The Proposition

Kenneth Branagh, as expected, performed very well. What was difficult to absorb as "possible" were the Catholic religious elements depicted. They were wrong and inaccurate. For example, the Mass vestments were not correct. The conversations and characterizations of the pastor and the young priest, for that period of time (Boston in the late 30s, early 40s) were off key, to say the least. The plot was interesting, but the film was too long, and there was too much "symbolism", and the "next move" was always predictable. With such a fine cast, and a great story, the producers and the directors should have taken time to be more accurate and correct about details. Another example of the lack of care was the scene where the young priest is seen administering "Anointing of the Sick" [formerly called "Extreme Unction"] to a corpse about to be buried. This never happens and is actually forbidden in the RC Church. Dead people cannot receive "sacraments." Attention must be paid. Details, details, details. The truth is in the details. However, I did enjoy it. I think most people would find this film interesting and entertaining.

This movie is visually stunning and very well acted by the WHOLE cast. I think it is better seen at home where you can go back and watch portions over again, because in some scenes you must hear every word and pay attention to body language and expression quite closely or the plot can easily lose you. Bad acting or directing would have made this movie impossible to understand, because the writing is extremely subtle. I think the directing and acting is amazing because of what it conveys without language. (Some of the negative reviews were written by people who did not pay attention to key things are explained in few or no words, once, and once only, or to things that were shown only through non-verbal language. You must look and listen the whole time.) It does have the tragic-amazingly-coincidental stuff going on, but so what? It is entertainment, for goodness sakes, not a documentary! Apparently someone who was involved in making it is embarrassed, because it is impossible to get it on DVD in American format, which is a real shame. I love this movie, and am very sad not to be able to watch it since my VHS player broke. It always absorbs me and lets me forget about my own life for a few hours. I like to watch it once or twice a year, and enjoy sharing it with friends who have not seen it. It has been enjoyed by many people I know, but some did say that my pointing out key scenes was necessary for them to follow the plot. A few friends really did not like it, but none of those particular friends like tragic drama in general. I will continue to look for it on DVD every several months, and I will be looking to fix or replace my VHS player just so I can watch this and one other movie that I also love and can't get on DVD.

Fortunately for me, I stumbled on this film with absolutely no expectations--didn't even know the title until I looked it up on the IMDb! But it kept me watching, fascinated, for two hours (including commercials), and at the end I felt like I wanted to spend more time with it. It has romance, elegant atmosphere, a surprising plot, intriguing themes, and good actors...so, while the pacing and direction sometimes seem a touch stilted, I'd definitely watch it again.

I'm a bit baffled that everyone who finds fault with this film picks on the story. For me, the story was the strong point: it had some truly surprising twists and grew from the complexities and relationships of a range of fully drawn characters--a luxury most films, with their flat cardboard characters, don't offer. And the references to Virginia Woolf, also singled out for criticism by many viewers, actually served to enrich and illuminate the ways the film dealt with the tragic inability of a woman to escape the double standard. In the world of the film, where even a seemingly perfect husband could with no warning transform into a tyrant, even a woman who thought she had it all could be trapped by a paucity of choices.

That makes it sound like a preachy feminist movie, which it isn't. In fact, those who enjoy good old-fashioned murder mysteries will get a kick out of it. Perfect it isn't, but I can think of far worse ways to spend a lazy evening.

As another reviewer said--either you love it or you hate it. I loved it. A well acted movie--somewhat far fetched in the storyline. Very intense deep story and you really get caught up in it. I do not think a lot of the comments from other reviewers really see the value of the movie, or look at it from all of the character's points or motives. William Hurt as Barret is totally selfless in his quest for a family and Madeline Stowe as his wife is also very convincing. The big surprise comes from Blythe Danner, although I really cannot figure out exactly what her role was--is she secretly in love with Hurt? Hard to say. But the acting is fine and Kenneth Branaugh does a terrific and convincing job. He is a good actor and this role suits him splendidly. I do recommend this movie.

Great actors, good story - what went wrong? Kenneth Brannagh as a priest was an inspired choice of casting (If only all my priests were that ruggedly handsome & masculine, I would never miss confession!). William Hurt's presence, however, always seems to blur the edges of the characters he portrays. I never know where the character starts and the typical William Hurt begins (he did a great job though, I was almost convinced). Madeline Stowe is both brilliant and radiant as Eleanor (a pleasant surprise from her typically subdued ingénue roles!). Blythe Danner is a gem (as usual) even though she is horribly miscast, this lady is really foxy - far from the matronly and bitter spinster she plays. Neil Patrick Harris is always a treat (it's hard to forget him as "Doogie", he could play a cab driver and still be endearing and sweet).

It's amazing how art reflects life. The movie deals with death and I couldn't help grieving because this could have been such a great film. The story had (at the risk of being corny) all the timeless symbolism and core themes of love and life. I was excitedly anticipating to see how these themes (such as that of human creation, as dealt with through the issue of "baby-making", or the relationship between religion and gender etc. etc.) were fully explored. Stowe and Brannagh make a tantalizing pair. They remind me of some sort of "fully ripe" Adam and Eve! (their love scene could have been sooo much better).

Like I said, I kept wondering "What went wrong?" : The actors were exemplary (probably to overcompensate for the movie's weaknesses). The story itself was quite good but the plot line was seriously flawed. The cinematography was exquisite, but the scenes were poorly set up (there's one where saucy family secrets are revealed - where else? but in a soup kitchen!). I don't know much about the art of movie-making (movie-watching, maybe) but I think even a seasoned film professional will watch this movie with tears after seeing such a great cast and good concept go to waste. (Like I said, the movie is sad, unfortunately because of reasons other than it intended).

I propose that this movie be redone and soon! (With Brannagh, Stowe and everyone in it, except Hurt and Danner)- yeah right!

The other option is for it to remain as a prime example of when great acting meets a good movie idea, but the sparks just don't fly.

Watch it for the actors, and weep for the film.