Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Adeel Hail Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Timothy Shary A well-off lawyer and his socialite wife have a few episodes in their lives during the 1930s and into the 1940s. The man is a rather overbearing patriarch and the wife is a doting housewife who doesn't quite know how to handle her adult kids.There are a few subtle lessons here about living above average in the Midwest during tough times for the rest of the world. Otherwise, there sure isn't a lot of drama, or really much of any consequence.The film may have been intended as a character study, but even as such, the characters are just not that distinctive. They do not achieve much and they impart little to the world.Newman and Woodward, married in real life longer than almost any other Hollywood couple, are reliably good actors, and I just wish they had more to do here. She has some laments about his lack of affection for her, and he thinks some modern changes are foolish. Still, that was not enough to make me care.If you're a fan of the actors, or the era, I think you will find this quaint. There is certainly nothing here to upset anyone, nor to provoke much at all.

preppy-3 Sleep inducing story of an old married couple and their children. Walter Bridge (Paul Newman) is a mean obnoxious old man who treats everybody like dirt--especially his wife. India Bridge (Joanne Woodward) plays his long-suffering wife who fights to keep the family together. Their children--Carolyn (Margaret Walsh) and Douglas (Robert Sean Leonard)--want to live their own lives.Long, boring and wildly overpraised movie. This is one of those small art films that critics fell all over themselves raving about (mostly because they couldn't figure out what it was about so it MUST be intelligent). What this actually is is a character study of a heavily dysfunctional and VERY dull family. Nothing wrong with character studies but the characters have to be interesting...and these aren't! The script is by the numbers and has been done before in many other better films. Also this movie drags out for OVER 2 hours! You keep waiting for something to happen...and it doesn't! I was fighting to stay awake through the whole thing. The acting is all good (especially by Newman and Woodward) but it can't save such a dull film. Mostly forgotten...and for good reason! I give it a 1.

writers_reign This is a series of vignettes in the life of a mid-West family rather than a straight ahead narrative, it is, if you like, Meet Me In St Louis without the songs. The form is still viable as the recent French film The First Day Of The Rest Of Your Life demonstrated last year. Newman and Woodward are, of course, beyond praise, and it's a delight to see Newman, who can epitomise the extrovert, playing a repressed, buttoned-up type in the best English tradition as written by Terence Rattigan. The film takes its own sweet time getting nowhere and has Art House written all over it so much so that it's difficult to imagine it making it through the first reel in the Multiplexes. Apart from the two leads there's fine support from the likes of Blythe Danner, Kyra Sedgwick and Simon Callow and if peering through a microscope at insects busy doing nothing is your thing then you came to the right place.

bobbobwhite My first thought upon seeing this depression-era period film was that no one could have ever been so stuffy, stupid, and socially constrained as the middle age/elderly couple played by Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward. But, then, I remembered that my grandparents were just like them, as were most of their contemporaries. What a limited life they led, and thank god for today's enlightenment.That women could have ever been so totally and willingly dependent, physically and mentally, on their husbands is now hard to imagine, but it did happen and was typical in the days when women did not work outside of the home. The film showed, over and over, dependency scenes that emphasized the helplessness and powerlessness of women in those depression era days. It got real aggravating after a while, but was offset somewhat by Woodward's character's inner goodness and sweetness. She was dumb as a mud fence, though.Newman was terrifically stuffy and dictatorial in his role and Woodward was terrifically dependent, incompetent, weak and stupid in hers. Wonderful work, and they both often had me steaming with their respective behavior, as I put up with a lot of this type of baloney when young. As their daughter, Kyra Sedgewick showed well that the "future" was going to be a lot different for women than the present by her unmistakable signs of emancipated behavior.The film's story was ended so well by Woodward's character getting stuck in her car in her garage, as she was so dependent and ignorant about how to do anything in life for herself that she sat in her car for hours without even trying to figure out a very easy solution to her problem. At the end, she was merely sitting there waiting and calling for many hours for others to "rescue" her from her easily solved predicament(if she only could have had an original thought), just as she had done all her incompetent and dependent life. What a great ending, and a great example of how not to be in real life. Thank god again that things have changed.