Possession

Rating:
Summary: Awful!
Review: This movie is an example of a movie that is based on a good idea, but that ccompletely fails in its execution of that idea. The story in the present, involving Gwyneth Paltrow and the leading guy (whose name I don't know and I won't bother learning because in a few years no one will know his name anyway) is completely lame and lifeless. The "romance" between the lead characters if utterly fabricated, with no natural life-force of its own. These two people have no chemistry together. The guy, with his constant two-day growth of beard, and his artsy, I-haven't-showered-in-two-weeks hair, is a total wus, and it is impossible to imagine Gwyneth being interested in him (the fact that she apparently was so interested during the filming is inexplicable). He is as convincing playing an intelligent art scholar as Keenau Reeves would be playing a rocket scientist. The flashback story, by contrast, is far more compelling. That story has good actors at least. I wish the whole movie had just been about Ash and his girlfriend. The screenplay of this movie is very amateurish. The grave-digging chase scene is laughably bad. I can't write anymore. Trust me, I love romantic comendy type movies, but this one just stinks!

Rating:
Summary: Victorian Romance leads to Modern Connection
Review: "No mere human can stand in a fire and not be consumed."

While doing research in the British Museum, Roland Michell (Aaron Eckhart) discovers letters written by Randolph Ash who had an affair with a lesser-known poetess, Christabel LaMotte.

Maud Bailey (Gwyneth Paltrow) knows Christabel's poems by heart and Randolph seeks her out as an expert to help him figure out why a "chaste spinster" and the "married Randolph Ash" never revealed their love to the world. He has one clue, a love letter.

Christabel and Randolph's love is based on a common love of literature and intellectual discussions, poetry and passion. They are like minds that somehow connected and together they find immense happiness despite their circumstances. Although they fight their attraction to one another, they eventually create a world of turmoil and tragedy.

Gwyneth and Aaron have a subtle chemistry but it is not "quite" the mingling of spirits that occurs with Christabel (Jennifer Ehle) and Randolph (Jeremy Northam) and yet there are enough sparks to keep them interested.

"I want to see if there is an us in you and me."

Is passion worth the turmoil and upheaval? Is this the tangle most people want? While the story of the poets is only a memory, Maud and Roland are just starting their journey and are fortunately single when they meet.

Maud and Roland lurk about in divine libraries searching for clues and discover old letters and journals. They are intoxicated by the thought that they can actually solve this mystery. They must conceal their true purpose while searching for clues.

They spend time reading the letters to each other, which is the most romantic "modern" part of this movie. The Victorian "flash backs" are much more entertaining on all levels.

The Victorian romance in this movie is wonderful, but the modern romance is much more subtle. Yet, who would not want to have a man read you poetry in bed?

Adapted from A.S. Byatt's novel by the same name. The movie is not the passionate fire the name suggests. However, this movie will possess you intellectually from start to finish.

Thoughtful Romance with an element of mystery.

Rating:
Summary: One of the best romance films of all time
Review: Possession is a brillant adaptation of A.S. Byatt's moving and also brillant novel of the same name. It is the stoyr of two modern day academics who uncover a romance between two victorian poets. along the way the academics discover their own hesitant attraction.
The directing is superb. Neil Labute created a seemless flow from modern to victorian not only in the relationships but in the ideas of love and life. he created parallels and connects with the help of four very talented actors. Gwneth Paltrow has done her best work next to Shakespeare in Love. This film has allowed her to go beyond the image that people see her as. She has proved she does not always have to be to he perfect romantic lead or the ditty blond. She has shown nuance in her abilities that were only hinted at in Shakespeace. Aaron Eckhart has done his best work also. He draws a wonderful picture of th modern man torn between the macko image and powerful emotions. there gradaul journey slowing becomes the heart of this picture but it takes a good eye to see the developemnt of thse characters affection. It is carfully acted and directed.
jeremy Northam has finally been able to prove his a leading man. He is charming and soulful. Jennifer Ehle is passionate and delicate in a part that could have become laughable with the wrong actress. These two bring a vibrance and reality to an age where it seems love was easier and more free.
Possession is a masterpiece. Neil Labute captured the esseence of byatt's complex novel in the best way possible. he even transfered the poems and letters of the victorians, which is something i thought could never happen in the film media.
Possession is one of best films of 2002 because it has great directing that is gentle and exact, acting that subtle and beautiful. overall, the film is wonderful and moving to behold. A defiante must for film buffs.

Rating:
Summary: drowning with love....
Review: 'possession' is the tender trap, a tonic for a lovesick mind.

i watched 'possession' time and time again at the cinema; head up, front row. i watch the DVD whenever i can; it is a privelege to be able to own a copy.

since the cast and the screenplay are so fatefully interlinked, i shall say, in my view the casting was superb. jeremy northam has all the qualities of a respectable poet laureate, and the sexual appeal to match that of jennifer ehle, his leading lady.

aaron ekhart, i notice in other reviews, has been much maligned as not being the equal of gwyneth paltrow. i simply dismiss that sort of talk. the point of mr ekhart's character is that he feels inferior, to be looked down on by maud bailey (paltrow) and this is the impression the viewer recieves, from the first images of roland mitchell (ekhart) working studiously, to the dramatic realisation of maud bailey's ancestory.

the film is split across two generations; but they are seamlessly linked. Neil LaBute's film is a triumph, the beauty of which shall be revered for many generations to come.

it is a 'feel-good' film, to make one long for love.

Rating:
Summary: Jennifer Ehle saves it...
Review: I love Gwyneth Paltrow, but she was an ice maiden in this role, not portraying the character with any warmth, passion, or conviction. Vacant is the word that comes to mind.

Why oh why did the producers/writers have to change Roland into being an American? I'm American, but it totally disrupts the romance between the two leads, and he was not a thief to the extent portrayed in the film. Awful.

Jennifer Ehle is magic. She brings as much passion and life to this character as she did to Lizzie in Pride and Prejudice! Only Colin Firth could have improved the sensational love story here between the two poets.

The actor who portrayed Randolph Henry Ash was lost in Jennifer Ehle's performance. She so overshadowed him.

Lovely movie, but the modern day romance falls flat on its face... much to my disappointment.

Rating:
Summary: 5 stars for the 19th century drama; 1 for the 21st century
Review: I remember the wonderful coming attractions for this movie and couldn't wait to see it. As a fan of A&E, the BBC and Masterpiece Theatre, this film looked like it had everything I love about a movie. Well, it never came to my town and I now know why. First of all, the director changed the book (which of course is his prerogative). But to totally rewrite a part, and making it worse, well that is butchery. To substitute an intelligent, gentle, ENGLISH academician for a phlegmatic, AMERICAN is almost heretical, even if he is one of your best friends. And his 5-day beard stubble during the entire movie did nothing for me. The casting of Aaron Eckhart as the poet intern Roland Mitchell was ludicrous. He acted like he was bored during the entire movie. There was no spark, not even when making incredible discoveries, nor with his scenes with Paltrow. Gweneth Paltrow portrayed English Professor Maude Bailey as an ice maiden (using her grating nasal English accent). There was no charisma between these two and I was very bored during all of their scenes, of which there were too many.
Now, the redeeming qualities; the reasons to watch this film: Jennifer Ehle (Elizabeth Bennett of Pride and Prejudice) as Christabel Lamotte and her secret lover, Randolph Ash, who is played by Jeremy Northam (the handsome star of many period pieces). The passion between these two accomplished actors is palatable. Even the cinematography (of the flashback scenes) was extraordinary. Their story showed an entire range of believable emotions; passion, love, pain, and loss. For the brief moments that these two were on the screen, my heart soared. Because of their charisma, I really ended up loving this movie. I would have loved it even more if this film sent all the 21st century to the cutting room floor.

Rating:
Summary: Breathtaking
Review: I have never seen such beauty. This movie took me in and made me feel as if I were there, sharing in all the love and wonder. I have yet to see a love story that has moved me like this one has. It is truely one of the best. I will love it forever.

Rating:
Summary: completely disgusted
Review: I couldn't even finish watching this movie. I knew it wouldn't be as good as the book, but I was completely willing to give it a chance. The reason why I hated it was not because it completely butchered a glorious novel (which it did) but because it was full of shallow, irritating characters and bad acting.

The worst offence was the character Roland, played by the souless, empty-eyed Aaron Echardt. The writers of this film decided to make him American (rather than British as he is in the novel) merely so that they could make the most appaling statements come out of his bastardy little mouth. He swaggers around spouting anti-British, misogynistic sentiments, acting like he owns the world. In the novel, Roland is an intellectual and failed would-be poet struggling to deal with a sense of coming too late in the realm of Victorian scholarship. Obviously, the writers of this film have no conception of academia or academics. Anyone who has even been to college knows that there aren't any academics like those portrayed by Echardt and Paltrow in the movie. Gwyeneth Paltrow's portrayal of Maud was bland and boring. I believe she was chosen for this movie on the basis of her lovely yellow hair -- which is quite striking but unfortunately does nothing to make her character interesting or realistic.

The Victorian portion of the movie (featuring Jeremy Northam and Jennifer Ehle) was not as bad. In fact, Jennifer Ehle (who is wonderful in movies such as _Wilde_ and _Sunshine_) was a pretty good choice to portray Christabel. Unfortunately, the subtext of the Christabel plot was that she was with her female partner Blanche only until the "right man" came along and swept her off her feet. The book plot is similar but far, far more complex and compelling and not in the least derogatory towards female-female intimate relationships.

Do yourself a favor and skip this rotten apple. I highly recommend the book by A.S. Byatt upon which it's based. Or, if you're in the mood for a good Victorian film, rent or buy _Wilde_ (about Oscar Wilde)or _Angels and Insects_ (an absolutely brillient adaptation of an A.S. Byatt novella), both of which have actually done their research on the Victorian period and feature complex characters portrayed by talented actors.

Rating:
Summary: Mismatched Romance
Review: This movie centers around two romances: one Victorian and the other modern. For those of us who love romantic movies, the Victorian romance is breathtaking and carries the film. However, the modern romance between Gwyneth Paltrow and Aaron Eckhardt is disappointing. Although Paltrow is adequate as a scholar of Victorian poetry, Eckhardt was a very poor casting choice. He is unable to convincingly pull off the role of a scholar and his American-ness does not fit well with the mood of the movie. The romance between Paltrow and Eckhardt is flat, particularly when compared to the dynamic Victorian duo of Jeremy Northam and Jennifer Ehle. One can only dream of what the movie could have been had Jude Law been the lead opposite Paltrow. However, I have given the movie four stars because the flashback scenes between Northam and Ehle are well worth the price of admission (or rental). They are a stunning and heart-rending evocation of lost love. Additionally, the premise of discovering a snippet of long-lost lives is a thrilling one.

Rating:
Summary: Dispossessed
Review: Neil LaBute and David Henry Hwang? Filmmaking is made up of strange bedfellows, but this film presents two writers and two actors who ill-fit. Aaron Echardt and Gwen Paltrow? An actor who in "the Company of Men" played a callow, shallow manipulating jerk with stunning accuracy, Echardt has no gleam of intellence required for "Possession." Paltrow is playing off a blank slate for the entire film. I actually found myself fast-forwarding through their tedious, poorly-written love scenes. Did Neil LaBute actually have the nerve to think he could outwrite both A.S. Byatt and David Henry Hwang? Apparantly.

The parts of Ash and Cristobel were played well by Jennifer Elhe and Jeremy Northam, although there was much too much of "The French Lieutenant's Woman" in this film for me. Jennifer Elhe is made to look like Meryl Streep down to the complexion and the hooded cape. The only moving part of the film was when Ashe comes upon his daughter at the end.

Films are all compromise; I understand this, but this film was compromised to death. In a better world it would have been a Masterpiece Theatre mini-series, poorly shot, better written. I feel like the deaf secretary in "The Company of Men:" used, abused, and angry.

Barry Levinson is at fault too, he produced this.

Read the book. I swore I wasn't going to write more bad reviews, but this film needs to be excoriated. It died at the box office, and I can see why. A.S. Byatt deserved more than this, better.