The Edge of Love

I went to see this as the Edinburgh Film Festival the other day and I have to say I was a bit disappointed.

The score and the cinematography were lush and gorgeous and the acting was very good but the script lacked characterisation. I realise that Dylan Thomas was not meant to have been an overly pleasant man, but I failed to see why the seemingly likable, headstrong character of Vera Phillips ever fell in love with him. He came across as completely selfish and sleazy with virtually no redeeming qualities and it frustrated me that there seemed to be no explanation for every woman fawning over him. Characters made choices out of the blue and eventually I just grew to dislike all the characters I have loved in the first half.

What also grated about this film is that sometimes I swear I could have been watching 'Atonement' the amount of time Keira Knightley said "Come back to me." I really hope she wasn't trying to relive the glory of 'Atonement' through this film because I am afraid she will be sorely disappointed. Even though I personally did not enjoy 'Atonement' I can recognise that it is a marvellous film and sadly "The Edge of Love" just cannot compare.

If you went by the mostlly male MetaCritic reviewers, you'd think this was one of the worst films ever made. I thought it was good -- not great -- but held my interest throughout and I thought the actors were very attractive and convincing in their roles.

I don't know anything about Dylan Thomas. From what was read/spoken in the film, I don't think much of his poetry. Sounds like he tried way too hard and reached, but missed. The lines were contrived and didn't seem to make much sense. I like Archibald MacLeisch.

Mathew Rhys was very good at playing the womanizing villain, but with charm and believability. Knightly and the other female lead were also interesting characters in this wartime drama.

I think more women would rate this film higher than men because women would understand the female friendship as well as the slick charm of a Mr. Wrong.

This beautifully made film possibly evokes the feel of London in the blitz more than any other film. Set during wartime, it's about relationships and friendship. Primarily it's about the friendship between Keira Knightly's character and that of Siena Miller which is tested beyond any limit known to man.... or in this case, woman. Everyone looks great, everyone seems real and the very stylish photography and energy of the direction make this a real masterpiece of fine art.

The story, incidentally written by Keira Knightly's mother(!) brilliantly captures the mood and the anxieties, fears and hopes of the time and by focusing on the main, slightly unhinged characters, enhances these emotions and mental stains. Everything is switched up to level 11 but behind a mask of British restraint and respectability. The story arc itself is both engaging and genuinely exciting - it's not a soppy love story or a chic-flick for the poetry reading set - it's set during the war after all!

As much as the story is great, one big problem is that it is mainly made-up nonsense. The characters and events were real but they didn't happen like this. The real facts actually sound just as interesting but probably they would not have had Keira Knightly looking quite so hot? Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, as they say!

Love triangle? Forget it, this is a love square involving famous poet Dylan Thomas (Matthew Rhys), his wife Caitlin (Sienna Miller), his lover and later her friend Vera (Keira Knightley) and an admirer of her, the soldier William (Cillian Murphy). But not necessarily involving all of them together, even though there's the knowledge of all parts that there's something on in between them. And the background of this turbulent relationship is England during World War 2 with the bombs falling over their heads while they "love" and hate each other, and write poems about it. "The Edge of Love" isn't a romantic story of meetings, falling in love and break-ups, it's the upside of those, it's everything else but love. Pitiful.

It's about selfish characters using the L word to express themselves and make this movie going. Whatever that was it wasn't love. Only William perhaps, he's the only genuine soul in this and the one who got hurt the most. A good lesson to be learned in here. If you're going to get too close, you really must try your best to know the other one. Strange friendship relations are also explored in here. In what world you would imagine a woman making friends with her husband's lover and expecting nothing more to happen? Whatever. William is real while the other folks were just exploiters seeking benefits, money or used as muses in order to "help" the creative genius of a nasty drunk bugger. And what was the point of this, anyway? To prove that friendship can last even after a lot of misunderstandings and betrayals? Gee, how exciting for a motion picture to be developed. Next time, a similar work (but better!) could be made about writer Euclides da Cunha (Google it, please!) and that would make a far more interesting (and even more tragic) piece than this film.

The real life, in this particular case, wasn't all that interesting, therefore this is a movie that not even a great screenplay would make it better. Skip this with no regrets and treat yourself with "Bright Star" which is about a real love story, with very meaningful things to say and there's the delightful words of John Keats to leave you marveled. In there, it's life and art combined producing quality material. Here, there's nothing. I know very little of Dylan Thomas and after "The Edge of Love" I'll still know very little of him. Why? Not only does this movie doesn't generate any kind of sympathy for the man (couldn't even care for the actor playing him as well), almost no attributes and it gives so little of the artist (which sounds very limited with his writings) that I simply lost it. I won't search for his books. And that's the worst kind of service a movie can make while making a portrayal of a real figure. As quoted by a famous character in another movie: "He was a genius, a poet and a drunk." I can only agree with the last part.

It wasn't that bad. There's a gorgeous cinematography very suitable for the game of appearances all the characters were involved, good costumes and art direction, and Cillian was the best thing in it with this decent guy who falls in love with the wrong person, goes to the war and sees its horrors to later return transformed and with his marriage going downhill, poor and with a kid to raise. I cared for this character, opposed to the poet which not only I hated but couldn't understand what women saw in him. It may be the words but those don't translated so well while echoed in tiring voice overs. It sounds pretentious and lifeless. And it certainly wasn't for the looks, since he was quite ugly and with no expression. Keira and Sienna work best when they're together sharing their stories and dreams; with the male actors is just embarrassing to look. Still one of the weakest films I've ever seen. 5/10.

a beautiful film. for landscapes, for the story, for bitter atmosphere, maybe for nuances of acting. a film about past and choices. dark and remembering lost age, seductive for its special branches and useful for discover, again, the force of Keira Knightley art. its virtue - invitation to discover the poetry by Dylan Thomas. or to discover a biographic fragment, exercise really popular at Hollywood of last years. in fact, only a film who seems be another Sunday Gloomy with significant nuances, love story and options story who preserves the flavor of a period and the slices of sentimental adventure, one of definition of freedom in Boem style.