Nora

I bought this DVD, expecting the always fascinating work of Ewan Mcgregor. When I watched it, I was interested in the characters, wanting to know more. By the end of the film I was disappointed in the story line. They were together, then they weren't. He couldn't live with out her and all is happy again. It was two people that were the perfect couple but were absolutely horrible for each other. I did like the fact that it ended with a laugh, though.

This movie can only be understood or appreciated for those familiar with James Joyce's work. The movie is extremely similar to Joyce's lyrical structure. The chapters of his books usually begin abruptly without any explanation. This might explain why the movie seems choppy. The director was obviously trying to mirror Joyce's style. I did not like the movie at first, but after i had read one of his books, I came to understand the movie. However, for cinematic purposes and for the well-being of audiences, the director should have at least explained how Nora affected James more convincingly. I had to look up in the internet on their conflict.

Overall, the movie was good. They could have deleted some the overwhelmingly repetitious scenes (if you have watched it, you will know what i mean). In turn, they should have replaced it with more scenes that discussed the conflicts.

I've read the biography on which this movie is based, and found that the screen adaptation hasn't embellished the true story (unlike most biopics) very much. "Nora" covers the Joyces courtship in Dublin, immigration, and their years in Trieste until 1914 when "Dubliners" was finally published. McGregor may not be perfectly cast - he's heavier, and not much of a tenor - Joyce, on the other hand, was so renowned for his singing that he briefly contemplated making a career out of it. Ewan's very earnest in his attempt, though, he gets an A for effort. Susan Lynch makes a great Nora, no complaints there.

Some of the chronology is played around with - the Prezioso episode happened after James and Nora's last mutual visit to Galway, not before. Two of Joyce's sisters are conflated into one, and the family's stint in Rome is omitted. Some episodes are invented for the sake of exposition, such as the run-in with the cattle in Dublin. Those are minor quibbles. The film got many details right - not the least of which was how elegantly the couple always tried to dress despite their relative lack of funds. Trieste hasn't changed much since early 20th century, so we also get to see some nice location shots - and a few in Dublin.

I was a bit disappointed that the film ended at an early cutoff point, after James and Nora's first decade together. Ideally, it should have been a miniseries a la "John Adams", and covered their fame in Paris, Nora and the kids caught in a Civil War crossfire during their last trip to Ireland, Joyce's eye troubles, Lucia's illness, etc. As is, it shows only the beginning of an almost 40-year relationship.

How one views this film will depend in part on how much of a Joyce devotee the viewer is. As is the case with any film based on the life of a larger-than-life figure, the film will be largely viewed by those who have an avid interest in James Joyce. These viewers will judge the film with a much more discerning eye. The fact that Joyce's work does not have mass appeal and is devoured by a small but fervent group of literary intellectuals makes the scrutiny that much more intense. For this audience, the film will have numerous unbearable flaws and inaccuracies.

However, for the audience of non aficionados, this film has a great deal to recommend itself, providing that the viewer loves good drama and has the patience to endure its methodical pacing. The story is a powerful love story with shearing forces that bring emotional torrent to the relationship. In it we find the high minded writer, James Joyce, obsessed with Nora, the coarse and illiterate chamber maid whose practical wisdom and unfettered sexuality provide the ideal compliment and the perfect wedge. These two are helpless moths being consumed by a bonfire of ardor built on differences that are as irreconcilable as they are essential to each of their souls. Given this premise, we have the underpinnings of great theater.

Despite the disappointment of many Joyce fans regarding this treatment, the film is really not about James Joyce, it is about the relationship. Thankfully, director Pat Murphy didn't lose sight of that fact and succumb to the temptation to mollify Joyce fans by making this a Joyce-centric film. Murphy patiently peels away the layers of each character and casts each revelation on the relationship like kerosene on a house fire. The deeper we get into the characters, the more complex and hopeless the relationship becomes, and paradoxically, the more inextricably entwined its participants.

Murphy's direction is excellent on all fronts. The cinematography is incredible with awe inspiring locations and a wonderfully rich sepia quality that enhances the period renderings. The look and feel the period is well done. The early 20th century costumes, furniture, sets and props are precise and breathe life and realism into each scene.

The acting is superb. Ewan McGregor practically rips himself to shreds playing the mercurial Joyce, jovial and charming one minute, paranoid, brooding and insanely jealous the next. However, poor Ewan once again has a terrific performance upstaged by his co-star Susan Lynch (See Nicole Kidman and "Moulin Rouge!").

Despite lacking the classic features of a leading lady, Lynch's physiognomy is a perfect match for the earthy Nora. Lynch can flat out act. This lady has a five octave emotional range with the force of Caribbean hurricane. If there weren't a single other reason to see this film, her performance would be enough.

I am glad that I happened on to this film buried in the stacks at the video store. I rated it a 9/10. It isn't for everyone, but for those who can appreciate a fatalistic love story with steamy sexual content, constant emotional tension, great acting and insightful directing; this will be a disturbing, but worthwhile experience.

It will not be difficult to find large numbers of enthusiasts in the literature departments of your local university who will state under oath that James Joyce was one of the greatest creative geniuses in human history. Something about his biography can for instance be found in the books by Richard Ellman or Fritz Senn, two Joyce specialists who devoted their lives to the study of his work. His work is not dull, as some commentators here were suspecting, but it's also not a collection of one-liners. Actually, it's hard to find more challenging mind-bogglers that are also considered literary classics than some of Joyce's work. I must say that for those who hoped to learn something about 'James', 'Nora' has as much to offer as 'Bilitis' about Einstein. If you forget about the names of the protagonists in this film, it goes through as a somewhat entertaining writer-lover romance. But to honestly attribute Joyce's name to this semi-sofporn is quite off the mark. And as to the question on my title line, the answer is: I honestly don't know.