224 reviews
In some ways it was great to see how true the film was to the source material, often capturing the powerful emotions and the horrific effects slavery can have on African-Americans at the time. However, because it is so faithful it makes the film almost 3 hours long so it does drag at points.
Thandie Newton's portrayal of Beloved is rightly weird and disturbing, whilst Oprah Winfrey and Danny Glover were very convincing for me as Sethe and Paul D respectively.
The main issue with the film is that knowledge of the book is almost essential going in, as I can see how it may be difficult to grasp exactly what is going on in the narrative without that prior information. Other than that I feel it truly captures the essence of Morrison's novel and can be very thought-provoking at times.
Thandie Newton's portrayal of Beloved is rightly weird and disturbing, whilst Oprah Winfrey and Danny Glover were very convincing for me as Sethe and Paul D respectively.
The main issue with the film is that knowledge of the book is almost essential going in, as I can see how it may be difficult to grasp exactly what is going on in the narrative without that prior information. Other than that I feel it truly captures the essence of Morrison's novel and can be very thought-provoking at times.
- carlo_simone18
- Jan 29, 2018
- Permalink
Beloved is a novel that relies heavily upon it's own language and the brilliant writing style in order to have its effect on the reader. One of its strongest points (and these are countless) is that it is about the period of American history near the end and immediately following slavery, when Negroes were still considered sub-human. It presents the story of the tremendous suffering of a few slaves during that time (and, indeed, during their entire lives), but the important thing is that the book does this with a startlingly small amount of graphic images and direct depictions of violence or cruelty. Because the movie is a visual account of the novel, it is unable to do this.
Sethe is a former slave who has suffered more hardships than most human beings (although, given the allusions to life on Sweet Home, she has not suffered even there the most), and the novel is about her life experiences and those of the slaves close to her. The most glaring problem here, which may have been unavoidable, is that Sethe's flashbacks could not be presented in the film in any other way than as brief, shocking images filled with violence and blood. This is not a problem because of anything to do with gratuitous violence, but because in the novel, Sethe lets out brief snapshots of her memories (which are too painful to directly tell as stories of her earlier life) as though she does not quite realize that she's doing it, then immediately stops herself when the pain hits her. The magnitude of her suffering is reduced to split-second sequences of brutality, which are presented as such but with no explanation or hint that they are that short because they are too painful to be any longer.
Besides the trouble that arises from having huge Hollywood superstars play the slaves here (which is a negligible fact because the performances are so powerful), the performance of Beloved, the title character, is entirely off the mark. Beloved embodies the epitome of Sethe's painful memories. She is Sethe's daughter (although not the only child) that Sethe was forced to kill to prevent them from going into slavery (thus providing the most significant act that allows us, indeed, FORCES us, to judge her as a person). When she is reborn from the river, she stumbles to 124 Bluestone Road, the house in which the majority of the movie and novel take place, and back into the lives of Sethe and Denver, the daughter that barely escaped the violence of her own mother's hands.
The problem with the performance is that, while it's true that Beloved was killed when she was two years old, and has not matured a day since then except physically, she does not act like a two-year-old child. The Beloved in Toni Morrison's novel has the maturity of a two-year-old and the physical, motherly needs of a two-year-old (most evident in her urgent need to be with Sethe), but she does not have the demeanor of one. I am reminded of John Malkovich's performance as Lennie Small in `Of Mice and Men.' Lennie Small is a huge, hulking man in the novel with a miniscule intelligence. He has the intellectual capacity and maybe even some of the same values as a seven or eight-year-old (such as `tenning dem wabbits'), but he doesn't act like one. Thandie Newton remembers in her performance that Beloved was a small child when she died, but she overuses it to the point where she drowns out much of the rest of the effect that she has on the story and those around her. Most importantly, her overdone performance distracts attention from the purpose that she is meant to serve in the story.
Beloved is the supernatural element of Toni Morrison's novel, who is there not because this is a supernatural story but because she represents the magnitude of the suffering that went on during slave times. She is a spiritual manifestation that requires no explanation except for her cause of death, and Newton's outlandish performance in the role reduces that effect because her behavior is not explained.
The film stays true to the magnitude of sorrow presented in the novel, but it transforms it from the slow, relentless, and immensely complicated version presented in the novel and into one of visuals and performance, which challenges successful actors to present the lives of people who have suffered more than most people alive can imagine. The film succeeds grandly in presenting the society in which Negroes were not humans but property. Sethe did not murder her children, she destroyed property that does not belong to her. But the important thing that is lost here is the shock that is delivered by the subtlety of the content. The emotion of the novel is enormously powerful, and yet it is all so subdued that even white people are almost not in it at all. They are little more than a lumbering presence that never shows its face (except for the single scene in the book that is presented from the point of view of white people), but is always looming dangerously just over the horizon. Beloved is a story that is too powerful to be told directly, because if it is, it will be weakened because the danger and the suffering becomes tangible, something that you can see and then forget about. The short descriptions and bits of events in the book force the mind to circle and work them until the full impact of their true meaning is realized.
