BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Derrick Gibbons An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

dawnsinbox Omgosh I LOVED this movie so much. Maria Bonnevie WAS Dina. I'd never seen her before. Now I want to see all ger work. She was AMAZING in this one. Everyone was. I'm ready to watch it again.

mindcat After reading some of the dismal reviews by some posters I am wondering if we watched the same movie? What I often find is many a children and immature, and feel they have the competency to review drama and great art. None sense, children with your popcorn boxes and shallow minds.There is not much more Mindcat can say that has not already been said by the truly intelligent reviewers here. The movie is a gem and is so far removed in quality at every level from the Hollywood block-bonkers, it probably stuns some of the deer here in the headlights.See the movie if you have an IQ of 120 or better, you'll love it on all levels. Children stick with Mickey Mouse and the Cadavier that Ate Chicago.

Bob Taylor A powerful story, made weaker by excessive length and too many characters. Some of the secondary characters could have been eliminated to make the plot flow more smoothly. Having said this, I was tremendously impressed by Maria Bonnevie in the title role. Her face is florid, sensual, expressive of lust, sorrow and all the other emotions in this often violent woman's life. Mads Mikkelson as the grafting, unscrupulous Niels gives the other fine performance; his suicide takes all the life out of the story.Gérard Depardieu and Christopher Eccleston were added to the cast for star power, I suppose, but they don't mix well with the other players. Eccleston's character--Zhukovsky the anarchist--is just a jumble of historical clichés we can't become involved with.

melbrs I saw this film in Paris last year. Going in, I didn't know what to expect, I knew the film wasn't French, but I didn't know it was Norwegian until I saw the Norwegian flag waving away in the background of one of the early scenes. I was fully expecting to read the French subtitles, but by happy coincidence the film was in English. Now I know many here have complained about the poor use of English in the film, but I don't recall it being that bad (although I admit it has been a year since I've seen it). I just recall that the actors sounded like non-native English speakers speaking English, which by nature is going to be imperfect. Actually, that's not true I know many non-native English speakers who speak English TECHNICALLY more correct than native speakers. When that happens THAT'S when I'm likely to complain about the awkwardness of the actors in regard to language. If you're writing your thesis, OK use technically perfect English. But, in real life it's all about slang!ANYWAY! Back on point: I liked this film. It's NOTHING like the films you'd see being produced in the US, even the independent ones. But the best way i can sum it up is to quote some random guy I overheard outside the theater when asked what the film was like: "Très bizarre!"