Spoonixel Amateur movie with Big budget

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

JohnLeeT Giving one of the most amazing performances of her incredible career, Emily Watson brings compassion, love, and beauty to this otherwise mediocre film. As is almost always the case, Watson rises above the material and essays a character that in unforgettable in its depth, realism, and passion. There is no debate as to Emily Watson being the finest actor of our time and this film serves as another showcase for her astounding talent and artistry. In even minor roles, Watson captures a film and makes it her own to the extent that other actors in a piece strive to give exceptional performances themselves. Anyone who truly appreciates cinema and recognizes genius when they see it will see Emily Watson's name in the credits and make a point of seeing the film. Watson is a divine gift to any director and an artist that touches the very souls of audiences whenever she graces the screen with yet another masterful moment of cinematic greatness.

Kristinartist79 spoilers for movie and book They changed a lot from the book, but it was a good movie. They changed the way Norah learned about her daughter except that she found out after David passed away. Also, in the movie, they ended it after Norah and her son met the daughter, and there was nothing to indicate that she would still have a relationship with her mother and trin, whereas in the book they went on after they met, and even though Norah was living in Europe, without her daughter (who understandably did not want to move to Europe with her) she was still going to visit her and be a part of her life. (Don't forget they they could afford to fly her to visit regularly). And her bother moved close by to his sister. I guess the movie had to edit a lot, but the ending was unemotional; it was just like they met, excepted it and it was over; I mean I guess they figured it was implied that she would be a part of their life after that. In the movie, Carolyn's husband seemed more loving; I didn't really like his character in the book, pushing Carolyn into putting her daughter in a group home, before they were both ready because he didn't want to have the responsibility of raising her anymore. Sure he was right, but he was just too insensitive about it; he never once said that he would miss her or that they could still be a part of her life. He did address the issue of her moving into a group home, but he was kinder about it; he wasn't all, I want to travel the world and leave her in a home. The story line was a valuable lesson about how a decision made at a spur of the moment could ruin the life of yourself and the people around you. They portrayed David as a decent man who made a very bad decision that ruined his families life and could have ruined Pheabes life. Sure Carolyn's taking the baby might not have been purely a selfless act, as she really wanted a baby, but her life was a lot better because of her love for that baby. She could not hold the baby in her arms and leave her in that horrible place, which showed her kindness and love for that child. Sure, she could have told Norah who probably would have kept the baby, but she was caught in the middle and also, she did not know what the end results of that would be. So while she might not have been totally selfless, she obviously had the child's best interest at heart. The fact that she loved David might have influenced her to want to help him, but in the end, she did what was best for the baby. In the movie, David seemed to barely notice her. Actually in the book they implied that he did show some interest in her, but never acted upon it and it was never explained why and why he chose Norah instead of her. The movie does not even get that the fact that Carolyn loved David, just that one part where she told him he loved her, during that interaction where he was just insensitive saying, "What did I have to do with that?" In the book he was more sensitive and kind about the issue. They also addressed the issue of people with Down Syndrome getting married, but I felt they were too one sided on the issue; they just showed Carolyn say no and ended it from there, I felt it should have been more controversial. I mean Carolyn did a great job raising Pheabe to be independent and smart, but it seemed she did not have any confidence in her, maybe she was overprotective because she loved her. When Carolyn was saying she would be raising another baby if her daughter had a child, it seemed to me like she was not giving her any credit (or herself credit for how well she raised her daughter). People with mild mental retardation are able to get married and sometimes raise a child, often better than people without a disability.

molasses420 Someone asked about a song that the son was playing on the guitar...It's called: "Romance: Juegos Prohibidos." The composer is an anonymous Spanish guitarist.However, you can find the song on iTunes played by other musicians.A few scenes later, Paul and his son are in the truck arguing about music and there's another song playing.It follows the son as he's running on the beach.It's called "Asturias" by Juan Quesada and it's on the Vicky Cristina Barcelona soundtrack.From the little bit I saw of the movie, I really enjoyed the soundtrack! Wish it were available to buy.

npernell Who is minding the store here? How could any producer/network executive/director let a crew stick the skeeziest fakest plastic palm trees in film history in the sands of a wintry Canadian beach and try to fob it off on us as the tropics? Those trees were to real palm trees what a pink tinsel K-Mart Christmas tree is to real fir. And who let Dermot Mulroney go in front of the camera with painted-on grey hair that wouldn't have passed muster in a high school play? And didn't any of the geniuses doing quality control on this thing think to correct the (excellent) Canadian actor when he said gaz instead of gas? Everybody involved with this plodding slug of a "movie"--writer, director, actors--has done not just good but brilliant work elsewhere. Paced way too fast between events and deadly slow within them, devoid of any emotion except the obvious, expository and contrived--maybe this only seems like one of Lifetime's worst movie because of all the Red Carpet hype with which it was presented. And I'm saying this as somebody who love Lifetime. What gives, folks?All of that said, a certain actress's work at a certain critical turn in the movie (and if you've seen it you'll know exactly what I'm talking about) was so brilliant that the movie would have gotten a 10 from me if that was the whole movie. Unfortunately it was only about five seconds of it.