Sethe is a former slave who has suffered more hardships than most human beings (although, given the allusions to life on Sweet Home, she has not suffered even there the most), and the novel is about her life experiences and those of the slaves close to her. The most glaring problem here, which may have been unavoidable, is that Sethe's flashbacks could not be presented in the film in any other way than as brief, shocking images filled with violence and blood. This is not a problem because of anything to do with gratuitous violence, but because in the novel, Sethe lets out brief snapshots of her memories (which are too painful to directly tell as stories of her earlier life) as though she does not quite realize that she's doing it, then immediately stops herself when the pain hits her. The magnitude of her suffering is reduced to split-second sequences of brutality, which are presented as such but with no explanation or hint that they are that short because they are too painful to be any longer.
Besides the trouble that arises from having huge Hollywood superstars play the slaves here (which is a negligible fact because the performances are so powerful), the performance of Beloved, the title character, is entirely off the mark. Beloved embodies the epitome of Sethe's painful memories. She is Sethe's daughter (although not the only child) that Sethe was forced to kill to prevent them from going into slavery (thus providing the most significant act that allows us, indeed, FORCES us, to judge her as a person). When she is reborn from the river, she stumbles to 124 Bluestone Road, the house in which the majority of the movie and novel take place, and back into the lives of Sethe and Denver, the daughter that barely escaped the violence of her own mother's hands.
The problem with the performance is that, while it's true that Beloved was killed when she was two years old, and has not matured a day since then except physically, she does not act like a two-year-old child. The Beloved in Toni Morrison's novel has the maturity of a two-year-old and the physical, motherly needs of a two-year-old (most evident in her urgent need to be with Sethe), but she does not have the demeanor of one. I am reminded of John Malkovich's performance as Lennie Small in `Of Mice and Men.' Lennie Small is a huge, hulking man in the novel with a miniscule intelligence. He has the intellectual capacity and maybe even some of the same values as a seven or eight-year-old (such as `tenning dem wabbits'), but he doesn't act like one. Thandie Newton remembers in her performance that Beloved was a small child when she died, but she overuses it to the point where she drowns out much of the rest of the effect that she has on the story and those around her. Most importantly, her overdone performance distracts attention from the purpose that she is meant to serve in the story.
Beloved is the supernatural element of Toni Morrison's novel, who is there not because this is a supernatural story but because she represents the magnitude of the suffering that went on during slave times. She is a spiritual manifestation that requires no explanation except for her cause of death, and Newton's outlandish performance in the role reduces that effect because her behavior is not explained.
The film stays true to the magnitude of sorrow presented in the novel, but it transforms it from the slow, relentless, and immensely complicated version presented in the novel and into one of visuals and performance, which challenges successful actors to present the lives of people who have suffered more than most people alive can imagine. The film succeeds grandly in presenting the society in which Negroes were not humans but property. Sethe did not murder her children, she destroyed property that does not belong to her. But the important thing that is lost here is the shock that is delivered by the subtlety of the content. The emotion of the novel is enormously powerful, and yet it is all so subdued that even white people are almost not in it at all. They are little more than a lumbering presence that never shows its face (except for the single scene in the book that is presented from the point of view of white people), but is always looming dangerously just over the horizon. Beloved is a story that is too powerful to be told directly, because if it is, it will be weakened because the danger and the suffering becomes tangible, something that you can see and then forget about. The short descriptions and bits of events in the book force the mind to circle and work them until the full impact of their true meaning is realized.
- Anonymous_Maxine
- Mar 13, 2003
- Permalink
I read Beloved in an intro English course and it took me a long while to get used to Toni Morrison's writing style. She once said in an interview that she wrote the book to be disorienting, in some ways to re-enact the feeling of the slave diaspora.
I thought the book heart-wrenching, at times gut-wrenching, and vivid. The character of Paul D never made much sense, seeming like a man waiting for something to happen, but Sethe burned off the page. What I remember most is Baby Suggs' speech at the rock, which the film has divided into three segments.
I projected Beloved for the college theater and I have to say it was long and arduous, especially if you haven't read the novel. There is no SENSE to the PAIN that goes on with these characters; in Braveheart and Titanic, we have a certain tragic pleasure in mass death or torture that we can't receive from Beloved. I read a lot of comments talking about the ghost in Beloved, but the ghost is more of a catalyst for looking into the characters than the star of the film.
I admired the time put in most. It just seemed like Demme and Tak Fujimoto, and the lighting designer as well, gave the actors the time they needed to act and sink into things: unlike traditional MTV-editing, some scenes were comprised of only one shot, usually tracking, as Paul D and Sethe in the cornfield. The score was brilliant; Portman really found a grace in stillness and the trembling African voice and the flute. It was bare but riveting at the same time.
