User reviews

Whatever resulted Serena can be enigmatic. Visually, the movie has a lot of beautiful shots. There's also great talents among the cast. The story seems like it is meant for a powerful tragedy, but these assets however lead to a rather dreary, unfocused drama, that doesn't quite live up to its ambition. Even with the looks of a grand and dazzling piece of cinema, the film doesn't come close with that worth. And it's a truly frustrating thing to look at a movie with such strong potential become a strange mess.

The story is basically an old fashioned American drama about a man, who manages a timber industry, oppresses his ambition that leads to numerous unfortunate events. The core here is a love story in which its romance is often nonexistent, we hardly get to see how they fully develop their relationship. But there is still an interesting growth within these rich details. But the movie is too scattered with various subplots that each takes over the entirety. There is too many conflicts, like they are mostly separated into a whole new different story, unable to say a single or definite point. The third act becomes a weird flood of consequences that doesn't necessarily gain any deserving depth.

There is so much going on with the story, the film also manages to shift it into several tones. It goes to art-house calmness, a showy drama, and then even has a preposterous climax. The worst of it indeed never fits in to its stunning production values. The film seems to be too reliant on what it has. It has captivating cinematography, impressive production, and even the actors are just doing what they believe they can do to make this movie work. Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper are the main attraction here, while they try to bring something to the table, the movie remains to be dreary for not letting the two have an actual engaging moment together. The pacing is reasonably slow, but sometimes it becomes an obligation than another moment to thoughtfully breathe.

Serena is a pretty strange film to encounter, one that has its best potentials fall apart into a surprisingly dull cinema. It's still fascinating to see what it has: great cast, striking images, richly defined context, and gripping drama (if only it has more time to actually develop them), but it really doesn't have an exact intention. And the story keeps on going, still failing to be actually engaging. This is an obvious lesson about creating cinematic drama, when things needed real definition on what's going on and who the characters are, than just throwing them away with stuff that could gloss over its half- baked narrative. Even the presence of the ever appealing Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper couldn't overlook the entire film's unimaginable flaws.

Serena has had quite a hard time so far. Filmed in 2012, it has been shelved for over a year and half due to apparent scheduling. But finally, after all that time it has come to light at this year's BFI London Film Festival for a world-premiere! But it does raise the question, is it a hidden gem that we have been long-desiring? Or is it so bad that it has was hidden on purpose? Unfortunately it appears to be the later.

Considering that is has two A-list on screen regulars; Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper, the film is surprisingly dissatisfying. Set in North Carolina in the Depression era, the film accounts the perspective of George Pemberton (Cooper) and his wood-plantation empire. That is until he meets Serena (Lawrence), when he suddenly suggests 'we should be married' - and they immediately do. In fairy- tales this is expected, but in a reality period drama it is loose and leaves no belief in their relationship. As a result, throughout the events of the film we have no attachment to them at all.

Once on board with Pemberton's wood-empire, Serena does not want to just be a trophy-wife, but instead gets hands-on involved in the dirty business end and is not afraid to throw some axes.

Form there onwards the film repeats the same formula over again: Romance, wood-chopping, politics - repeat. It is a tedious cycle with the all-so often subplots appearing that have no registration to the already flimsy story.

Also featuring; Rhys Ifans (as the bearded hit-man), Toby Jones (as Sheriff McDowell) and Sean Harris (as a wood-chopper), the film shockingly concludes with a melodrama on misplacement and seems unsure of where it is going, or what genre it even is.

If there was one positive thing to be said about Serena, it would be the six sex scenes between Cooper and Lawrence. But even then, the chemistry between them is tightly bound compared to their previous on-screen duos (Silver Linings Playbook, American Hustle).

Directed by Academy-Award winning Susanne Bier and penned by Christopher Kyle, it is hard to find who is exactly to blame. Is it the direction of the story? Either way it is a disappointing adaptation.

