Music Box Films | Release Date: March 23, 2012
6.4
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 45 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
27
Mixed:
9
Negative:
9
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
8
MsLexiJul 25, 2015
It's a difficult movie to evaluate because although it is one of those films that I do think was good, I can't say I really enjoyed watching. I think the way I would describe it is that The Deep Blue Sea is a film that is about all-consumingIt's a difficult movie to evaluate because although it is one of those films that I do think was good, I can't say I really enjoyed watching. I think the way I would describe it is that The Deep Blue Sea is a film that is about all-consuming desire, and desire that is also overwhelmingly incompatible. It's tragic because in this love triangle you can so clearly see that neither outcome would be a happy one, given the disparity in intensity of affection in both cases. It reminded me a little of the play After Miss Julie, but I felt that the lack of conventional chronology made it more of a portrait of humanity/emotion/desire than a story in which I was invested in the ending. As a film, I thought it was beautifully shot and it conjures up a haunting image of post-war London. Without a doubt, the highlight of this film is the incredible Rachel Weisz. She is simply excellent. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
worleyjamersDec 5, 2012
Despite moving at a glacial pace, The Deep Blue Sea builds to a subtle but effective ending that really caps the film off with a bang. I really liked this film even if it is hard to understand at times. It's a quietly moving picture thatDespite moving at a glacial pace, The Deep Blue Sea builds to a subtle but effective ending that really caps the film off with a bang. I really liked this film even if it is hard to understand at times. It's a quietly moving picture that really is worth seeing and Hiddleston and Weisz are both terrific. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Morpheus00Nov 16, 2012
Interminable, indulgent and pretentious (unrequited) love drama which fails to provide one sympathetic main character (rich girl looking to indulge in a spicy affair; volatile paramour with an adosecelent attitude; ageing, doting cuckold).Interminable, indulgent and pretentious (unrequited) love drama which fails to provide one sympathetic main character (rich girl looking to indulge in a spicy affair; volatile paramour with an adosecelent attitude; ageing, doting cuckold). The intrusive, melodramatic score and clanging 'arty shots' further annoy and mystify. Poor show. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
ClariseSamuelsSep 22, 2012
The Deep Blue Sea is interminable, deadly boring, and it boggles the mind. A sensuous young woman played by Rachel Weisz is unhappily married to an older man who is kind, hard-working, and extremely wealthy. She willfully trades him in for aThe Deep Blue Sea is interminable, deadly boring, and it boggles the mind. A sensuous young woman played by Rachel Weisz is unhappily married to an older man who is kind, hard-working, and extremely wealthy. She willfully trades him in for a passionate love affair with a man who is so carefree, irresponsible, and immature that he is positively cruel, but she is so starved for stimulation that she welcomes the cruelty because she finally feels something. In fact, she feels so much that it drives her to attempt suicide, an attempt that occurs at the beginning of the film, yet afterwards, everyone feels secure enough to leave her to her own devices, when she clearly needs a psychiatrist. They had them back in 1950. Sigmund Freud set up his private practice in 1886, so they definitely had psychiatrists back in 1950. Hester's lover, Freddie, played by Tom Hiddleston, chooses to leave her after finding out about the suicide attempt the same day, or perhaps it was the next, not caring a whit that he is almost condemning her to try to kill herself again. The onscreen chemistry between Weisz and Hiddleston is not overwhelmingly genuine, despite a nude love scene where Weisz's character, Hester Collyer, stares lovingly at the sleeping Freddie and proceeds to lick his arm like an affectionate puppy. This was meant to be a sign of uncontrollable passion.

From the very first scene, Weisz, who has to carry the entire film, has a perpetual expression on her face that clearly states, "I'm not happy." The message of the film is also stated explicitly early on, in a scene where Hester and her husband, Sir William Collyer, played in an understated and expressive way by Simon Russell Beale, are dining with Hester's mother-in-law. Hester says she has no passion for tennis, and her mother-in-law warns her against passion because it always leads to something "ugly" (echoes of Shakespeare's "violent delights have violent ends"), and recommends a "guarded enthusiasm" which is safer than passion, although Hester notes that it is also duller. This brief dialogue lays down the foundational philosophy, superficial and trite though it may be, for the entire film. Anything is tolerable in a passionate, sadomasochistic relationship, as long as, heaven forbid, it isn't dull. When her devastated husband asks Hester for an explanation and wants to know what happened to her, her dreary answer is "Love, Bill, that's all." In this film, love is as welcome as a Blitzkrieg.