People have said that the film went for too much shock value. That's possible- did we need the close-up of the dead child at the breast? No. But then again when we read it in the book, don't we think of it? Don't we for a split second see that image in our heads? I for one thought of much more graphic things when Morrison discussed Paul D and Beloved's night in the shed. The camera and the actors treat the world of Beloved and the audience with respect. Winfrey does seem more like someone who loves Sethe's character, than Sethe herself, but she did it for me. The sadness, the strength, emptiness, she did it, and Lisa Gay Hamilton as the young Sethe was riveting with her time in the film. The look in her eyes when Schoolteacher says "Animal" is amazing.
Danny Glover always does a good job, but he didn't really amaze me. For me, you know what you're getting with Glover, nice guy, troubled soul, easy-going with fits of rage every now and then. It's what he likes to play, and he does it well here but no surprises. The surprises are Winfrey, and Kimberly Elise especially in those crucial minutes when she decides to leave home, the fear and determination on her face. (She somehow becomes more sexual by the end of the film when she sees Paul D.) Thandie Newton is incredibly freaky and disgusting as Beloved with the exception of that ONE long gaze she gives Danny Glover that night, seduction, perfect symmetry. And Beah Richards as Baby Suggs: I wanted her to be my mother. She broke my heart with her religion: "This is the prize. This is the prize." The preaching scenes are INCREDIBLE in this film, especially since Tak Fujimoto chooses a circular tracking shot that allows them to do it all at once.
There isn't much redemption at the end. Sethe is drained and miserable. Paul D is on his own but still not totally free. I think Roger Ebert's comment put it best: the happy ending of Beloved is that the ordeal is OVER. There is no sense to the pain, but one hopes at the end that there can be healing.
I loved this film. I loved the fact that it's not hammering any one message home, but you can take things about motherhood, race, brutality, the dangers of love and commitment, freedom, and chains out with you: it's all there. And it is as beautiful as it is wrenching.
I thought the book heart-wrenching, at times gut-wrenching, and vivid. The character of Paul D never made much sense, seeming like a man waiting for something to happen, but Sethe burned off the page. What I remember most is Baby Suggs' speech at the rock, which the film has divided into three segments.
I projected Beloved for the college theater and I have to say it was long and arduous, especially if you haven't read the novel. There is no SENSE to the PAIN that goes on with these characters; in Braveheart and Titanic, we have a certain tragic pleasure in mass death or torture that we can't receive from Beloved. I read a lot of comments talking about the ghost in Beloved, but the ghost is more of a catalyst for looking into the characters than the star of the film.
I admired the time put in most. It just seemed like Demme and Tak Fujimoto, and the lighting designer as well, gave the actors the time they needed to act and sink into things: unlike traditional MTV-editing, some scenes were comprised of only one shot, usually tracking, as Paul D and Sethe in the cornfield. The score was brilliant; Portman really found a grace in stillness and the trembling African voice and the flute. It was bare but riveting at the same time.
People have said that the film went for too much shock value. That's possible- did we need the close-up of the dead child at the breast? No. But then again when we read it in the book, don't we think of it? Don't we for a split second see that image in our heads? I for one thought of much more graphic things when Morrison discussed Paul D and Beloved's night in the shed. The camera and the actors treat the world of Beloved and the audience with respect. Winfrey does seem more like someone who loves Sethe's character, than Sethe herself, but she did it for me. The sadness, the strength, emptiness, she did it, and Lisa Gay Hamilton as the young Sethe was riveting with her time in the film. The look in her eyes when Schoolteacher says "Animal" is amazing.
Danny Glover always does a good job, but he didn't really amaze me. For me, you know what you're getting with Glover, nice guy, troubled soul, easy-going with fits of rage every now and then. It's what he likes to play, and he does it well here but no surprises. The surprises are Winfrey, and Kimberly Elise especially in those crucial minutes when she decides to leave home, the fear and determination on her face. (She somehow becomes more sexual by the end of the film when she sees Paul D.) Thandie Newton is incredibly freaky and disgusting as Beloved with the exception of that ONE long gaze she gives Danny Glover that night, seduction, perfect symmetry. And Beah Richards as Baby Suggs: I wanted her to be my mother. She broke my heart with her religion: "This is the prize. This is the prize." The preaching scenes are INCREDIBLE in this film, especially since Tak Fujimoto chooses a circular tracking shot that allows them to do it all at once.
There isn't much redemption at the end. Sethe is drained and miserable. Paul D is on his own but still not totally free. I think Roger Ebert's comment put it best: the happy ending of Beloved is that the ordeal is OVER. There is no sense to the pain, but one hopes at the end that there can be healing.