Trainwreck is a strong word. Average is another strong word. Mediocre sounds about right. Serena isn't necessarily a film that Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence should concern themselves with burying, it'll be forgotten at the bottom of the bargain bin in no time, but it's not something to be proud of either. Director Susanne Bier, whose 2010 film In A Better World won the Foreign Language Oscar, just doesn't seem to know what to do with the material and it's a tonal catastrophe. Set in Depression-era North Carolina, the story focuses on entrepreneurial newlyweds George and Serena Pemberton, played by Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence respectively, as they struggle to maintain their timber empire in the face of betrayal from their closest allies. Life becomes complicated as Serena cannot bear children, but before they met George had already impregnated one of his maids. It's a power struggle of greed and corruption between all involved and leaves a startlingly bloody trail. Unfortunately, Jennifer Lawrence's performance is all over the place, up the walls and on the ceiling. However, it's not necessarily her fault. She has more understanding of Serena than Bier seems to have and ultimately she's at odds with how her character is presented. Lawrence plays Serena cold, robotic, calculating, to the point where she seems disinterested. She's a sociopathic and manipulative character. But Bier wants our hearts to ache with pity when she's on screen, emotions difficult to muster when it works better on a psychological level. A slight tonal adjustment more aligned to the way Lawrence is playing could make our skins crawl when we see her, and be much more compelling for it. As a result, Lawrence just feels way off. Random bursts of tears and screams don't help consistent characterization, not even fitting to the mould of the sociopath. The editing isn't her friend. The film is littered with continuity errors and she amusingly keeps darting across Cooper's shoulder. Their chemistry is as tender as ever, their sweeping romance is much less so thanks to skimming over every detail. The film would've been a decent (if mild) psychological thriller if it played its cards right and wasn't concerned with any sentiment. But would Lawrence have been better if the style was adjusted? Perhaps slightly. The complaints about her not fitting the time period are valid, but not glaring. As an actress, she's still unpolished potential, and has at least improved since she shot Serena, but Bier's direction fails her. Not to completely blame others, her character is a disaster on everybody's shoulders. However, in the film's third act it does come to its senses and finally realizes what kind of story it is, but the execution is still very weak, lacking any tension or spatial awareness on how to shoot its most kinetic scenes. It feels like there is a decent film buried underneath there somewhere with all its dynamics, maybe a couple more drafts away, maybe a couple more takes, maybe a more intuitive editor behind the wheel. But the potential is lost. Perhaps a road closer to Foxcatcher's gritty authentic realm would've made for a more engrossing film, but that tone is far from its interests and selling points. On the other hand, Cooper is solid. Nothing great, he too has evidently improved since the shoot. He's easy to buy as this character of someone who could have the power to run an empire, and be the type of person who would fall for Serena and eventually be manipulated by her. His acting process as he confronts his moral dilemmas is laid entirely on screen, given that the film offers many shots of him just thinking. But he's immersed enough in the character to make it work. He is a touch too unlikeable to invest in given his corruption, but he makes the whole thing a lot more watchable than it could've been. Alas, peripheral characters are starved of development. Most glaringly is Ana Ularu, ostensibly a key character as the mother of Cooper's child, and she's given literally nothing to do but share venomous glares with Jennifer Lawrence. Rhys Ifans is solid, but his character is written too idiotically to take seriously. Toby Jones toes a fine line between being too self-aware, but it's David Dencik who is the most radiant of the cast in his screen time. Not that he's a fascinating character, just happens to have the most convincing conviction of the ensemble. I want to time travel back to their set and leave the crew a tripod because if there's any way to devalue millions of dollars of (lovely) production and costume design it's giving the camera to Jimmy Tremble Fingers. It's like a Kathryn Bigelow film, constantly but only slightly shaking with the camera settings making the frame flicker every other shot. The film is void of any cinematic atmosphere. It's such a shame because when the second unit shoots the astonishing static vistas of the Smokey Mountains it gives me hope that it could be an attractive film. But there's no grace to be found otherwise. Serena is just a ferociously sloppy film. The biggest sin is how it enters dark territory without embracing it, feeling as though it's in denial of how brutal its story truly is. The attempts to be poetic in its imagery are laughable and the film often ruins decent moments with trite cringe- worthy lines. Nevertheless, it isn't an unbearable film, if 'not always bad' can be a compliment. There will be some people who can ignore these flaws and like it for what it is. It doesn't quite deserve the lashing it's suffered so far, but lets just quietly put it back on the shelf. 4/10

