Beautiful, tough film. Those who give it low ratings miss the way the artificiality and staginess of the film work to create a reality - much like some live theatre. It's not meant to be realistic, it's heightened in a way so that it's emotional truths hit you harder. The links between all the character's oppressions, all trapped by social prejudice and convention - how society views women, gays, black people - are fantastically laid out in a film that draws you in with colour, style, staging and god, the acting. Julianne Moore's depth of character, the soft humanity of Haysbert and the painful closet that Quaid portrays every time he's on screen - a 10. … Expand

An incredibly elegant film. They might as well put Julianne Moore's name on the Oscar now because she gives the best performance of the last couple of years. Dennis Haysbert is incredible as well. Most importantly, the direction and music are so well done, & the choices Haynes made were right on the money. I hope this film gets some noteriety because it really shouldn't be missed.

Sublime film, though admittedly not for every tastle. The acting, cinematography, art direction and score were excellent.

I've seen this movie 4 times, and each time I discover something more wondrous. The subject matter is compelling, and Moore surely deserves an Oscar for Best Actress. The photography and musical score are outstanding.

Beautiful and enthralling. Its story will keep you thinking long after you leave the theater.

Wonderful movie. Hands down the best of the year. Why don't they make films like this any more?

Okay, it seems that people are not understanding what this film is. Basically, all Haynes has done was to take a melodrama from the 50s (including sets, costumes, dialogue, etc.) and inserted themes that would have never made it past the censors at that time. It is not supposed to be a "realistic" view of the 50s. It is simply a wonderful celebration of those grand old films. And if you haven't seen any of them (like "Imitation of Life", etc.), then you just won't appreciate this film. And that's okay. It's not for everyone. However, I just urge those who truly enjoy movies to go and see this film. And, if you haven't seen them already, rent some of the old melodramas of the 40s and 50s so you can truly appreciate how beautifully crafted and acted this film is.… Expand

This movie took my breath away! I LOVED IT!

A profound and touching film, superbly realized in every aspect. Julianne Moore's performance, in every sentence, and every physical and emotional expression transcends all the boundaries of great acting, and ranks among the greatest of all film performances, alongside Setsuko Hara in Late Spring, Gong Li in Raise the Red Lantern, Kinuyo Tanaka in Life of Oharu, Helen Bonham Carter in Wings of the Dove, and Gillian Anderson in House of Mirth.… Expand

Everything from the script, direction, performances everything is perfect here.

A great film.

Every scene is perfect.

Simply stunning. Every detail of this film is perfection. From the script to the art direction to the costumes, photography, and especially the acting. Julianne Moore is brilliant. I can't imagine a better performance coming from any actor this year. Hopefully, the Academy will recognize that fact and award accordingly. Dennis Quaid is terrific as well matching Moore moment for moment. This film takes the wonderful '50s melodramas, captures all the elements, and then gives it all a new life of its own. Todd Haynes has not simply made melodrama as entertainment. He has raised it to the level of being art.… Expand

This film is just amazing! Anyone who thinks otherwise is missing something. If you did not enjoy this film and have not seen a Douglas Sirk film, rent one.(All That Heaven Allows) It is sad to me to hear people say that the 1950's were not like this, that was not completly what the director was going for. It is paying tribute to the films of the times that were extremly like this. Julianne Moore does the best job any actress in hollywood could do, hands down the best preformance of the year. Also to the person who did not think a black man would go to an art gallery at that time is seriously confussed. Yes black people did do the things whites did. Yes, even if it was targeted to white midle class people. Alot of things are still targeted to that and wealthy and non-wealthy people of every culture attend. … Expand

Stunningly beautiful scenery and lead actress, powerful scenes by Dennis Quaid. The best of its type I've ever seen.

I do not understand the rave reviews. Yes, the actors are competent, but the entire storyline is absolutely ridiculous. The wife is cut out of the cookie cutter mode from the Stepford wives. The garderner is an educated black man with his own business who is cutting grass? His own neighbors turn against him which is absurd. The effect on the children (spoilers Omitted) is not even presented. And, every cliche in the book is used in the making of this film. I had all I could do not to laugh as the fim was so pretentious. I thought Robert Young as "Father Knows Best" was going to be walking through the door at any moment to meet his "Donna Reed". FFH is way overrated. Forgettable as soon as you leave the theater.… Expand

Competent but stiff acting. Way over rated for what it really is. Too many holes in the storyline make for a poor movie.