I loved this film. I loved the fact that it's not hammering any one message home, but you can take things about motherhood, race, brutality, the dangers of love and commitment, freedom, and chains out with you: it's all there. And it is as beautiful as it is wrenching.
- DannyBoy-17
- Mar 19, 1999
- Permalink
I am a big Jonathon Demme fan, even going back to Handle With Care (Did anyone other than me see this film?), so I was very disappointed with this convoluted mess. Making a film from a richly loved book can be troublesome. The film feels like it came from a book, as if the director was afraid to leave out any of the details and alienating the book's legion of fans. Plus the supernatural side of the story is better left to the imagination. On screen, it comes off as ridiculous and hokey. Oprah is fine, but the title character is tremendously annoying. Stop reading here if you haven't seen the film, but she kept reminding me of those not-quite-right pets from Pet Sematary. I normally admire over the top acting, but this is more like over the top of top. Embarrassing stuff. I Have other issues:(1) what was up with that white woman who helps Oprah give birth? She was almost as annoying as Beloved;(2)What happened to the sons?;(3)Why did the makers cut to a seemingly gratuitous and graphic scene of Oprah urinating? I rewound my vcr to figure out the significance and it went over my head twice. Unless you've read the book, you'll probably find this to be an indecipherable, indulgent mess.
This movie features a very disturbing story and standout performances, especially from Thandie Newton. It is not for the faint of heart, the squeamish, or those who only watch movies for glamor and escapism. Some of the scenes should've been edited out or shot less graphically. While I admired the power of this film I have no desire to see it again.
- perfectbond
- Apr 11, 2003
- Permalink
- sassytigerr
- Jan 14, 2007
- Permalink
- beloved2709
- Mar 31, 2006
- Permalink
If you haven't read the book, I suggest you do, it is amazing and left me reeling when finished. Is the film as good? Not quite. On its own merits though, I think it is good. Albeit it isn't a movie for all. Some of the movie does rely too much on shock value and I found some bits rather hard to watch, granted the book did have some hard hitting parts but it never felt like too much. Also the film does feel a little laborious in pace in the middle, and Thandie Newton's performance for my liking is over-cooked. However, Oprah Winfrey's lead performance is achingly poignant and Danny Glover gives her great support. Beloved is well directed, looks beautiful, has an overall evocative story that has something to say and has a good score and worthy script. In conclusion, not for all but I liked it. For the full emotional punch though, go for the book. 7/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Sep 2, 2011
- Permalink
It's 1865 on the outskirts of Cincinnati. Sethe (Oprah Winfrey) is haunted by a ghost. Her two young sons run away as the ghost attack. Eight years later, friend Paul D. (Danny Glover) from the old plantation Sweet Home is reunited with Sethe after 18 years. She's living with her daughter Denver (Kimberly Elise) along with the spirit of her baby. Sethe and Paul recount the horrible history of the plantation. Returning from a carnival, they find mysterious Beloved (Thandie Newton) on their yard. She has a magical origin and is childlike at first.
I haven't read the book and didn't know what to expect from this movie. The horror opening shocked me a little. This isn't the best from director Jonathan Demme. There is a dark fantasy about this movie but it's not conveyed well. Thandie Newton is doing a Nell thing and it's hard to see past Oprah's persona. There are powerful stuff here but it feels like a wild mess and lifeless. It's also way too long and the acting is too big. It leaves the movie unwieldy and tiresome. There are tough images and heartbreaking stories. Maybe simplifying it would have distill this to its brutal essence.
I haven't read the book and didn't know what to expect from this movie. The horror opening shocked me a little. This isn't the best from director Jonathan Demme. There is a dark fantasy about this movie but it's not conveyed well. Thandie Newton is doing a Nell thing and it's hard to see past Oprah's persona. There are powerful stuff here but it feels like a wild mess and lifeless. It's also way too long and the acting is too big. It leaves the movie unwieldy and tiresome. There are tough images and heartbreaking stories. Maybe simplifying it would have distill this to its brutal essence.
- SnoopyStyle
- Aug 13, 2014
- Permalink
When I logged onto IMDb and came to the "Beloved" page (after finishing watching the film), I was extremely surprised at the average 5.4 user rating that this film had. 5.4, are you kidding me? I went in seeing this film without ever reading (or having any knowledge of) the award-winning novel that the film is apparently very tightly based upon. Even without that, this film was amazing. The movie begins with a woman named Sethe (Oprah Winfrey), a former slave living in 1800s Cincinatti, where an unseen presence is tearing apart her house, throwing things against the walls, and injuring her dog. Her two sons ultimately run away, terrified of the house, and her youngest daughter, Denver is forced to stay. Cut to eight years later, a friend of Sethe's, Paul D. (Danny Glover) reenters her life and moves in with Sethe. "We got a ghost here", Denver tells him, and Paul D. mentions feeling an evil presence in her house, but Sethe tells him it's "only sadness". Then later on, a mysterious young woman who calls herself "Beloved" is found standing in the front yard of the house. She can barely speak, can't move, and is almost like an infant in the body of a teenager. But who is she, where did she come from, and why is she there? Sethe's dark past holds the secret to Beloved's identity, which is revealed later on in the film.