I don't normally post reviews because one man's trash may be another man's treasure. However I don't see how many people could like this movie. I'm a big Cooper/Lawrence fan so I had lofty expectations. the first bad thing I noticed were the many many cuts. It was as if they were trying to piece a movie together from random 5 second snippets. the next thing I noticed was the very shaky cinematography. At times it was like cloverfield. OK not as bad but visually disturbing. Next was continuity. Bradley cooper's character has an unlit cigar in his mouth speaking to JLaw. Cut to her saying her line. cut right back to him and the cigar is lit and he's smoking it. Unlikely but plausible so I'll allow it. Cut back to her then right back to him and he's lighting the cigar. One of the worst cases of continuity I have ever seen. Well maybe until this. From the start Cooper has a thick accent. Spot on JFK to be exact. I'll buy it. 35 minutes into it his accent is completely gone. No accent whatsoever. I don't know if it ever cam back because I turned it off after that. Truly a black eye for two great actors.

Maybe it's because I grew up in the South. Maybe it's because I expected a lot less after reading the reviews. Maybe a little choppy but the beautiful photography and excellent acting and characters... totally nailed the mountain man character. Very believable story. Said in the beginning she was damaged. What did you expect?

"I've think you've taken nine months to do about six months work."

It's funny that Jennifer Lawrence was given this line in a film that took over 18 months to make during post-production because for what it is, this could have been edited much better in two or three months. The narrative feels choppy and instead of focusing on the characters in this period piece they move the narrative from one act to the next without ever giving the audience anything to chew on. This is simply a flat period romance with very little chemistry that misfires on all cylinders (editing, casting, and screenplay). You can't help but feel that there is another film in here somewhere that got lost in the editing room. Serena seemed to be a film aiming for Oscar gold because it had everything going for beginning from the romantic pairing of Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper after their incredible success in Silver Linings Playbook. Add the solid Danish director, Susanne Bier (In a Better World), and a script based on Ron Rash's 2008 novel to the mix and Serena seemed to be a sure bet. I had high expectations for it and many were already including it as a contender for next year's Academy Award even before it finished being produced. How could a film like this end up being so forgettable and predictable at the same time? I'd guess the blame relies on the producers who tried to cash in on Lawrence and Cooper's success by centering the film on the romance instead of focusing on the other interesting cast members. The romance never works here because the characters are never fully developed so there is no way we can invest in their relationship. The amazing chemistry these two actors had in their previous film is completely wasted here. Everything about this film seemed disconnected and I am sure it won't live up to the aspirations the producers and critics had for Serena.

I have genuinely enjoyed all of Jennifer Lawrence's performances up to this film. The setting in the woods reminded me of the first time I saw J-Law in Winter's Bone, a film so richly invested in character development that I was expecting her to deliver another outstanding performance. That comparison to Winter's Bone only ended up disappointing me. She is extremely over the top in this film and the emotional scenes she gets are never believable. The scenes where she breaks down and cries were painful to watch. Bradley Cooper loses his charm as well, but I guess the blame relies on the script. If you are trying to deliver a strong romantic period piece you have the right actors to do so, but the script doesn't help build the romance. Bradley Cooper's character catches up to J-Law on a horse and asks her to marry him and then they are married. The entire film felt sort of chopped up and fast forwarded to the key parts of the story without taking time to give the characters any depth. About 15 minutes into the movie I knew where everything was heading and it was a huge disappointment for me because I expected a lot more from this film. The secondary cast is interesting, but unfortunately very little time is given to these characters. Rhys Ifans, Toby Jones, and David Dencik are extremely talented actors and I wish the script would've given them more time. Unfortunately Christopher Kyle's script misses the mark at every turn. The only positive thing about Serena was Morten Søborg's beautiful cinematography.

I just picked this movie randomly on a Sunday afternoon. And no, it's not going to win any awards. But man, have the IMDB pseudo intelligencia come out in droves to lambast this one. I guess there was some sort of issue between its completion and release. And so I guess the lemmings were keen to pile on. To all those all those meandering wannabe insiders and frustrated industry outcasts I say - get a life.

