This movie apparently had a firestorm of mixed reviews and comparisons to the Pulitzer Prize winnings book swirling around it - and I missed it all. Thankfully. I enjoyed the movie, though it wouldn’t make a list of my favorites. It is told by jumping forward and backward in time, which allows filmmakers to withhold key or dramatic details of the plot as long as possible. This seemed stunning and revolutionary way back when I watched Pulp Fiction, but now of course a lot of movies play with event sequencing. (I suppose one of the foreshadowing of this technique was Citizen Kane, like, what the hell does Rosebud mean?) So I am comfortable knowing that some things may take a while to make sense. This movie is all over the place: geographically and plot-wise, but I was fine with it. Sometimes I like a movie that dares me to pay attention. Given the hysterical nature of some of the negative reviews, I feel I might want to read the novel, but I understand it is rather long, and so is my reading list! I would say that if you aren’t a person who hates movies made from your favorite books, give this one a watch - just let it wash over you. My final comment is: I really like the Boris character, who drops into the action a couple of times. Where is his movie? Hmm, maybe he shows up more in the book. Sigh, okay, it goes onto my reading list.

Go to full review

I really don't see why this got quite such a kicking from the critics. Ansel Elgort, Jeffrey Wright and Nicole Kidman put a good effort into a tale that hinges on the impact of one single, tragic, moment in time and of the subsequent consequences. The characters visibly evolve throughout the film and it flows in an interesting and absorbing fashion. It is a wee bit too long and perhaps some more judicious pruning of the original - rather lengthy - book might have been in order. That said, the screenplay does hold true to the book in all the essentials and really this is well worth a watch.

Go to full review