It's a feit when an actor can take such krummy lines and make it art. Moore deserves all credit for what made this movie good, because she singlehandedly stole every scene.

Wow do I feel, and am going to look stupid. Moore is spectacular, as is Quaid. Beautiful Ed Lachman cinematography! Fine script, and though they do a fantastic Douglas Sirk homage, it just didn't work emotionally. There are times, when Quaid cries or Moore cries when it works, but it is immediatly flushed out by the OVER-THE-TOP musical score. I know! I know that's what they did in 1957 films but why doesn't director Todd Haynes add in that nod to Sirk and Sirk's style and mix it with Todd Haynes's style. I wanted him to be a bit more personal, why doesn't he comment on the film. GRADE: B/B+… Expand

Just came back from viewing Far From Heaven. From reading the reviews, I expected more? The acting was stiff but competent. It might have been better if they had left their hair down just a tad. The 1950s were captured beautifully as if they had been painted on canvas. Julianne Moore's character was just too perfect to be believed? Here she was, every man's dream...beautiful, loving and devoted, yet she was cast aside. Any wife when she first learned of her husband's secret would have been filled with outrage. To the contrary, she pretended in a cookie cutter mode that nothing out of the ordinary had happened preferring to keep her emotions in check. She thought by his going to a psychiatrist it would cure the problem. But what about her psyche? The movie should have delved deeper into her needs. The screenplay was written in an unrealistic manner regardless of the era. This deterred me from giving a higher score.… Expand

Don't know about you but any minute I thought Robert Young was about to walk through that door? And where was June calling out to the Beaver? Was Donna Reed in the movie? Unrealistic portrayal of real people dealing with their personal problems regardless of the era.

I'm sorry, am I missing something. I think the only reason this movie got such high reviews is because of the subject matter. I thought the dialogue was lacking. I also felt that it was an unrealistic portrayal of that time. Would an African-american man really go to an art show that was targeted to the wealthy white middle class? I don't think so. Not at that time. Well, that's just my humble opinion.… Expand

Thank Goodness for a movie that looks and feels beautifully and wonderfully DIFFERENT! A director and actors who are willing to take some chances!!! I really enjoyed this film and how Todd Haynes used every element--music, lighting, wardrobe--to tell his story. My reaction when I walked out of the theatre: Moore, Quaid, and Haysbert were all terrific. Haysbert, in particular, is called upon to be stoic yet also bold enough to express interest in Moore's Mrs. Whitaker. Both are mavericks, which, in this time period makes them near outcasts. Haysbert's Deagen has the audacity to be college educated, to raise a single daugther, to indeed be versed in literature and the arts, and to own a business. Moore's Cathy Whitaker is similar: she's associated with social justice causes (friendly to Jews and negroes, they say) at the derision of the conservative community. Both actors, Moore and Haysbert, bring their material to life wonderfully. Regarding some of the criticism here: it's offensive to me that others would claim there were no Black intellectuals in the 1950s. Indeed, Black men and women have been reading literature and studying the arts for a long time. Also, yes, indeed, there were closeted men with young male lovers in the 50s. Let me remind of you Rock Hudson, a closeted gay man who was married for three years. He may not have had lovers during that time (I don't know), but it's not so far beyond the pale to believe Quaid's storyline.… Expand

This movie moved me in a way I've never experienced. These characters are trapped as far from heaven as we remain today, yet the unique perspective and the tight crafting of this film expresses a hope that we are moving toward honesty. We are never who we think we are, and we are never beyond the limits of love, but we're forever far from heaven.

Perfect. Many critics discuss the films irony, but they miss the boat. It's the flawless combination of sacred and profance that Hayne's is exploring - the irony takes a back seat. He has chosen an incredible language and style for the film and, furthermore, has tenderly executed it - never ridiculing the characters or the inspiration from which the style originates. 'Far From Heaven' something beyond moving. It's disgusting that Haynes wasn't nominated for a Best Director Oscar.… Expand

I would have given it a lower rating but for the grounds being so well groomed. Acting was sound, but limited by the stiltifying script. The two very sensitive socio-cultural subjects depicted in the movie, homosexuality and interractial relationships seeming were handled in such a superficial, trite way that it was hard to relate to the emotional impact of these most sensitive topics. The dialog reminded one of the movie, "The Stepford Wives" which was really a characterature of real life ... it was a times down right embarassing.… Expand

Haynes's characters ultimately respect the moral sensibilites of the era, which gives the film weight.

