|
Upcoming Release Calendar
38
12 Rounds Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.
|
Frida
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|
||||||||||||
MPAA RATING: R for sexuality/nudity and language
Starring Salma Hayek, Alfred Molina, Geoffrey Rush, Ashley Judd, Antonio Banderas, Edward Norton, Valeria Golino, and Saffron Burrows
Chronicles the life Frida Kahlo (Hayek) shared openly and unflinchingly with her mentor and husband, Diego Rivera (Molina), as this young couple took the art by storm. (Miramax)
| GENRE(S): | Romance |
| WRITTEN BY: |
Hayden Herrera (book Frida: A Biography of Frida Kahlo)
Clancy Sigal Diane Lake Gregory Nava and Anna Thomas |
| DIRECTED BY: | Julie Taymor |
| RELEASE DATE: |
DVD: June 10, 2003 Video: June 10, 2003 Theatrical: October 25, 2002 |
| RUNNING TIME: | 120 minutes, Color |
| ORIGIN: | USA |
All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...
The average user rating for this movie is 7.7 (out of 10) based on 27 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.
Andrea gave it a10:
Great movie. Still, my hopes about this film were not high, so I can even say I enjoyed. Selma Hayek surprised me, positively. I did not expect her to be convincing enough, but she actually made me believe that she is Frida. Alfred Molina also seems to be good choice for the role of Diego Rivera. This movie is not just for Frida Kahlo fans and admirers, everybody should give it a chance.
[Anonymous] gave it a10:
Great performance by Salma Haykek and molina. A gorgeous film!
Shannon P. gave it a 1:
This move is superficial, pretentious, and narcissistic. But what really makes the film such a painful experience to watch is that it is just downright boring. Instead of a human story, we are presented with a series of tedious skits and cliches about artists, socialism, infidelity, and bisexuality. The writing is just plain awful.
Yoon Min C. gave it an 8:
Bold and passionate, as colorful and flavorful as the lives of frida and rivera. the actors are pretty good but the real star of the movie is julie taymor the director. like orson welles, taymor has a background in theatre and burns with ingenuity, wit, and energy. she's unapologetic about her wild expressive style but more crucially, her art derives from a sense of the sacred, from the primordial core from which all creativity springs forth. we need this woman of great spirit when what passes for visual expression today are mtv imagery, rampant CGI, or bloated recycled cliches drenched in blood.
Pat C. gave it a 5:
Really didn't know what the story was about or where it was going until the very end. Being familiar with the reserve inherent in Latin domestic relations, I found their conversion to Hollywood standards inaccurate and offensive. I did develop an appreciation of Kahlo's art, which was obviously deeper and more substantial than this movie. Despite having no major problems, the film refuses to be good. It restricts itself to sketching out only the factual elements, then fills them in with a deep rich shade of B.S.
Kim B. gave it a 10:
Outstanding collaborative work of director, cinematographer, actors and the many many others that give this film its exquisite flavor and poignant moments of the pain and passion of Frida Kahlo. It is unfortunate that the critics betrayed the film's potential to enlighten gringo audiences to the wonder and beauty of Mexico and fascinating layers of its complex history. See it, please. You'll want to read and see more.
Joshua W. gave it a 4:
Perhaps more than anyone out there I wanted this movie to be great. I admired everyone attached to the project, and I have been a fan of Frida Kahlo's work for well over a decade now. Unfortunately this movie tried to hard to portray Kahlo as a figure without flaw, as someone who treated adversities as a child would a christmas present under the tree. Having read much on Kahlo, including personal letters she wrote I can say for sure that she was not at all the charater portrayed by Salma Hayek, although her performance was powerful, it was not truthful. Kahlo's crippling accident on the train is the perfect example of how this film deified it's lead. The over the top stylized image of gold dust floating down on the injured Kahlo strips the moment of any real trama, it depicts the accident as a mirraculous gift bestowed upon her. Kahlo's work portrayed her anger and fears as well as her strength, strength which she developed as she learned to deal with what had happened to her. This movie would have you believe that Kahlo was always the same tour de force throughout her life. The movie would have been much better had it shown as a true portrait of Kahlo, a woman who suffered greatly and found strength in her will not to just give up. This kind of growth is the stuff that good drama is made of Kahlo's life had it all, then the makers of this movie drained her of it, making her awesome achievments seem all the more diminished for it.

| Return to top of page |

Popular on CBS sites: iPhone 3G | Fantasy Football | Moneywatch | Antivirus Software | Recipes | E3 2009
About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use