Weisz's performance is uneven, sometimes bordering on electric, as when she stands on the subway platform in grief and despair after Freddie hangs up on her, but often has to depend on her ability to display fleeting emotions that play across her face. She doesn't always succeed and mostly conveys a sense that she is perpetually morose. In the end, Freddie is brutal, and Hester is left abandoned and alone. At first she sobs uncontrollably, but then suddenly walks to the window and stands there--there are a lot of window-gazing scenes--with an inexplicably tranquil smile on her face. The camera pans to what appears to be wreckage still left over from the war. Does passion lead to carnage the same way war does? It's not clear that the film had enough depth, despite the title, to draw that conclusion.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
AristasAug 7, 2012
This film, for me, was a bit mixed. It was very well done and shot beautifully, the only gripe I had was that I never really had an emotional connection with the characters. It was a very slow paced movie but I was expecting that going in.This film, for me, was a bit mixed. It was very well done and shot beautifully, the only gripe I had was that I never really had an emotional connection with the characters. It was a very slow paced movie but I was expecting that going in. While the film was pretty well acted for the most part it still seemed a little forced and fake. Decent film, if you like dramas/romance. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
mrichMay 15, 2012
This was a profoundly sad film. I don't think I was happy at any point throughout the film. However, the dynamic between Hester and Freddie was so emotionally compelling and heart wrenching. It shows the anguish and misery that is oftenThis was a profoundly sad film. I don't think I was happy at any point throughout the film. However, the dynamic between Hester and Freddie was so emotionally compelling and heart wrenching. It shows the anguish and misery that is often integrated with love. The movie isn't easliy digested, and I don't think I want to see it again but, I am still glad I did. It was such a real love story and it will rip your heart to shreds. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
TomcroSsmanMay 6, 2012
This is a low budget, poorly lit and murky, dreary piece with long scenes with dialogue separated by very long pauses. A bit like a silent film in pacing, and limited technical skill. I think the median age of the critics suggest they'reThis is a low budget, poorly lit and murky, dreary piece with long scenes with dialogue separated by very long pauses. A bit like a silent film in pacing, and limited technical skill. I think the median age of the critics suggest they're very familiar with silent movies, and wish for their return. But to non movie critics, this is a dull, pretencious piece of garbage. How Rachel ended up in this...

Not only is Finding Nemo a better film, but its also emotionally involving.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
cinemaquoteApr 25, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i loved house of mirth, i go for the girly/romantic/classic stuff but this was insufferable. truly. totally predictable, every one comes through stiff, un-animated, sad in a bad way. even rachel weisz is bad. the only high moment is the post-suicide attempt, which lasts 5 mins. the male lead is horrid, horrid. forgettable. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
1
AJ21Apr 12, 2012
This is another one of those movies beloved by the lofty critics and hated by me. Why do I keep getting suckered into seeing these awful movies? It was dark, morose, contrived and dark! Oh did I mention it was dark? Post WW II England, thisThis is another one of those movies beloved by the lofty critics and hated by me. Why do I keep getting suckered into seeing these awful movies? It was dark, morose, contrived and dark! Oh did I mention it was dark? Post WW II England, this movie attempts to emotionally manipulate us into caring for a woman torn between lust and who knows what? I didn't care, my wife wanted to leave early as did a friend. Slow, boring and insignificant drivel. Stay home! Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
MossyCDLApr 8, 2012
Starkly realistic portrayal of the consequences of one-sided, overwhelming, irrational passion. It is no doubt a fantastic film, but the material is so heavy that the film is almost too painful to watch at times. This also makes it a hardStarkly realistic portrayal of the consequences of one-sided, overwhelming, irrational passion. It is no doubt a fantastic film, but the material is so heavy that the film is almost too painful to watch at times. This also makes it a hard film to love and get personally attached to. It is best to stay distant during the film, because if you open yourself up too much, you might get destroyed in the crossfires of the characters' emotions(I kept myself distant, and yet I still found it to be so powerful that it was almost unbearable and stifling). The film may move at a languid pace for some, and the first half is very, very slow, but the explosive power of the end of the film is well worth the wait. Go see the film for its acting. This is clearly the best performance Rachel Weisz has ever done. She is so emotionally distressed during the film that it appears that she might implode at any time. It's not a film to see twice, however. I don't think i'd be able to do it. Collapse
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
MarcDoyleMar 27, 2012
This is one of those tough evaluations. Yes, it explores a very tactile, real, passionate love triangle - an intense young woman in a loveless marriage to an older man falls passionately in love with a fun-loving younger pilot - but it's suchThis is one of those tough evaluations. Yes, it explores a very tactile, real, passionate love triangle - an intense young woman in a loveless marriage to an older man falls passionately in love with a fun-loving younger pilot - but it's such a tough movie to get though, that I can't score it among the best of the season. Weisz is perfect for the role, but you just feel like slapping her throughout the film.... "snap out of it!" It's not a film that I can recommend, but it does vividly capture the predicament. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews