← Back to Reviews
in
This is a really pretty movie, right at the edge of "visually dazzling", even. If you haven't seen it, it's a period piece set in 1900, about a few girls who vanish during a field trip/picnic. The acting is pretty good, if a little melodramatic, but then
we're talking 1900, when melodrama was the order of the day. The costumes were excellent, as was makeup and hair. (Unusual in 70's films!)
The meaning of the movie is kind of an enditement of the conservatism of the day, which (perhaps) contributes to the hampering of the investigation of these girls' disappearance. Despite being laid out in the poem in the opening scene, that theme is pretty muddled, though. I was ok with that when I thought it was a depiction of an actual event. In that case, I'd think there would be facts they might want to include, even if it was a little unclear how those facts contribute to the story. But you get to the end, and there's the disclaimer that "any resemblance to anything real is a big coincidence" and I start asking "why did I watch this again??"
They're not so much telling a story as laying out a lot of possibilities, none of which are really solidified. I get that it was Victorian times and people were very careful about what they presented to society, but as the unseen watchers, we're really not privy to much, either. For example, there's all this wierd lesbian energy that's hinted at, and sort of expressed, and MIGHT be a motivation in a murder, or else that girl just killed herself, or maybe she killed herself because she was a lesbianand we don't actually know which it is. It's entirely unclear what the story is. I think if it's fiction, then someone ought to decide which it was and tell the story.
It was fun to watch, though.
|
The meaning of the movie is kind of an enditement of the conservatism of the day, which (perhaps) contributes to the hampering of the investigation of these girls' disappearance. Despite being laid out in the poem in the opening scene, that theme is pretty muddled, though. I was ok with that when I thought it was a depiction of an actual event. In that case, I'd think there would be facts they might want to include, even if it was a little unclear how those facts contribute to the story. But you get to the end, and there's the disclaimer that "any resemblance to anything real is a big coincidence" and I start asking "why did I watch this again??"
|
They're not so much telling a story as laying out a lot of possibilities, none of which are really solidified. I get that it was Victorian times and people were very careful about what they presented to society, but as the unseen watchers, we're really not privy to much, either. For example, there's all this wierd lesbian energy that's hinted at, and sort of expressed, and MIGHT be a motivation in a murder, or else that girl just killed herself, or maybe she killed herself because she was a lesbianand we don't actually know which it is. It's entirely unclear what the story is. I think if it's fiction, then someone ought to decide which it was and tell the story.
It was fun to watch, though.