the fact that this was made in 1971 is really hard to escape while watching. but that doesn't necessarily mean that the film "hasn't aged well". in fact, I quite liked it. felt that the sort of hippie look agrees well with the atmosphere of the play. the ending of course is way more graphic than in the text. but then again, I could imagine the author of titus andronicus would have approved ;-)

what a bad movie. a lumet was involved in this mess? what a shame! why didn't jonathan demme prevent damage with his 30 years of experience in directing?! I appreciate expermintal visual style - "festen" is still among my personal top10 of all times - I can also endure uncompromising realism in writing and thus gave the film the benefit of the doubt when it first came apart of the seams of the test dinner, but it happened again and again for instance during the wedding party. uh... boring! and for no reason or message. the only plus is the actors, and while particularly the character of rachel offers an opportunity to shine, it is not spectacular enough to make the oscar win a must. I think shirley maclaine was absolutely spot on when she said that anne hathaway had more potential in her than "princess diaries" or "prada" and "rachel getting married" is a good start to show this potential, but I'm absolutely fine with her not winning that night. all in all, it's a sh*t film (sorry for my french, but I really hate this movie for appearing so anti-mainstream appealing, while not giving me anything for the two hours of my life) with good actors - and that's simply not enough. not even close to enough.

quite a surprise... I didn't expect anything from this, but watched it anyway being quite optimistic about ralph fiennes films recently due to the spectecular bull's eye that was "in bruges". indeed, "the duke" eh, "the duchess" doesn't offer anything new or groundbreaking which it should be remembered for in a year, still it presents that quite well and is entertaining.

hm... had expected more. the 1970s setting looks great as does the collage style, the acting's good, but there is little character development and something strangely un-captivating about this movie. I'm usually very skeptical of biopics, because they tend to follow biographical dates in a sort of undramatic way and maybe "milk" suffered from this problem as well. personally, I didn't really like the writing. I appreciate that "milk" won for best screenplay as a symbol for lgbt rights, but, uhm, it's appalling how much better written "in bruges" is and this is where this oscar truly belongs hands down.

I was quite overwhelmed, when I saw it the first time, but you get slightly annoyed with inconsistencies in plot and structure, if you think about it more.