The Beguiled

The Beguiled is a gentler, more sensual and more sophisticated take on Thomas Cullin’s novel than the film made by Don Siegel and Clint Eastwood in 1971. In the original film, the ruin of men was represented by jealous and vengeful women who were incapable of suppressing their lust. Therefore, I understand Sofia Coppola’s decision to rework the same subject matter so that the result would not be a film expressing male paranoia about female hysteria and in which Southern belles are defined solely by their sexuality (or lack thereof). Coppola dispensed with the broader historical context and replaced it with a timeless narrative about the battle of the sexes and girls coming of age. Similarly as in The Virgin Suicides and Marie Antoinette, she confines her female protagonists to a golden cage, which provides them with certain privileges but also prevents them from freely expressing their individual interests. This confinement is manifested also in The Beguiled in the disregard for the outside world, corresponding to the point of view of privileged white girls who are only interested in their own needs. Despite its seeming one-dimensionality and superficiality, The Beguiled is a layered, subversive and humorous film with an ambiguous message. 85% (07/14/2017)

OK, gorgeous pictures, almost tableau vivant, fantastic natural lighting, charismatic cast, but I have to ask: WHY? There is a nice word for that - everything in this film is "underwritten". Characters and a story that moves forward through sharp reversals in the mood of a single male character. I get that Sofia wanted to change the perspective, but she failed. Deceived / Deceived / Deceived are too empty to offer material for subversion. In the end, it was best described by an American spectator who, when leaving the Cannes Palais de Cinema, said: COMPLETELY USELESS. I agree. (05/27/2017)

Sofia Coppola has always relied on emotion rather than historical epic, and this personal story of a woman's motivations and feelings is no different. The running time, the story, and the protagonists, dominated primarily by Nicole Kidman and Kirsten Dunst, are in line with this. Colin Farrell's character has it all together in the middle of the film and then starts making incomprehensible and illogical (screenwriting) mistakes, which, given the leisurely build-up of the story, feels like a punch in the gut. Otherwise, the cinematography is great, as it should be in a historical drama, but one can't help feeling that some of the main characters' interactions feel like Coppola made this film with a nineteenth-century style. (10/01/2017)

I love the acting of both the excellent Nicole Kidman and Colin Farrell, but even the young puppy Elle Fanning has something going for her. I was expecting a more steamy psychological and erotic experience which the last half hour politely encouraged, just a shame they ended it so quickly. It was watchable, but could have been better. 60% (10/01/2017)

Sofia Coppola made a visually captivating film in which there is not much to criticize in terms of styling, costumes and sets, helped by the actors who played their parts well. I especially liked Kirsten, who I thought was beautiful in the background, although she almost seemed dumb, which doesn't feel right for her, but she played it well. However, I’m not the least bit surprised when it comes to Nicole. (10/05/2017)