This is not a good film. The themes it covers are explored in depth and well in the Cronin biography. Read that book instead.
This is not a good film because it squanders its talent, though they are all able, but the shrewish depiction of Suzanne is unfair and is a simplistic device for Beckett to seek affection elsewhere.
It is not good because the locations are obviously neither shot in Paris nor in France.. The latter may seem a quibble but the scenes of the war time in Roussillon are critical to rendering Beckett's life with Suzanne and to his development as a writer.
It is not a good film because it uses reductionism to render a stereotype of man in his relationships with women, that is not historically accurate and glosses over essential facts that would provide context: thus, the time of the Bray affair Beckett and Suzanne had lived separate lives, loyal, yes, but more as lodgers in the same apartment. The time spent on the unfortunate Lucia is wasted as it has no import but to display the relationship with Joyce, and if it was seen as important, it might have shown Beckett visit Lucia in the asylum as he did.
Where it has promise is in the duologue between the Becketts, which allow for a dramatic exposition of his inner life. Or some variant of it; ready for a streaming platform and easy consumption. These scenes were quite effective but not enough to save the overall feeling of superficial understanding and cliche: Beckett quoting an American review of Godot is ridiculous.