"Beloved" isn't a horror film, and I wasn't expecting one either. Granted, there are a few disturbing scenes (and a handful of rather scary moments), but this film is a drama more than anything and really focuses more on it's characters. The story itself is an interesting one at that, and after seeing this I'm tempted to go read the novel (which I hear the film is adapted to very closely). Everything in the film seems to be put together very nicely, and (unlike many people who claim to not be able to follow the story) I followed it very easily. There are some harsh themes that are a consistent part of the plot (mainly Sethe's horrible past as an abused slave) and there are some scenes that are truly hard to watch. While the supernatural element is a main theme in the movie, this isn't your average ghost story. It's not horrific or in-your-face, it's a much lighter and touching. I don't want to go too in-depth into the plot, because there are things that I could easily spoil and wouldn't want to - see the film for yourself. Character development is rampant in the film, and each of the characters mature in a different way throughout the course of the movie, and makes for some very interesting viewing as each of them grow in different ways.
Performances are amazing from everyone involved. I'd never seen Oprah Winfrey act, I'd just seen her television talk-show a few times, but she proves in this film that she can (and very well too). Danny Glover also gives a very nice performance but it's overshadowed by the rest of the cast. Thandie Newton plays Beloved, and plays it perfectly - her character is mysterious and obscure, and she does it well. Kimberly Elise plays Sethe's daughter, Denver, and plays the character excellently. I can't say anything bad about the acting in any aspects - to sum it up as a whole, the acting here is just flat-out amazing. Along with the wonderful acting, the directing is great also. Academy Award winner Jonathan Demme (who also directed the award winning crime-suspense masterpiece "The Silence of the Lambs") handles the story well and keeps things consistently absorbing and ultimately haunting. Very nice cinematography is present too, and there are tons of symbolic images throughout the film that are placed nicely in the mix, along with a lot of shots of nature and wildlife.
Overall, "Beloved" is an amazing movie, and the people who are rating this as a '1/10' must have not seen very many movies, because this film is so far from a '1' that it's not even funny. Don't let the average user rating scare you off from this film, because it really deserves much better than that. I guess this is one of those "love it or hate it" movies, but I thought it was an unforgettable movie. 10/10.
"Beloved" isn't a horror film, and I wasn't expecting one either. Granted, there are a few disturbing scenes (and a handful of rather scary moments), but this film is a drama more than anything and really focuses more on it's characters. The story itself is an interesting one at that, and after seeing this I'm tempted to go read the novel (which I hear the film is adapted to very closely). Everything in the film seems to be put together very nicely, and (unlike many people who claim to not be able to follow the story) I followed it very easily. There are some harsh themes that are a consistent part of the plot (mainly Sethe's horrible past as an abused slave) and there are some scenes that are truly hard to watch. While the supernatural element is a main theme in the movie, this isn't your average ghost story. It's not horrific or in-your-face, it's a much lighter and touching. I don't want to go too in-depth into the plot, because there are things that I could easily spoil and wouldn't want to - see the film for yourself. Character development is rampant in the film, and each of the characters mature in a different way throughout the course of the movie, and makes for some very interesting viewing as each of them grow in different ways.
Performances are amazing from everyone involved. I'd never seen Oprah Winfrey act, I'd just seen her television talk-show a few times, but she proves in this film that she can (and very well too). Danny Glover also gives a very nice performance but it's overshadowed by the rest of the cast. Thandie Newton plays Beloved, and plays it perfectly - her character is mysterious and obscure, and she does it well. Kimberly Elise plays Sethe's daughter, Denver, and plays the character excellently. I can't say anything bad about the acting in any aspects - to sum it up as a whole, the acting here is just flat-out amazing. Along with the wonderful acting, the directing is great also. Academy Award winner Jonathan Demme (who also directed the award winning crime-suspense masterpiece "The Silence of the Lambs") handles the story well and keeps things consistently absorbing and ultimately haunting. Very nice cinematography is present too, and there are tons of symbolic images throughout the film that are placed nicely in the mix, along with a lot of shots of nature and wildlife.
Overall, "Beloved" is an amazing movie, and the people who are rating this as a '1/10' must have not seen very many movies, because this film is so far from a '1' that it's not even funny. Don't let the average user rating scare you off from this film, because it really deserves much better than that. I guess this is one of those "love it or hate it" movies, but I thought it was an unforgettable movie. 10/10.
- drownsoda90
- Jan 13, 2007
- Permalink
As per title: watching the movie without having read the book would be borderline useless because the story is very "thick" and full of symbolism, it would need a tv series to get it all down. As it is, it's a haunting tale of slavery and rebirth but it doesn't cut as deep (mostly because without the internal monologue of the characters, it's difficult to really get what Beloved is).