If Luis Bunuel's "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" is a brilliant work of art made out of a concise political statement, this film is a keen political statement made about other works of art. It's beautifully shot, highlighted by Elmer Bernstein's appropriately melodramatic score, and held together by Julianne Moore's bravest performance. Kudos also to an unusually real Dennis Quaid, who was robbed of an Oscar nomination. He provides the jagged edge to an otherwise beautiful and elegant piece, where harsh truths and ugly sensations smolder beneath the surface. Perhaps its politics are most poignant and effective when showing how certain things are said in today's society that might've remained as code in the 1950s, yet we're still all too willing to misrepresent them in their finest pomp and polish. I'm not entirely sure that that statement is something the director, who is openly gay, intended to say.… Expand

Predictable movie. lacked focus while trying to tackle two huge themes (homosexuality & racism) at the same time... Didn't enjoy the acting in this movie, extremely sterile and contrived. Anybody else notice the boeing jet fly by on the reflection in the woman's car, while she was watching them go into the black resturant? Can't believe that made the cut!

Highly stylized, visually lush, and superbly acted, this film is both beautiful to look at and meaningful to experience. It deals with issues that, while still somewhat sticky today, were a powderkeg in the 1950s. As a result, framing this story in the 1950s gives it the dramatic power to really impress.

To paraphrase one of America's most acid women wits, everything in this post-card beautiful, otherwise dreary film is a lie, including "and" and "the." For instance, women who reflexively smush their children's every little passing wish and enthusiasm and men who so grotesquely ignore their children do not produce such well-bred and healthy-seeming offspring as the kids in Far from Heaven. Obviously middle-aged, dour humorless unidimensional closet cases such as the Dennis Quaid character do not arrive at middle age with heretofore contented wives and orderly families, nor are they pursued and seduced by young men half their apparent age. Black gardeners in 1950's Connecticut were most unlikely to be cultured, artistically literate, brazenly oblivious to racial taboos, possessed of book-lined middle-class dwellings and well-bred uniform-wearing schoolgirl daughters. The America evoked by such nauseating defamatory pretentiousness and plausibly inhabited by such fools and fakes could never have defeated fascism and communism and faced up so conscientiously to social injustice and become the most productive civilization in history.… Expand

This was a fine movie. Clearly, its best attribute was in its ability to recreate the perfect 50s movie using taboo issues that would have instantly been cut back then. It truly accomplishes this well. In addition, the acting was excellent. Its shortfall is hard to place, however. I think it was somewhere between the issues themselves and the ways in which they were presented that I found myslef wondering if I had seen this movie sometime before in the 90s: its content itself wasn't very original. Despite this, the movie was beautiful, and I would recommend it to anyone who thinks they can appreciate it for what it is: a taboo fusion.… Expand

Stilted but good performances.

A+, an extremely competent film. It seems, Post-Velvet Goldmine, that Haynes wanted to prove he can have total control over his filmmaking-- well, he did his homework-- the critics love it... But, this is his weakest film. Unlike one of the best American films ever, Safe, this project really is safe, no risks-- the audience can sit back, and look back, and feel great about how open-minded we all are now...… Expand

A real heart-breaker! This is no more realistic than Douglas Sirk's films of the '50's but it's a wonderful fantasy exploring/exposing our recent culture's limits of tolerance and stifling society. How far we've come, or have we?

[****Spoilers Warning****] At the end of Far From Heaven, Moore's character had no money, no friends, no husband, no lover. Her husband, on the other hand, had a lucrative income, influential business associates, and a hot, young male paramour. There's a glaring inequity here. The storyline of Quaid's character cried out for further development ? the way it played out in the movie was unlikely for that time period. What really would have happened to Quaid's character once his friends and associates learned of his homosexuality? In the ultra conservative social environment of the U.S. during the 1950s, this revelation would have ruined his career which, in turn, would have threatened the welfare of his wife and children. The unrealistic fate of Quaid's character created a huge, gaping hole in this film that kept it from being a truly great movie.… Expand

Far from heaven is far from perfect. Too many missing pieces in the story and too little character development. Tries hard but misses the heavens.

Now I finally know what they mean by the term "a critic's movie". What they really mean is not one for the rest of us. I can't believe I actually sat all the way through this amazingly predictable, trite, and truly boring movie. Of the last 100 or so movies I have watched over the last year or two, I would rate this one dead last.

