Le choix d'une vie

I like movies with a good character-centered plot and this certainly qualifies. So many Hollywood movies have a distinctly evil antagonist and a pure protagonist. There is no "bad guy" in this movie. All of the people have a side that I could relate to, but they make mistakes along the way.

In all a very good film

I was 16 years old in 1969. This movie caused a lot of memories to come rushing back. I want to thank the director Tony Goldwyn and writer Pamela Gray for recreating some of the vibrations of the time so beautifully. The movie is really about the cultural clash when a young couple trying to live out the 1950's ideal realize that time has passed and they adopt to the new world of personal growth, peace, Moon landings and Woodstock Festivals.

Some people are complaining that the lead character, Pearl, was a bad role model, being unfaithful or indecisive, not knowing what to do; however, that was the way things were back then. To me the film was incredibly believable and faithful to the times and setting.

My only complaint is the scene where Ross rejects Alison's request to "go all the way." Being 16 at the time, I had only one desire, to "go all the way" with every teenage girl who would let me. I spent nearly every moment I could trying to convince them and I did find three or four who said yes. If anyone who looked like Anna Paquin had said to me when I was 16, that she wanted to go all the way, I would have been out of my clothes in 10 seconds flat.

The only other thing perhaps that the movie missed were all the crazy, repulsive, hateful, violent conservatives who were around then threatening and terrorizing progressive, loving, peaceful people. That actually hasn't changed much since 1969. They're still doing the same thing.

This movie also has a terrific soundtrack and uses popular music from the time better than any movie since "Easy Rider." For those who grew up in the 60's, see it to remember, for those who grew up after the 60's, see it to learn.

A Walk on the Moon was Tony Goldwyn's directorial debut,

and all I can say is MORE! This is an excellently constructed film. The script was written by Pamela Gray is

fantastic. If you like a film with characters who could easily be real in believable situations that you come to care about, then you will love this film. Set in upstate New York in the summer of '69 the movie focuses on the choices and the resulting consequences made by a young woman who feels trapped in her role as wife and mother. That setting with the Vietnam War, social unrest, Woodstock, and the manned moon landing is arguably one of the most interesting times of the 20th Century and woven seamlessly into the film. The soundtrack with songs from the era fits perfectly and is great. The casting and performances were flawless. After seeing the film, I can't imagine anyone else in the roles. This was the first time I had seen Liev Schreiber who plays Marty, the husband, and Viggo Mortensen, the carefree lover. Both were terrific. Tovah Feldshuh, the perceptive earthy mother-in-law, and Anna Paquin, the rebellious daughter, were perfectly cast as well. And Diana Lane as Pearl, the lead, plays her multifaceted role well. I believe this film to be worthy of Academy consideration. The category that comes to mind (and there are others) is best supporting actor for Liev Schreiber. This film is a must see for the baby boom generation. Four stars!!!!

The first time I watched this movie, I think I was just captivated by the excellent performances. Viggo Mortenson, like William H. Macy and James Caviezel, is one of those whose roles are understated but so well executed and you anticipate their next work. Diane Lane is gorgeous, and I think that somehow is supposed to drive a pitiful feeling from us that a woman of so much beauty is shackled down to a normal existence. Liev Schreiber's role was the most successful of the principles. The real sympathy in this movie DOES go to him for spending the duration of it separated from his family, and his philandering wife, simply keeping his tv-repair job.

Rule #1 about this movie, don't see it with your significant other. The passionate scenes of a cheating spouse copulating with a free-spirited, self-centered vagrant under a waterfall will make both of you uncomfortable. The scene that bothered me most was the actual moon-landing, where while he's quarantined to the shop repairing TVs so everyone can watch the event she's making it with the blouse-man on the bus. As others have said in this forum, the main point at the end of the movie is that she was misunderstood by a caring husband, her needs weren't satisfied (we never mention his), and ulimately he'll have to forsake his matured take on life if he's ever going to have his wife back.

It was the equivalent of watching Dharma and Greg with explicit adultery, where once again the responsible spouse has to pick up the pieces and try to understand their act-before-thinking partner. This isn't a statement of gender specifics, I'm well aware that plenty of men are unfaithful and self-centered as well. I'm just tired of people in this country deciding we can be married and never compromise on anything. It simply won't work that way. Marriage is a give and take, and in order to function right we need movies that emphasize communication. A movie that tries to justify infidelity isn't going to enhance anyone. I love my wife dearly, and I don't need to see a movie like this one as a cautionary tale of what could be if her needs are left ungratified. See it if you like, but I could mention PLENTY more "chick flicks" which will leave you with a warm or sorrowful feeling at the end worth seeing, rather than an akward feeling that neither of you want to discuss.

A touching look at life, human weaknesses, missed dreams, and opportunities.

Having read all of the posted reviews, what I find most interesting is the overall male consensus that the film portrays the husband as the guilty party for his wife's dissatisfaction. Being male, I find it hard to believe that so many of my gender feel so weak and betrayed.

Pearl, doesn't blame her husband and only learns to value and understand him better as also having missed out on some of life's potential. Also, I find it hard to accept the moralizing in the reviews. The film is not condoning the illicit relationship, the idyllic couplings and temporary `escape', are photographed as what we dream we've missed. Are acted out fantasies, to be moralized? Pearl knows, the fantasy can't last and a price will be paid.

Haven't we all missed out from time to time? How many men have fantasized (and acted out) Pearl's actions and expected to be forgiven. Why because they're men??? A well acted, beautifully filmed, and nicely scored remembrance, of the period of self exploration and human frailty.