- borgolarici
- Jun 11, 2022
- Permalink
Toni Morrison story about a former servant in post-Civil War Ohio who, while working as a cook and living with her troubled teenage daughter (in a house touched by a spirit from the past), is visited by a man she once knew 18 years ago when she was a troubled girl from Kentucky. They forge a loving friendship built upon their memories, but the horrors of their youth sneak back into the yard once a wild child named Beloved shows up and is taken in. Fill-in-the-blanks melodrama moves along fluidly, yet intrinsically keeps tripping itself up. Director Jonathan Demme wants the overstuffed tale to unfold slowly, but by explaining so little about the central characters he risks alienating his audience. Within the first few minutes, Demme employs a technical effect which looks (and plays) cheap, followed by an outpouring of sorrowful family anger which gets the first act off on the wrong foot. The narrative is, in fact, so fuzzy that we're not sure who Oprah Winfrey's character is, how she makes her living, or what her relationship is with her daughter (who appears disturbed). When the stranger Beloved is readily welcomed by Winfrey into the home, talking in a staccato sing-song, we're not told why. Demme seems to think the mood music and the haunted/loving expression on Winfrey's face will tell us what we need to know, but this backfires (the film is practically intent on shutting out logic, replacing it with soul-bearing emotion). Perhaps in an attempt to retain Morrison's prose, the screenwriters don't allow these people to have normal conversations (it's all steeped in the hypothetical). "Beloved" has an interesting pictorial look, although the cinematography by Tak Fujimoto is too clear and pristine (as it was also, for example, in "The Color Purple", shot by Allen Daviau), and the tidy yards and weathered rooms look too Hollywood. Demme darts around avoiding explanations, while Thandie Newton's Beloved skitters about like a banshee. Winfrey, who also co-produced, gives an uneven performance hindered by the dialogue; her lack of sparkle reminds us she can be a gravely intelligent presence, but her solemn looks of longing don't register anything intriguing (we're supposed to be drawn to this woman because of Winfrey's personality, I assume, yet with Oprah so subdued we're left with nothing but a skin-deep portrait). It's a misbegotten venture. With hurting eyes rimmed with tears, mouths torn by grief, and hands grasping and clutching at the air, "Beloved" whips up quite a tempest, yet it's mostly hot air. ** from ****
- moonspinner55
- Jun 3, 2008
- Permalink
Toni Morrison writes complex novels, and Beloved is no exception. Oprah Winfrey tackled the project, and the result is mixed. Although I can't stand her holier than thou attitude, and angel network bulls***,she can act, as she proved in The Color Purple. Here she is Sethe, who, just after the Civil War lives alone with her daughter, Denver, after her sons have run away, due to being frightened away by an angry ghost. An old friend, Paul(Danny Glover) drives the ghost away, and he moves in with Sethe. A beautiful young woman named Beloved(Thandie Newton) wanders into their yard and they take her in. Here is where it gets complicated. Denver finds out that Beloved is Sethe's reincarnated daughter. Beloved puts a spell on Paul and rapes him. Later on, it is revealed that Sethe was assaulted when she was young, and she tried to kill her kids, rather than have them live in slavery. As a movie, it is visually interesting, but the plot is too convoluted for my taste. Thandie Newton is always good, and she was an excellent choice for the lead role. Check her out in Gridlocked.
I expected better from Oprah and others, but this movie was disturbing. Not because of the subject matter, but in the execution. It was hard to follow, disorganized and (in some respects) over-acted by the players. Plus, I think that despite the probable intent of the movie (and presumably the book) of showing how slavery (at its worst) treated human beings as animals, Sethe's character simply illustrated the animal nature unaffected by any shred of human compassion or sensitivity. She showed herself to be an animal, just like her former captors believed. The world is full enough of people with excuses for their bad choices and behavior - why spend so much time and money making yet another movie about them?
- lawyerchik1
- Jan 31, 2006
- Permalink
- anaconda-40658
- Dec 14, 2015
- Permalink
Every time I see copies of this movie are missing from the video store, I pity the poor soul who is forced to endure this painful excuse for a movie. I saw this film at a free theater preview, but we paid dearly for the painful hours of torture. Not only is this movie slow, boring, stupid, and a waste of time, as one theater goer stated loudly on the way out, "That is one weird a-- movie!" I've never read the book, and for fear that it is anything like the movie, I never will!! Everyone (who obviously didn't see the film) praised it and Oprah with promises of Academy awards - I cringed at the very thought. To the Academy's credit, they only allowed a nomination to this film for costume design, clearly a statement that No, they did not forget about Oprah or Beloved. So, consider this if you pause in the video and contemplate - how bad could it be...I will never be able to erase the image of a naked pregnant woman standing spread-eagle on a front porch screaming at a group of women (not to mention this person is supposed to be Oprah's dead baby back from the grave as a teenager who grunts and can't make a complete sentence but can convince a man to have sex with her while she drools). Someone save us, I think we've reached a new low in films!!
