VividSimon Simply Perfect

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

funkyfry I saw this movie because I'm a fan of Stephen Fry from back in his "Blackadder" days, and I was reading an article about James McAvoy which mentioned his doing this film with Fry. I have to say that even though the film didn't make me think any less of either man as an artist, it was somewhat underwhelming overall, particularly in the last 20 minutes or so. I was very amused by the "Old Major" character for most of the film but finding him in the war situation didn't resonate for me. The biggest problem I had was with Nina Blount (Emily Mortimer). I couldn't be sure if I was supposed to respect that character or not, and by the time the film seemed to come down one way I had already made up my mind for the opposite. When Adam (Stephen Campbell Moore) sold her for his rent money, I thought it was actually a pretty sensible move considering how shallow she is, and I didn't understand – or believe – that he would give up his fortune for her much less burn his book for no real reason. In general I didn't think the film earned the kind of sincerity and pathos that the director Fry attempts to draw on for that finale (and I wasn't surprised, after writing this and reading some other comments, to find it was imported into the book).However, the more breezy aspects of the movie do work, and I also enjoyed the parts with McAvoy toward the beginning. His performance is really thrilling – the way he makes you feel at the same time how pathetically limited his ambitions are and yet believe his sincerity when he announces that he'll kill himself if he's not invited to a particular soirée. I laughed at the scene with him and Richard E. Grant (as a religious figure) and I felt bad for him when he made good on his promise. If only the movie had been about his character instead of this other guy who felt too serious to fit into that social group. There's a dual aspect to his screen persona, a mixture of a kind of misguided or disproportionate hunger for excitement and a vulnerability to intimate personal relationships that produces a feeling of awkward sensitivity just beneath the surface of a boor.Fenella Woolgar is an actress I'd not heard of, but her work in this film was the most impressive of all. I've actually known people a bit like her back in college. I recognized pretty much all of the basic types presented in the film, but she made hers feel the most human and real which is an accomplishment considering the characters are deliberately shallow. What happens to her happy-go-lucky character made me reflect on the fact that she could have been somewhat insane all along and nobody would've noticed. Without getting too personal this also reminds me of some people I've known and some times I've lived in. Sometimes with the irrational things we do as kids or young adults either on a spur of the moment impulse or to try to impress each other, we get so wound up and confused that we can't even recognize who among our loved friends is just wild and crazy with youth and who might be alcoholic or mentally sick until it's too late. At least I never could.The leading man and lady aren't nearly as impressive. Moore does pretty well at least until those war scenes, but I never cared for the character Mortimer was playing so it's hard to say how good she was in the movie. I never felt any kind of humanity from her, and I think the writer/director wanted us to, so at least some of the blame falls on her shoulders. Dan Akyroid is suitable, nothing special, and O'Toole's brief appearance grabs our attention but does nothing with it.All in all, it's a moderately successful and watchable film, but I don't plan on returning to it anytime soon. I think the film takes itself a bit more seriously than it should.

joannaclaireice When i first saw Bright Young Things it was because my elder sister Florence had made we watch it when she was in charge of the remote control. i wasn't really paying any attention until Adam was left by his fiancé-to-be Nina. I think that David's appearance in this film was absolutely great as that was the first time that i'd ever seen him with ginger hair and a moustache. My favourite character was Agatha (played by Fenella Woolgar) and especially after she went mad. I didn't quite understand what happened to her until the film literally pushed my to books etc... to buy the book. The most devastating part of the film must have been when Miles (Michael Sheen) reveals that he is gay. The funniest character was definitely the drunken major as he never had the time (or the place) to give Adam his money. Jim Broadbent brought a great light to the film seeing as i was a bit disappointed and felt like crying a) when Adam lost his fiancé-to-be Nina and b)when the man at the train station refused to give Adam his story book named 'Bright Young Things'

B24 A most notable characteristic of this film is that it rather zanily merges the 1920's with the 1930's. That historical distortion may seem a slight defect to some viewers choosing to concentrate on a broader stage involving the upper class in its last throes of excess, but for me it destroys the underlying plot. The years before the Great Depression -- the Roaring 20's -- were sui generis. Moving everything forward to events as late as 1940 is a forced element that simply fails.Otherwise, there are some bright young moments here. Character actors do indeed steal the show, even if some are given throw-away roles. If only there were better and more believable development of various interactions between the leads, it would make for compelling drama; but we are treated instead to campy olio resolving itself into a strange conclusion, somewhat surreal. For example, the business between Adam and Ginger having to do with money as WWII rages on is misplaced farce -- even if the audience assumes a generous disposition of credulity.Little wonder outsiders looking in have a difficult time with this film, not to mention us history buffs.

Shannon I had never heard of this movie, just got it in the mail from my movie club. It sounded like some sordid sex movie and so I had no interest in watching it. However, since injuring my back being laid up bored, I thought I'd check out the trailer, at least. Since it looked like a period movie, I thought I'd give it a go. It started slowly, not really introducing much of a conflict or plot. What I liked about it was the attention to period detail and the great character development. What I didn't like about it was the boring content and lack of a compelling plot. There was some promising use of color in the direction at the beginning of the movie, but for some reason that didn't continue! The brightest moments in the movie were the scenes with Peter O'Toole and Dan Aykroyd.