The movie itself has stood the test of time. The adaptation is an interesting take, if somewhat predictable. The performances were solid. And the cinematography does an admirable job of reinforcing some of the symbolism of the original text.

With Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence in this film, I am sure folks immediately thought of their lovely romance in "Silver Linings Playbook"--and that's natural. However, when people saw that this was NOT a romantic film but a very, very grim and slow film, I am sure that alone turned off many fans. Regardless, folks were sure turned off and this went on to be one of the biggest money-losing films of the year. Despite this, is the film any good?

Well, yes and no. I'd say yes in that there are some very nice performances==particularly by Jennifer Lawrence. While she plays a thoroughly unlikable lady, she is able to convey a lot of emotions without actually saying anything. I was very impressed by her. As for Bradley Cooper....well, his character wasn't very interesting. The film also has some lovely location shots. What I didn't like, was that the film was too stark, too quiet and too god-awful depressing. Additionally, and this is a more minor quibble, but I HATE how in the close-up shots the camera NEVER remains still. I am sure some folks think it makes the film artsy, but on the big screen it probably induced nausea.

The story itself is about greed, corruption and amorality--themes that made me think of "There Will Be Blood", though without the larger than life leading performance. The Pembertons (Lawrence and Cooper) marry and move to the area which is now the Great Smokey National Park during the early Depression. Their goals are to eventually earn enough for a huge spread in Brazil--and both seem willing to abandon morality and decency to do it. However, Mrs. Pemberton is a lot like Lady Macbeth--the vicious woman pushing her husband to do ANYTHING to earn this fortunate. But when Mrs. Pemberton realizes that a woman in town with a small child is Mr. Pemberton's, this same vicious and amoral energy is about to be unleashed on the husband, child and old mistress.

This is a slow and unpleasant film...I'll admit this readily. However, I don't think overall that it's a bad film--even if it is a movie practically overflowing with nastiness! I see it as a film that STILL has an interesting story that could have certainly been much better. Giving the story some energy, some life would have greatly improved it. As it is, I just can't see most folks being very willing to watch this sort of unpleasantness.

To be honest I am only writing this review because the film has had such a negative reception. I want to make a few things clear.

This film rather than following the Hollywood formula is more true to life in the sense that some European films have been. Life isn't always exciting, sometimes it can be brooding rather than fast paced with flashy cars and "cool" props being used to polish up perception.

I would classify this as historical fiction in the sense that most films with a historical setting have a lot of flash and posturing. This film offers a view of the less glamorous times during the depression. It gives you a glimpse of the issues through the plot rather than show you first hand. Some elements are true to Hollywood such as perfectly clean main characters but conceptually this film seems like a simple slice of life.

One person said you ended up not liking anyone. I think that's the entire point of the film. It's dark, brooding, and it has things to say about the nature of people and life without offering the flash and allure of a visually stunning or fun filled film. Many can't understand the setting (the depression) and might not understand the hard choices people made between survival and dreams which still relates to current life in many ways.

I found the plot believable and think it's a good film for the deeper thinkers and realistic story lovers. Although poetic, it substitutes flash for substance. Instead of looking for something action packed or something to cuddle up with just accept it for what it is. It's unlikely to be pleasant for the light hearted.

I was nearly put off watching this by the low scores. Glad I watched it because your never disappointed with Bradley and Jennifer. Humbling storyline and lovely scenery. Tense in places and surprising in others. Didn't like the ending but won't spoil anything. Just a good film to watch...

Despite the oddly virulent reviews of Serena posted on this site, Serena is not a bad film, simply a dull one. Beautiful cinematography (it was filmed in the Czech Republic) and costume design can't hide the flaws of the director's decisions. The film is weirdly static, with no flow from scene to scene. Because of that, the actors aren't allowed to build their performances, actions seem simply to happen and no point of view is made or advanced. The famed Lawrence/Cooper chemistry is notably absent because of this directorial decision. There are births, deaths, accidents with no relation in the larger scheme of the movie. Lawrence is stunning in the period costumes, Rhys Ifans virtually unidentifiable in the best performance of Serena and Bradley Cooper continues his aversion to razors as the stubble-faced husband/owner of the logging company. (BTW: this appearance is notably out of sync for a period piece. No business owner in the first half of the 20th century would appear in public with a 2 day growth of whiskers.)Coming off the previous successes of the Lawrence/Cooper team, this film is a failure that can only be laid at the director's feet. It's a shame that their work is dissipated in this way.

If a film has Academy Award nominated actors, is based off a New York Times bestseller, it can still be a crap movie. We present to you: Serena.

Serena is a bunch of melodramatic nonsense masked as a worthy Hollywood feature film – when in reality it is just a bigger budgeted soap opera set in a historical time period.

George Pemberton (Bradley Cooper) is trying to build a timber empire in North Carolina in 1929. While in the Northeast he meets a captivating woman named Serena (Jennifer Lawrence) and marries her. Together, the newly married couple return to North Carolina and pursue the venture together, Serena being the ever proficient business partner. Their saga and dramatics for success is the basis of the narrative within this film.

Anyone who has read the novel Serena by Ron Rash should be deeply disappointed by the film adaptation by screenwriter Christopher Kyle and director Susanne Bier. I'm disappointed and all I did was read the summary of the novel after watching the film, and all I can say is "woof, Cliffnotes, eat your heart out." Serena is a tragedy of editing, direction, screen writing, and acting all with a pretty paint job to delude viewers into thinking the drama is adequate.

With so much wrong in the film it is hard to differentiate whose shoulders must bear the brunt of the blame. Surely the starting point for the film is the script, and Kyle's is devoid of suspense, tension and drama. The dialogue does nothing to progress the plot in a feasible manner so director Susanne Bier must, like a magician, attempt to cultivate it from thin air. Not to say her attempt is admirable either, the gritty drama about greed set in the dense forest of North Carolina has no mood, no vision and is plainly shot with a vividity that exacerbates Serena's lifelessness.

Speaking of lifeless, moving on to the lead performers of this film: Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence. Neither both to develop their characters in any fashion. Both Cooper and Lawrence are hollow mannequins going through the motions – no greed, no hate, no love, no passion, no motivation, no flaws, no self, no soul. Admittedly, they are severely miscast for their roles but the level at which they falter is startling.

The only entertainment received from watching Serena is from laughing at this allegedly dramatic film that fails to engage its viewer. Serena is uninspired and dreadfully cliché – watch out for some hilariously poor sex scenes and side-splitting 'emotional breakdowns'. Serena is so poorly done, from all angles, its a marvel the film even managed an internet release in the States.

Please check out our website for full reviews of all the recent releases.

I mean, it's hard to even really think this is a good film, but considering all of the bad hype and the delay in the release of it prior to this, I think we all expected something along the lines of Grace of Monaco/Diana. Instead, it's not really that bad, certainly not in the funny way we all expected. So it's good that it's not a trainwreck, but it's not very good either. It's just way too all over the place to work, and seems to be going through the motions without any concern as to what it's trying to say. Also, it's a little dull. Still, it's not that bad and I do think Lawrence does the best she can with the material, although Cooper has no presence.

In Depression-era North Carolina, Pemberton (Bradley Cooper) fights to keep his flailing logging business afloat in order to make enough money to start of new life in Brazil with his enigmatic new wife, Serena (Jennifer Lawrence).

The town sheriff is suspicious of Pemberton's dirty dealings and increasing pressure to mark the area a national park sees the ambitious businessman turn to his wife for increasingly destructive support and direction.

Serena is billed as a period drama centred around the bleak prospects of a small town and all those trapped within her but in reality it's a much more sophisticated character study of the deeply complicated title role herself.

The Depression era setting is really an extended metaphor for the inescapable darkness of Serena's damaged personality. Having suffered a soul stamping tragedy as a child and left unable to love (by her own admission) each new opportunity or friendly face is terminated by her manipulative neediness and, eventually, brute force.

Her one genuine connection is with the curmudgeonly Galloway (Rhys Ifans) an equally disturbed and quietly menacing character who tends to her every warped whim like a loyal lap dog. What at first seems a perfect union between Pemberton and Serena horrifyingly unravels as each turn to competitively desperate measures to get what they need.

Although both Lawrence and Cooper more than handle their complex roles, Serena could've been a big hitter with more established, serious actors in their place. A quiet, slow burning watch.

I saw the film today and while the performances were good and the look of the film from the sets to the costuming were impressive the flow of the film wasn't perfect and that felt like it was mainly down to the editing.

The tone shift half way through did feel jarring, it made the film feel oddly paced as the characters motivations were so emotional and fluid that I felt the viewer had to keep working out the reasons for such intense decisions and it not working at least sometimes for me.

Fans of the novel will notice big changes and I imagine the film works better for people who are unfamiliar with Ron Rash's novel as I was disappointed how different it was.

It's not a masterpiece but it's not a disaster, if any thing it feels too ambitious and doesn't quite reach the heights needed.

I usually write a review only when my opinion drastically differentiates from what I find already contributed - when there's a dire need to tip the scale. And there is one here, to save this incredible film from the lynch mob.

This atmospheric dark period romance set in an unusual stage has a lot of human drama to offer. And this is what S. Bier is known at excelling. And pouring it on, which obviously irritates some part of the audience. But it is all done with a lot of taste for timing, with a good and fresh modern editing which disposes of most needless parts of the action and instead rather reserves that time for us to think about it all during the breaks of foggy Smoky Mountains scenery. (Obfuscation plays a leading role here, and this landscape couldn't be a better choice.)

Film is layered with appropriately somber music used/mixed with subtlety, and likewise its gorgeous photography has been wonderfully appreciated by the edit which understands its visual potential. This is one of those rare instances where a pattern of hand-held closeups doesn't seem gratuitous, but does manage to bring us closer to the characters. Beside this being the result of the strong characters themselves, it is also a combination of a slower, not-frenetic pace, with a lot of static masters too.

While there might be some unbelievable decisions the characters make in this story, we need to remind ourselves that instead of treating this as a negative, these are the emotional extremes we should be welcoming, in an emotional rawness which needs appreciation. At the end, it is an emotional and symbolic theater in which all the elements and symbols have and live to deliver their wonderfully intertwined meanings.

I think It's a great movie with a deeper meaning than just the first line story which is beautifully told with sensitivity and great performances. But besides the moral implications of their actions which are well portrayed (we understand Serena's personality through her tragic past life experiences; and her husband's blindness having found the love that matches his lifestyle and personal ambitions), the story is also about nature Versus civilization. George Pemberton's obsession with hunting down the adult panther symbolizes his quest for bringing development into a virgin forest inevitably by destroying trees and erasing nature. Nature is nowadays seriously in danger of survival and humankind cannot do so without respecting nature : the end scene between the panther and George both death-wounded is intended to mean exactly this.

I feel like the ratings of this film are being dragged down by people comparing it to either (a) the book, or (b) the other films involving Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper: Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle. Mind you, I haven't read the book. And it's clearly a weak film compared to their prior work. But it's not awful.

One reviewer compared it poorly to Manos-Hands of Fate. Now that's just ridiculous!

The movie has several good aspects to it. The acting is good and the cinematography is strong. And it has weaker aspects: the writing is weak, and the story design is a huge train wreck. It feels like there was an original design to the story which was subtle and elaborate, and which the director failed to convey.

It's worth watching to enjoy the actors, who are far, far better than this script deserves. And if you watch the DVD, you can hear some comments from the director, which illuminate or hint at where the problems may lie.

This film tells the story of a timber tycoon in a rural place, whose life drastically changes after marrying a girl who lost her family to a devastating fire when she was twelve.

I watched "Serena" at once after getting my hands on it. The pairing of Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence could not be wrong, I thought. The plot is all about Serena, and is roughly in three parts, thee first showing Jennifer Lawrence in a confident mode, the second showing her in distress and the third showing her in callousness. Jennifer Lawrence does well to portray these qualities, but the main problem is that she's too young and beautiful to be in such a role. Think Nicole Kidman in "Cold Mountain".

On the other hand, Bradley Cooper is believable as a tycoon. Lighting effects are great as well. Story telling could be more focused though, as there are scenes which don't lead to anywhere, such as the scene where there's an accident involving someone slipping next to a tree. Overall, I think "Serena" is an OK film but it isn't as thrilling or engaging as it could be.