Beloved has many moments of powerful beauty which more than make it worth watching, despite its 3 hour length. Some of Thandie Newton's scenes are extremely disturbing and even frightening as she expresses Beloved's obsessive, all consuming, needy love for her mother simultaneously coupled with homicidal rage at her for daring to separate them. Denver's inner self is often written on her face, saying more than a page of dialog could. Oprah as Sethe is always Oprah but somehow she shows you this woman's truth. It would be very interesting to see how this movie would have been with a different, lesser known actress in the role. Baby Sugg's sermon is a picture of the almost forgotten awareness of a state of love and freedom in the midst of a world filled with despair, loss, separation and hatred.
I have also read the book and found it to be an extremely confusing, disorientating and yet somehow compelling experience. It is written I think to recreate in the reader the way we experience life ourselves, as emotional colors, in remembered snatches, through different lenses, and without it always making sense. I would definitely read it again having seen the film. I can sense that there is much I missed in the book the first time around and just because something is difficult, does not mean it isn't worth making the effort. I would say the same thing about the film.
I have also read the book and found it to be an extremely confusing, disorientating and yet somehow compelling experience. It is written I think to recreate in the reader the way we experience life ourselves, as emotional colors, in remembered snatches, through different lenses, and without it always making sense. I would definitely read it again having seen the film. I can sense that there is much I missed in the book the first time around and just because something is difficult, does not mean it isn't worth making the effort. I would say the same thing about the film.
- Socket_Seven
- Feb 4, 2006
- Permalink
Based on the book by Toni Morrison, in which a slave is visited by the spirit of her deceased daughter.
I love that the cover of the DVD proudly says "from the director of Silence of the Lambs", because these two movies have so much in common. I mean, yes, this one does have some creepy zombie ghost girl and there is a mass murder scene... but I suspect as a whole the overlapping audience is not all that large.
The movie is okay. Danny Glover is alright, and Oprah seems to be over-acting much of the time. What I actually had the biggest problem with -- and maybe this will sound stupid -- was the display of teeth. Rows of pearly, beautiful teeth. And I greatly doubt anyone of that time period had such good dental care, let alone the slave population.
I love that the cover of the DVD proudly says "from the director of Silence of the Lambs", because these two movies have so much in common. I mean, yes, this one does have some creepy zombie ghost girl and there is a mass murder scene... but I suspect as a whole the overlapping audience is not all that large.
The movie is okay. Danny Glover is alright, and Oprah seems to be over-acting much of the time. What I actually had the biggest problem with -- and maybe this will sound stupid -- was the display of teeth. Rows of pearly, beautiful teeth. And I greatly doubt anyone of that time period had such good dental care, let alone the slave population.
Uh-oh. I've read and seen several reviews of this movie now that heaped lavish praise on the acting, the story, the direction, the music, the "important social themes," Oprah's heroic quest to have the film made, etc, while warning that viewers who haven't read the novel "might be a bit confused in places." What a cop out! As another reviewer has remarked, it seems like some serious Emperor's New Clothes action is going on here. C'mon, who's gonna have the guts to step up to the plate and pan the movie that stars (and is produced by) the most powerful woman in show-biz? I keep getting the image of a drunken, ashamed Joseph Cotton in "Citizen Kane," typing up his glowing "review" of Kane's opera-singing wife...this movie is that bad!
I've heard the novel is great. With some imagination (and maybe a couple of tequilas), I could still see how that might be true. But the movie has to stand on its own, folks! Director Jonathan Demme's excellent "Silence of the Lambs" sure did. This one, however, falls flat: the plot just wanders along from episode to confusing episode (with frequent and annoying use of extended fade-outs).
Worse, despite all the horrifying things that happen to them, the movie's characters don't generate much sympathy. Why? Because while there's a strong sense of inner tumult, and lots of Exorcist-style physical turmoil (flying tables and glowing red lights -- gimme a break!!!) there's no sense of any real inner conflict. The characters just react -- to the inhumanity of the white slaveowners, or to the frequent supernatural outbursts. There's no evidence in their actions that there's anything they've had to weigh or be confused by. The things that have happened to Sethe (Oprah) are revealed in flashback form, so unfortunately there's not much chance for you as viewer to get involved in them -- it's stuff that's already happened, and you're just being filled in, in shorthand form ("prefab context").
Another major problem: this thing is WAY too long. The movie meanders for another 45 minutes to an hour after what is clearly the climactic scene, and for what??? It just kind of winds down in some very expected ways.
