User Score
6.6
out of 10
Generally favorable reviews- based on 16 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 10 out of 16
-
Mixed: 3 out of 16
-
Negative: 3 out of 16
Review this movie
-
Your Score10 out of 10
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
-
Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
giuJul 30, 200910Pfeiffer shines in the movie. She's the only reason!
-
-
robertiJul 4, 20094Except for Pfeiffer, the casting is laughable and undermines any hope of credibility. Bates as a former courtesan? Friend as a paramour? Please.
-
-
BarbyF.Jun 27, 20092I was so disappointed in this movie. The beginning narration seemed like a cheaters device to cover a lot of ground and tell me what I emotions I should have been observing in action. Predictable and boring.
-
-
BichanelJun 29, 200910One of Michelle Pfeiffer's best performances. She also looks so beautiful in this film.
-
prev
next
Page:
- 1
-
40This glimpse into a decadent era has its charms, but they're mostly visual. While Pfeiffer and Friend perform well, the script is tonally confused and lacks edge.
-
40Michelle Pfeiffer is brittle in a way that's not especially French, but she's poignant and very lovely. Rupert Friend, on the other hand, is difficult to warm up to, especially with his features hidden behind all that hair. It's not a good sign when you have to take the movie's word for it that the lovers at its center are really, really into each other.
-
80Actors blossom under Frears' direction. There is no false moment or off-key note in this movie.