It's a ravishing film to look at and hear - Elmer Bernstein's score is one of the best ever. There are individual scenes that register, esp. between Moore and Haysbert, very strongly. And Moore's performance is just beautiful, matched by the shrewish Clarkson and the subtle Viola Davis. But I'm still not sure whether the movie's meant to be a parody of these kinds of '50s melodramas or whether it really means to make some kind of socially relevant commentary. If it's trying to have it both ways, I think it fails - the satire's too obvious and defangs the commentary. Quaid's character is one-and-a-half dimensional and Haysbert, although wonderful in the role, is so noble he makes Sidney Poitier look like Method Man. But there's Moore's performance, and that Bernstein score, to make the time invested worthwhile. … Expand

Boy, was I lead down the garden path by the critics on this one! This movie takes what I consider to be the worst movie genre ever, 50's melodrama, and pays tribute and homage to it! If you're not a fan of that genre, and are not wowed by cinematography alone, avoid this movie. This movie was two hours of stilted dialogue and predictable plot. I kept waiting for it to break free and take a David Lynch or John Waters turn. As it is, the only release is when Quaid's character uses the 'f-word' in a fit of anger. I cheered, thinking, yeah, this is where the payoff starts! But noooooo..... I was also very uncomfortable with how the race issues were dealt with. Such an important subject should not be dealt with in such a stilted artificial way. I did admire the technical aspects of this movie (cinematography, set design, costumes, ....). The actors did an excellent job, within the constraints imposed by the script. At least with original melodramas of the fifties, you can kind find some amusement by viewing them as an artifact of their time. That exuse doesn't work for this movie.… Collapse

Boring, idealized, irrelevant. I lived through the 50s and this was not close.

I find it interesting that professional critics average score is 88, while the rest of us rated this roughly 68. In any case I agree with someones observation that the characters seems to be living in formaldahide. Hopefully, the director wanted it that way, i.e. stifled acting for a stifled era. What I found to be completely unbelivable was the movies attempt to portray the towns reaction to J Moore's relation with D Haybert seem like a crime. I know my neighbors would talk if I went out to lunch/dancing with another women, not to mention if the woman was my gardener or my postwoman. Relative to D Quaid, his shacking up with another man and divorce is unreal, being as he would have lost his career, friends, everything he had. Much more believable (and interesting) if they stayed married. In any case, I found the movie pretty lame, a dog actually. … Expand

I kept snickering. Scenes were so predictable. Like when Moore runs sobbing into the garden and there's a moment of suspense and then Surprise! There's the gardener!

Solid, but not the world beater I expected from the reviews. I think the homage elements make this a critics movie.

I went to this movie expecting to be impressed by great acting and an interesting story, but was sorely mistaken. I kept waiting for the movie to shed its veneer 50s quality and confront its issues, but it kept giving more sterotypical roles and actions. I could feel the audience around me uncomfortably snickering at the plot's predictable nature. A big bore.

This film is picture perfect. Dennis Quaid is very intense in his role.This movie tackles the taboo subjects of homosexuality and racism of the 1950's brilliantly!!

Beautiful in every way. But, I was never fully engrossed in it's ages-old storyline.

7+ Stylized approach saves the movie from being goofy. Strong but sort of stiff acting. Patricia Clarkson has a killer wardrobe. Script is overwritten -- paring it down a bit and loosening up the actors and their characters would have made a better movie.

I couldn't believe that this was the same movie I read about in the newspaper review! I haven't seen anything so condescending towards African Americans in years. Let's see, Black lower-middle-class small business owner takes over his father's gardening business and immediately gets into heart-to-heart talks with wealthy White housewife without showing a hint of discomfort and worry about how it will be perceived by White people? Puh-lease...talk about Brother from Another Planet -- this man is from the Planet of Clueless. Then there's the Black maid who is devoted to the family, seems to have no life of her own, and only wants the best for her lovely White mistress and doesn't seem cynical or worried in the least about her boss's hanging out with the gardener. (Talk about an updated Aunt Hattie!) And then there's the assumption that the Black businessman's Black neighbors would start stoning his house because he's seen with a White woman in a bar. In the 50s? (Or maybe ever?) I don't think so! This is just another movie that treats Black people as mirrors for White concerns but now it's liberal stereotypes that are being thrown about. It's unfortunate because Julianne Moore is great and Dennis Quaid is pretty good, too. I also really like Dennis Haysbert in 24, the television show, but he is terrible in this film. He makes a great presidential candidate but he can't handle this role at all.… Expand

Definitely worth seeing...although I'm not as gaga about this as many of the Film Critic Associations, who have lavished awards on this film. I agree that some of the scenes with Haysbert and Moore were a little hard to believe...especially dancing together in the bar. But I still liked the re-creation of the 50's, and thought Quaid did a great job in his role.