I've heard the novel is great. With some imagination (and maybe a couple of tequilas), I could still see how that might be true. But the movie has to stand on its own, folks! Director Jonathan Demme's excellent "Silence of the Lambs" sure did. This one, however, falls flat: the plot just wanders along from episode to confusing episode (with frequent and annoying use of extended fade-outs).
Worse, despite all the horrifying things that happen to them, the movie's characters don't generate much sympathy. Why? Because while there's a strong sense of inner tumult, and lots of Exorcist-style physical turmoil (flying tables and glowing red lights -- gimme a break!!!) there's no sense of any real inner conflict. The characters just react -- to the inhumanity of the white slaveowners, or to the frequent supernatural outbursts. There's no evidence in their actions that there's anything they've had to weigh or be confused by. The things that have happened to Sethe (Oprah) are revealed in flashback form, so unfortunately there's not much chance for you as viewer to get involved in them -- it's stuff that's already happened, and you're just being filled in, in shorthand form ("prefab context").
Another major problem: this thing is WAY too long. The movie meanders for another 45 minutes to an hour after what is clearly the climactic scene, and for what??? It just kind of winds down in some very expected ways.
I look at Beloved from an entirely different facet. I didn't read the book either. I see it historically as a commentary on the necessary tragedies the slaves had to endure to prevent or discontinue the abuse of their owners. I envisioned what must have happened to thousands of parents when faced with similar plights, their reactions and regrets, and sorrows following their decisions in either direction. Who was Beloved? the movie answers it clearly. Why was she there? that's for you to determine. Are there Beloveds in all our lives? I think we all need to determine that for ourselves and because of the aspect of my viewing, I have determined that we need to examine our personal environments more carefully and perhaps see our own internal haunting for what it is and know how to stop it.
I commend Oprah for her dogged efforts to produce this project. I understand it took years to get it to the screen. Cudos and I hope it airs again soon. I only wish I could find the DVD.
I commend Oprah for her dogged efforts to produce this project. I understand it took years to get it to the screen. Cudos and I hope it airs again soon. I only wish I could find the DVD.
This was an incredible movie. I viewed it in English class after reading the novel, and it just helped to confirm the strength of the novel. This was a very hard movie to make considering all the elements of the novel that needed to be included, but Demme and the actors did an amazing job portraying these elements. For anyone who has seen the movie and does not understand parts of it, I would highly recommend reading the novel, as it brings out parts of the novel that could not possibly have been portrayed with their full power and meaning in the movie. While viewing the film, I can fully understand how it may be difficult to understand certain sections, as the significance can not be portrayed except through the written word. This is still an amazing movie despite its few minor flaws, and I congratulate Demme for making such a movie from such a book.
- dramachic7838
- May 17, 2005
- Permalink
...How much I hated this film. I realize that with internet reviews, people are usually way too quick to tag a movie as "best I've ever seen " or "worst I've ever seen", without appreciating the sheer weight of the word "ever". But "Beloved" was by far and away, bar none, the absolute worst movie I've even seen. THREE HOURS (that felt like twelve hours) of my life that I'll never get back.
I went into this movie with an open mind, all I knew about it was that it starred Oprah, so it must be a "Chick Flick", but that's all I knew. And I thought she did a good job in "The Color Purple," so I thought how bad could it be? At first I was surprised that the first ten or twenty minutes were actually almost interesting, lots of scary stuff happened. And the acting was very good. But that's it, once they dispensed with that, the movie took a three hour turn for the worst.
Basically, there was no continuity, no ascertainable plot, and a lot of really gross stuff. In my opinion, the producers/directors/Oprah wanted an oscar, and they wanted it bad. So they got out their cauldron and started concocting: Shocking scenes, all-star cast, confusing as hell, Oprah as the lead role for political correctness, eye of newt (okay, no newts were harmed in the filming). The movie tries way too hard to be so meaningful and psychologically intense. Instead, it ended up irritating and annoying me. I got nothing out of this movie.
I give it a ZERO out of ten.
I went into this movie with an open mind, all I knew about it was that it starred Oprah, so it must be a "Chick Flick", but that's all I knew. And I thought she did a good job in "The Color Purple," so I thought how bad could it be? At first I was surprised that the first ten or twenty minutes were actually almost interesting, lots of scary stuff happened. And the acting was very good. But that's it, once they dispensed with that, the movie took a three hour turn for the worst.
Basically, there was no continuity, no ascertainable plot, and a lot of really gross stuff. In my opinion, the producers/directors/Oprah wanted an oscar, and they wanted it bad. So they got out their cauldron and started concocting: Shocking scenes, all-star cast, confusing as hell, Oprah as the lead role for political correctness, eye of newt (okay, no newts were harmed in the filming). The movie tries way too hard to be so meaningful and psychologically intense. Instead, it ended up irritating and annoying me. I got nothing out of this movie.
I give it a ZERO out of ten.
- Marcus_Membrane
- Apr 18, 2001
- Permalink