Rating: 
Summary: To Call The Hours A "Chick Flick" Would Be Degrading
Review: Some of the reivews are calling The Hours a "Chick Flick", which I have to disagree with. Saying it's a chick flick makes The Hours sound like it is only for female airheads that like bubbling romantic comedies. The Hours is a dark, elegant and sinister film that questions it's characters and the actions they take in life. You don't have to be an older woman to enjoy this movie either. I am a teenage guy, and I found a lot to admire in this movie from the acting, to Philip Glass's score, and the fine editing. Also, some reviewers are questioning the message of the film. To people who are confused out there: NO, The Hours is not saying every deperssed housewife is a lesbian, or that suicide is noble and good. Also, it is not saying that it is heroic to abandon your family. If you're too dumb to pick up on the main themes, then maybe you souldn't be watching a movie of this caliber in the first place. If you are interested to see a good film, no matter what gender or age you are, I do suggest picking up The Hours. It's definetly worth a look if you enjoy fine cinema.
Rating: 
Summary: 4-1/2 stars -- Why didn't EVERYONE win awards?
Review: I didn't really hear that much about The Hours from friends because I don't know anyone that saw it. But I decided to take a look at it, and it turns out the movie is breathtaking, to say the least. The movie starts out with three different epilogues in three different years: Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman) in 1923, Laura Brown (Julianne Moore) in 1951, and Clarissa Dalloway (Meryl Streep) in 2001. Virginia is introduced as a mentally unstable author under a doctor's care, and the woman in her latest book is living vicariously through Laura Brown, who picks up the book in '51 and is seen reading it throughout the movie. After twenty or so minutes into the movie, I figured the three stories going on would intertwine somewhere along the line (despite it being different years), but I still couldn't quite understand how Clarissa's life connected to the other characters' - that is, until near the end of the movie. I won't give away what Clarissa's connection is, because trust me, you'll know. And when you find out, you'll probably give a great big, "OH!" Nicole Kidman was very deserving in the awards she received for the part of Virginia Woolf, but like I said in my title, I think just about everyone should have won awards; especially Ed Harris, who played the part of Richard. I enjoyed everything about this movie, although I didn't quite understand the kissing scenes. But maybe that's just me. If you don't own The Hours, at least watch it once. Anthony Rupert
Rating: 
Summary: The Hours .. suitable name for this movie
Review: The only reason I'm giving this 2 stars is because of the interesting cinematography. Otherwise I was bored to tears, and the movie dragged on making the minutes seem like hours. I am a woman, and I still don't get it. The constant pity parties that the characters indulged in were tiresome ... with no resolutions, nothing to look forward to at the end. Also, just what is it with Hollywood's obsession with lesbians these days?
Not that I have anything against the lifestyle, but it seems to me that the kissing scenes were just thrown in for shock value.
I don't see how those scenes fit into the plot ... then again, I don't exactly know what the plot was supposed to be. Perhaps I'm missing something, however, I'm not interested in enduring the movie again to see what message I may have missed. I don't need to be reminded that life has its dark moments.
On the other hand I have become intrigued with Virgina Woolf and am curious about her life, and I plan on doing some reading about her, as well as her work.
Rating:
Summary: A stunning cinematic achievement
Review: "The Hours" may or may not be the best English-language movie to have been released in 2002, but it is, to me, the most exquisite and delicate. As such, it is not designed to be a commercial movie for mass consumption; indeed, its relative box office success can probably be attributed to its powerhouse cast, led by Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore. To people who love great acting, any one of these women in a movie makes it worth seeing. To have all three together is rather intimidating, and that fact, I believe, is what lead to some of the movie's negative reviews since, with that much talent, a project can be seen as all about the stars. Adding to the talent overload are such marvelous actors as Miranda Richardson, Claire Danes, Ed Harris, John C. Reilly, Toni Collette, Allison Janney and Stephen Dillane. The movie, based on a Pulitzer prize winning novel, contains three stories which touch upon each other but rarely actually connect, the common thread being English author Virginia Woolf [Kidman] and her novel, 'Mrs. Dalloway". Woolf was a brilliant writer who suffered from severe mental illness. She committed suicide in 1941 when she finally could no long cope with her disease. There is the story of Laura Brown [Moore], set in 1951, in which the character, who is reading Woolf's book, toys with the idea of suicide. The last story revolves around Clarissa Vaughn [Streep]. Set in present day, it is about her relationship with her ex-lover [Ed Harris], who is dying from AIDS and whose only out seems to be to kill himself. On the surface, all this dallying with suicide may seem grim and depressing, the movie is actually life-affirming, but, as I've said, it's not meant for mass consumption. Kidman deserved her Oscar for Best Actress in "The Hours". Like Bette Davis before her, she is always willing to take on an acting challenge. Here, having donned a prosthetic nose, she is barely recognizable. Still, I wish there were an Oscar for Best Ensemble Acting because that is the one "The Hours" should have received because each remarkable individual performance adds to the power of the film as a whole.
Rating: 
Summary: SEX TRASH
Review: Sex Trash directly from the Mind Sewer Masters of Hollywood. Disturbing. Very disturbing. Nicole Kidman at least had the intelligence to disguise herself with that nose job.
Rating:
Summary: Deeply Moving
Review: Synopsis: Three women across three different generations simultaneously explore their own personal angst. I'm not surprised that the back cover of the DVD has no description of the movie itself. It's hard to get a feel for it at first. Juggling three different timeframes and three story lines is a bit much when there's little to go on. However, as the film progress, the picture comes into focus clearly enough ... at least for those of us who can relate to the heroines of the story. The Hours does a remarkable job of making the audience feel the restlessness and dissatisfaction of the main characters. Virginia is housewife of the 1920's tormented by what comes across as schizophrenic tendencies. Laura, a housewife of the 1950's, is burdened by family expectations she feels incompetent to fulfill. Clarissa is a modern day woman torn between feelings for an ill ex-lover/current friend (male) and her longtime significant other (female). All three stories are told simultaneously. Once you get used to the rhythm of the changes, the method becomes refreshing. Three completely different women with three completely different problems interconnect by way of their common angst and feelings of futility in the face of life. Their differences become insignificant as their similarities begin to show. The Hours manages to express the inexpressable devastation of human emotional pain thanks to the superb acting abilities of Julianne Moore (Virginia), Nicole Kidman (Laura) and Merle Streep (Clarissa). Kudos to director Stephen Daldry too!
Rating:
Summary: The Hours
Review: I was a fan of the book for a while. Michael Cunningham's unique prose and organization of these three stories is amazing. When I heard that a film was going to be released, I was a little surprised. This is one of the most difficult novels to adapt into a film, because the story is very complicated and shifts often. 'The Hours' is the story- three stories- of three different women, each searching for happiness. Writer Virginia Woolf, in the 1920s, is wrestling with mental and emotional demons while writing 'Mrs. Dalloway'. In 1949, Laura Brown is reading 'Mrs. Dalloway' and feeling as if she is the main character, lost in depression and feeling trapped in the storybook life she lives. And, in 2001, Clarissa Vaughn is obsessed with the details of life while planning a party for a poet friend dying of AIDS, who calls her Mrs. Dalloway. These three stories interweave throughout the book and the film and ultimately shock you with their power and beauty. Nicole Kidman plays Virginia Woolf wonderfully, and is completely absorbed into the character. Julianne Moore plays Laura Brown with unbelievable realism and works very well with the role. Meryl Streep plays Clarissa Vaughn so wonderfully, from breakdowns to buying flowers. I thought that Ms. Streep delivers a much finer performance in 'The Hours' than in 'Adaptation', which she is good in also. Last but not least, Ed Harris, playing the AIDS ridden poet Richard is extraordinary the whole way through. The film has many twists in each of these narratives. Despite the fact that Laura's visit to the motel became a suicide in the film (it is just an "escape" in the novel) and a few other changes, 'The Hours' follows Michael Cunningham's book amazingly well. People are always comparing 'Personal Velocity' with this film. Well, 'Personal Velocity' is a conventional film with three boring women dealing with the same problems as in every other film about women. But 'The Hours' gives a unique perspective and opens to a wide range of audiences. 'The Hours' leaves the audience with a big reaction at the end, summarizing that the most important parts of life are in the hours and days of every human life. This is a beautiful film, and got robbed at the Oscars, and the entertaining film 'Chicago' beat it for the best picture only because it is the most popular film. Julianne Moore definitely should've received more recognition for her stirring performance as Laura Brown. In the end, 'The Hours' is the best picture of 2002, or of any year!
Rating:
Summary: Amazing...
Review: The movie was absolutely amazing. Nicole Kidman was such an awesome actor in this film. The way Virginia Woolfe was portrayed (yes I read Mrs. Dallowoay) was just astonishing. I read The Hours first as well. I have to say... the movie DEFINITELY & book are so good, it is hard to tell any real differences from the two. Ed Harris was simply incredible. He played Richard in the movie exactly how I would have pictured him in the book. I was a little surprised at the end... but I will leave it to other viewers to find that out for theirselves. Happy watching!
Rating:
Summary: confused to why this is a good "movie"
Review: how can this be a good movie? why does everyone have homosexual tendencies? not that theres anything wrong with it, but if your gonna make a theme out of it in your movie there NEEDS to be a point, a reason, maybe there is but i didnt catch it. I caught the point of the movie when the question was asked to nicole kidmans character "why does someone have to die" refering to the book her character wrote, she replies "so everyone else will value life more" this story alone could have made a decent thought pravoking, but this line, which in my mind is the most IMPORTANT line in the move, is mumbled so quitly that i had to rewind sevrel time to catch what she was actually saying... NOT good for the movie, being such a crutial point. than the movie brought in other time lines of people affected by the book.. fist with julianne morres character who we are led twards the end of the movie to think she also kills her self... NOT SO!! why in this type of movie would you need a twist in plot? it serves nothing to the main point of the movie, instead it wasnt her that kills her self but her son, in an even latter time line, so that meryl streeps character "values life more" i guess... but all three of these characters have awkward female to female kisses... didnt seem to be a reason... just cause it happend in the book? the movie even ended on one of those kisses... oh, and ed harris, the son that kills himself had aids and i assume its from the emplied gay relations he's had... why all this gayness? if your gonna make a movie about gay people make it relivent!! it seems like the director put the "twist" and the "gay" stuff in there just to make it seem artsy, along with the other two time lines which could have been left out to make a much more meaningfull and historicly based movie... it seems that too many directors are trying to be "artsy" rather than just make a good movie which is ART... come on HOLLYWOOD get it together, stop trying too hard to make people think your smart... we know your not and thats what we like about you :).... let the indi kids do the artsy flicks unless you actually have something MEANINGFULL... bottom line, i hate movies that have elements in place that do nothing to aid the movie... but you can watch it see for your self...
Rating:
Summary: I cannot help but think
Review: that this film is a great disservice to the novel *Mrs. Dalloway*, if not to Woolf herself. I am tired of everybody focusing on Woolf's death and illness more than on her life and work. In "The Hours," even her novel comes across as suffused with the aimless futility of the film. And if we wanted to be accurate, why not show Woolf in her occasional "riding the crest of the wave" phase of bipolar disorder, instead of always so moony and depressingly wise. Woolf's work is varied and rich and provides the movement and life that this movie does not have by a long shot. I did not like the scene where Meryl Streep collapses in the kitchen in front of her gay friend's gay lover--the message of "The Hours" in this scene seemed to be : "Look what women have to put up with; watch them go hysterical." ... The moment you walk out of the movie theatre/turn off the tape you know that you are ... destined to trace a circle like the poor chumps in "The Hours", and after a while, when you've fumed enough about poor Woolf's legacy being ... by this stuff..... You go back to reading "A Room of One's Own," "Orlando," "To the Lighthouse." You go back to being happy you got "Mrs. Dalloway" the novel before they put that ... "Michael Cunningham ..." button on it. What makes me angry is that people will now buy "Mrs. Dalloway" expecting something totally different. They will be disappointed and stop at page 3 or worse, finish the novel through a haze of duty. Then they will put in it on the same shelf that contains another similarly unreadable book, "Ulysses." Why does no one pick on James Joyce to this terrible extent?! Let me clarify: *Mrs. Dalloway* is on my top 10 list and Cunningham has used it to harp out his worldview. ... By the way, Woolf's suicide was (as they often are) more complicated, and had something to do with the fact that the Allies seemed to be losing the war in 1941.... But damned if you can see it here. In short: those who like this movie will languish in complacency, having been presented with all they already agreed with (they will laud it to the skies for this); whilst those who don't like it, will hate it for all the liberal propaganda (or in my mom's case, also for reminding her of her own illness). Hmmm I am depressed now, too.... At no dialogue, no opportunity for change.... Always the staleness, always the complacent liberal ideology, always....the hours..... I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
| 
