Dancing at Lughnasa

1998 "Five sisters embrace the spirit of a people."
6.3| 1h36m| PG| en
Details

Five unmarried sisters make the most of their simple existence in rural Ireland in the 1930s.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Steineded How sad is this?
Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation
Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible
Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.
celtic_chief I cannot understand how so many people have just given this classic play by the great Brian Friel just an average score. I take it they are incapable of understanding the deeper meaning to great European films like this. I guess if it doesn't include expensive props, they are incapable of reading under the surface. I had read this play many years ago, and loved it, and I had put off watching the film until recently. This has to be one of the greatest films that I have ever seen and one that is full worthy of a 10/10. Excellent performances by all, a powerful script, great directing. This is a must for everyone who wants more than fast cars and expensive props.
Richard Burin Dancing at Lughnasa (Pat O'Connor, 1996) is an oddly muted drama in which nothing really happens, for an hour and a half. "Progress is a comfortable disease," observed grammar-phobic poet e e cummings. For him, maybe, but for five unmarried sisters in '30s Ireland, it's anything but, as the march of time throws their life together into jeopardy. The spectre of industry and dwindling school rolls are looming, threatening to put teacher Meryl Streep (who is really annoying here, sometimes intentionally) and professional knitters Sophie Thompson and Brid Brennan out of work and break up the family unit. Not that they seem very happy to begin with, bickering and casting light on another's neuroses in a way that becomes quickly wearing very quickly. There's love in the house, for sure, but there's a lot more repression and glumness, much of it uninteresting and trite.As well as the breadwinners, we meet happy-go-lucky Kathy Burke, fifth sister Catherine McCormack - spending a summer with returning lover Rhys Ifans - a clergyman brother ravaged by dementia (Michael Gambon), and young Darrell Johnston, the story told through his eyes. The film has uniformly good performances, but it's often clichéd and unenlightening, with an opening and closing voice-over that apes How Green Was My Valley and seems to bear little relation to the action in between. On the plus side, occasional moments of insight peek through the overbearing script and there are two really good scenes. One has the family flicking through a photo album and recalling lost love; it's a quiet tour-de-force from Burke. The other, which partly gives the film its title, is simply great, as the sisters begin dancing to a song on the radio, their celebrations growing ever more feverish until they spill out into the yard. It's a moment of sheer wonder amid much muddled misery.
indexed-savings I saw this play turned into a movie with my wife from a TIVO copy. We were so moved by its beauty, reality, pathos, characters, and what we took to be an authentic depiction of people and scenery in Ireland, at the time of the Spanish Civil War (1936), and of a certain simplicity in an insecure rural life, that I rushed upstairs to this computer to find out who wrote it--and what others may have made of it.I landed here--where several reviewers confirmed my belief that this is a "keeper". I will save it to be seen (and not to be missed) by all my children and grandchildren. I believe it is a rare chance to meet people whose world is very small, and often very plain, whose words you don't want to miss.
Mashi69 Like all those who have criticized this movie, I too missed the point, because to me it just seemed a less than ordinary movie about ordinary people. I never saw the stage play, perhaps here lies the rub: that kind of continuity that films need (and plays don't, being divided into macro scenes) is totally lacking. The result is that the structure of this movie slackens and shows gaps as big as those of matter at the molecular level. I agree, the setting is beautiful: movies dealing with peoples who have strong traditions and attachment to their land must inevitably try to make the landscape one more actor. But when a work of "art" (lesser art) shows so blatantly its inner pathos-inducing mechanism, then the use of a spectacular landscape just makes things worse, as in the case of Dancing at Lughnasa: "folkloristic" in the worst acceptation of the term. Exemplary in this sense the voice off of the boy, Michael, who in the end has the nerve to say something like "I will remember those years as the most beautiful of my life" after having spent the whole movie interacting with the characters much less than any of the bushes in Mundy family's courtyard.