The Wife

Quietly devastating drama takes its time to unfold, but emerges as a haunting, poignant and Closely observed tale of simmering tensions and resentments; Close has possibly never been better, with her Joan running the gamut of eerie calm to full blown melt-down, though Pryce is almost her equal, bringing a tender compassion to his subtly shifty (and even sleazy) husband. A deceptively complex screenplay sneaks up on you somewhat; this surprisingly would likely reward multiple viewings.

A rich and uniquely set dual-character study, written with nuance and wonderfully acted. Small establishing scenes convey subtle dynamics (see arriving at the hotel), long scenes of dialogue mesmerize with both simmering and overflowing tension (see drinks with Nathanial; the post-acorn blow-up then amazing switch to happy phone call), and flashbacks add intrigue to the present-day plot (though it's mostly dissolved with the final breakdown-the film should've ended with the award presentation).

The idea is intriguing, but it's so poorly executed in terms of writing and directing, especially in the flashback sequences. And none of the supporting actors come even close to match the brilliance of Close and Pryce in this.

Dialogue mocks the cliche of the "blow hard husband and the stoic wife", winking at the movie's own premise...or whoopsie pointing out the obvious flaw of the movie. Seriously, every critique of writing pointed out in this movie is the script crying out its own faults for you. Is that meant to cover them? Wooden characters? Stilted dialogue? Predictable ending #1 and inexplicable character choice for ending #2?

There's a special twist of irony in watching an abysmally written film when it's supposed to be about great writers. I felt embarrassed for the leads, who are both excellent actors.

"The development process for this film took fourteen years." Embarrassing.

Very strong central performances and an excellent, intimate and atypical, present-day storyline are watered down by unnecessary flashbacks. In general, scenes between the two leads are powerful; the rest are simply passable.

Glenn Close is incredible; the plot is interesting, there're some good moments, but direction and screenplay lead the movie on an excessive melodramatic tone.

Has some issues (like the flashbacks) but overall very well acted solid drama

Glenn Close and Jonathan Pryce are both great in this character drama. Their performances elevate the rest of the film, which is mostly fine, but has at least one good surprise in store.

This is a superbly acted, insightful and moving character study.

When a movie is all-round good, in that extremely solid fashion.

Man, Glenn Close can stare.

A core characterization error was made in the introductory scene of young Joan. She says “I can be a handful”. I do not believe a woman of her talent, ambition and bite would have satiated to playing second fiddle to her husband all her life. Had she been more demure in the beginning, I could’ve suspended my disbelief that she was content in her role as simply “the wife”. Nonetheless, it’s worth the view even, and especially, as it aggravates the viewer.

I wanted to like this much more than I did. Something just felt off about the direction -- everything was so telegraphed and overwrought. I feel like there's a great film hiding here, but the story -- much like the novels which won the husband his Nobel -- could have a lot of editing.

Pretty boring. I hate flashbacks!

Probably the only thing good about this movie is it's acting.

Glenn Close looks almost exactly like my grandmother who died two years ago and never liked me.

Tahmin edilebilir bir senaryoya sahip olsa da, düşündürdüğü şeyler önemli. Bir yazar "okunmak" için neleri göze alır? Okunmadıktan sonra yazmanın anlamı var mı?

Never really gels, Close is excellent, but the story and the rest of the cast don't quite measure up to Close's level, even Pryce.

1743

glen is magnificent.

What's basically a TV Movie of the Week script is elevated by grand performances by Close and Pryce.

I am a sucker for these theater-like dialogue dramas, where great actors portrays huge emotion through stoic subtlety. Amazing performances from Pryce and Close. The rest of the cast does not deliver to the same extent (Ironside and Lloyd are horrible), which could suggest that the material is not amazing, but having two incredible leads can make up for that.

Why would anybody spend 14 years on making this ridiculous, paper-thin film when they could have just watched, say, Fanny and Alexander instead?

I quite enjoyed this. It was a nice, understated slow burn drama anchored by a couple of great performances. Glenn Close is getting attention for this, and rightly so - she's excellent. Of course, she's always excellent. Jonathan Pryce was great too. It was nicely shot and reminded me of Force Majeure (2014). It didn't reinvent the wheel, but I thought it was good.

My grandmother !!!

İki mutlu yazar. Bir mutlu evlilik. Nobel ödülü bu mutlu ilişkinin arasına girer mi? Evet dediğinizi duyuyorum. Klişe bir film. Hayatta kazanmak mı iyidir yoksa kaybetmek mi? sorularına cevap veren bir film. Neticeye gelene kadar çok sıkıcı. Gerilimi olmayan bir film. Glenn Close , Nobel ödülü alamadın. Oscar mı alacaksın? Oy annem.

Close is pretty good, Pryce is decent. The story can't quite carry the whole movie.

"I'd like to thank the Academy and Meryl Streep for letting me do this one". Welcome to Glenn Close's show. Jonathan was good too, and the movie was solid and well told. In its modesty, better than most of the 2018 award contenders, if you ask me.

Historiens komplexitet är tydbar i Glenn Close's ansikte men inte i övrigt

I wasn't really planning on seeing this on the big screen, but I'm glad I did. Somehow I was expecting a movie-of-the-week with an important message, but it's a lot more complex than that and the characters are not clearly painted as good/bad (apart from Max Irons' son which felt very cliched). Glenn Close is great but Pryce was really good as well. Stockholm provides an atmospheric background and it's nice to see Slater in a quality film - with echoes of his Interview with a Vampire character.

Couldn't we just /know/ that the plane was flying?

Not quite a fictionalised melodrama of Gretel and Theodor, since both Adornos were evidently extremely capable and both wrote, but his reputation did continually rise with his opportunities while she remained invisible, and he did have that famously roving eye - situations which emerged from similarly gendered intellectual cultures. Plus what they wrote wasn't fiction, of course. And they had to flee fascism. And topless New Left students protested his lectures.

A fairly dull story, with some incredible performances.

It’s a pretty good story, but the reason to see it is the acting, which is excellent without being especially pyrotechnic. I was really pleased to see Christian Slater as a wanna-be biographer tailing the Castlemans despite their open dislike of him. Slater brings his slimiest best, all the sneaky, sleazy acting that made him a Gen X icon, minus the rebellious self-righteousness. I won’t be surprised if there’s some supporting actor love for him at Oscar time.

Glenn Close, better than ever: The Movie