does he understand about love or sex? He doesn't seem to know and the movie is unable to specify his understanding. It may help to have an even younger actor in the role which would excuse his confusion. There is also the matter with the bees. It's a magical premise but the movie does not have the surreal magic needed to pull it off. While I appreciate the intended message, the movie never strays away from preaching its views. This could work but Charlie is a problem.

I loved this film up to the last few minutes and even not knowing the book's ending it was clear that there was a deviation. All of a sudden the characters go out of character and act as though they just stepped in from another set.

After watching the movie, I read the book and feel a bit more cheated by the movie; however without the context of the book the acting, direction and much of the writing are sensitive and full of truths.

One scene is so clear in the way that young minds work, concretely not abstract in the least. Young Charlie's friend Bobby asks Charlie if the doctor has a bath tub. He goes on to explain his reasoning for the question he had heard that the doctor is a "dirty dyke." Neither of them know what the second word means but they understand dirty and are confused because the doctor is not soiled in any real sense.

I will not divulge the ending, but suffice it to say that anyone who has lived in a small town or any isolated community will recognize the folly of decisions made by the writers and director. It is not a bittersweet ending, it is a sellout and cheap and disregards the dignity of the characters.

Why did I give it a 9 if I feel this way. Simply because the story up to that last part deserved a 10. The acting and cinematography were fantastic.

The relationship and dynamic between the two characters is a beautiful thing and develops so naturally. But, the ending should not have been changed from the book.