Ozzie and Harriet were not real--but the powers behind this movie didn't know that.

Les commentaires de certaines personnes dans cette section exposent le manque flagrant de culture cinématographique et de culture socio-politique de la population. En plus d'être un remarquable film au plan technique (la reconstitution plastique et filmique des années 50 est digne d'une anthologie), d'avoir une nouvelle remarquable performance de julianne moore( actrice qui prouve la grande farce des oscars puisqu'elle n'en possède toujours pas un), far from heaven est une étude fabuleuse de l'intolérance, des faux semblants, de l'hypocrisie qui marque profondément la culture étatsunienne d'aujourd'hui autant que celle idéalisée par le american dream des années 50...un chef-d'oeuvre....… Expand

This is to Sirk what Van Sant's remake of Pscho was to Hitchcock. Postmodernism served by gay hairdresser sensibility, cinema as interior decoration, human drama as campy irony served up with insufferable earnestness. Very impure, about as pleasant as licking and swallowing Lana Turner's entire cosmetic kit.

This movie portrays Dennis Quaid as one sick out of control queer. It insinuated that homosexuals can hunt each other out and are totally out of control. As much as I don't condone that kind of lifestyle, Far From Heaven has set back homosexuality as some sort of sickness. It demeans the attaction of two men like cats in heat. Shame on Dennis Quaid for being part of this terrible movie.

This film is very difficult to score - I do agree with one reviewer who found it very unlikely that Dennis Quaid's character would just dump Cathy and live with a man - because he definitely would lose his job and everything - in that era men did those things on the side while still being married. However, I admire very much what was attempted in this movie, and for the most part they succeeded. Julienne Moore is absolutely brilliant, and the reason she did not win the oscar is because the idiots in Hollywood always overlook understated performances - and yet these performances are actually more difficult (See Mary Tyler Moore in "Ordinary People"). Moore is perfect in every scene as she watches her perfect wold unravel and struggles between the part of herself that wants to scream outloud, and the other part of her that has been perfectly honed over the years to be the ideal suburban upscale wife - it is a subtle and brilliant performance. The script is not perfect, and there were a few minor scenes that did not ring true- but the overall package is amazing - the perfect cast from top to bottom, most of the script, the acting, cinematography, directing, score, everything about this movies pays homage to a by-gone era of American Films and does it with taste and class. When thinking about the 50's you have to remember that the 50's (as any decade) varied depending on where you lived and how you were raised - and this movie comes pretty close to what real life was like for these people - they were literally trapped inside a nightmare which they (and their contemporaries) had created - it's no wonder that a few years later their children would be burning their bras and protesting wars. Far from Heaven is indeed a great movie because it has such high aspirations - a movie from 2002 that dares to style itself after a 50's drama and to do so via (gasp) a subtle script rather than relying on special effects and things blowing up etc. For the most part they achieved their goal and are to be commended for their efforts. This is a beautiful film worth watching if only to appreciate the efforts of all involved.… Expand

My faith in the critics is absolutely shattered. This movie doesn't leave any clique unturned. The settings are very realistic but the characters and the dialogue are unbelievably stilted and wholly unrealistic. I expected a good movie and got a bad soap opera.

To everyone panning this film because it's "unrealistic" -- that's exactly the point. This is not only a film set in the 50s, but a film designed to look like it came out of the 50s, complete with the requisite stereotypes and cliched characters and situations. Even the music punches up the melodrama. What makes it so entertaining is that it is ridiculous to look at, but incredibly true emotionally. It's a parody of 50s films, but rather than being a comedy, it's a drama, and I have rarely enjoyed a film so much from start to finish.… Expand

Julianne Moore will win the Oscar come next year. Never for a second does she give us cause to laugh at her. On the backpage of a recent "Entertainment Weekly", a writer sneered at the notion of acting being an actual craft. Moore's performance rebukes such claims. Everybody connected with this film deserves a pat on the back, but this is the film that confirms Moore as one of the all-time-greats. The title of a film seems arbitrary most of the time. Not here. When you think of Cathy Whitaker's future, the words; far from heaven, will hit you hard. … Expand