I agree, very underwhelmed. Carey Mulligan was great, I thought, and Alfred Molina stole all his scenes from his cast mates, but the movie is just too darn safe, too predictable, too rushed. It’s the kind of sweet, innocuous film I could see many older people just falling for, but for me I prefer some bite to my movies, some real dramatic intrigue. This was a typical coming-of-age story that is pretty much what you see is what you get. A solid 95 minutes, but I certainly wouldn’t say it’s anywhere near approaching greatness.
Very underwhelmed. Carey is indeed something special to behold, but it all just felt a little rushed. I couldn’t believe they just chose to show that extra year fly by in a montage. Jenny throws her book in frustration, and a year has gone by. Ticked me off. Actually, I felt the whole movie takes the easy way out in general. However, because it’s such a weak year, Carey will indeed get nominated. Good for her.
Sounds like you wanted it to be about ‘A’ but instead it was about ‘B’.
Why blame the movie for that?
Your expectations might have been too high.
I try to go into every movie with low expectations. [Even the classics].
Obviously, this one is hard to do that with because the critics love it. It’s got a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes.
I could not disagree more with what’s being said here. I thought An Education was smart, provocative, funny, honest, painful, subtle, and witty. It was a gorgeous film to look at and it had some of the best performances I’ve seen in years. Carey Mulligan was luminous. She goes from being a child to a woman, to back to being a child with amazing ease. I was devasted when she breaks up with David and she’s crying her makeup off and we see she’s just a little girl in too much makeup—it was simply brilliant. An entire movie summed up in one exquisite shot. Everyone gave thoughtful, letter-perfect performances. I loved every moment of this film. I’ve already put it on my list of DVDs to buy when it comes out.
The mystery of the going ons in Jenny and David’s relationship build drama, I believe. Would I like to know more of what they did, of course, but one can’t always know everything, only then do you think about their situation more. Is the film predictable? Of course, most films are, it is a coming-of-age film, and those can only end in one way.
“The character of Jenny meets David once and suddenly decides to go on a date with him.”
Umm, this is how a lot of dates work. You meet someone, you find them interesting, you decide to go out. I don’t know what world you live in where you meet someone more than once then ask them out, but where I’m from, you only get one shot at running into someone you want to do the hibbidy-dibbidy with. Also, I do not remember a single jump cut, so I feel it’s safe to say that you’re confusing what a jump cut actually it.
The film was funny, endearing and very entertaining. Do I think it’s a 90 like it’s currently getting on RT? Not at all, but it’s still an enjoyable film that you were expecting way too much out of. Had the film been any longer, I’d have grown bored.
It’s not just that it’s predictable and derivative, but for me it just fails to uphold any sort of substantial interest. All the little emotional moments where we’re supposed to feel pity, sadness, pain, happiness, etc. just don’t register, and I’m afraid to say, play sadly forgettable. I might remember Mulligan’s performance but the rest had absolutely no lasting impact on me.
I think you have to take the film on its own merits and whilst not exactly frothy, is a lightweight, rather moral, character piece. Although I agree the emotional register is limited and all I can really recall a few weeks after seeing the film later is the visual evocation of an era and not for any great insight into character motivation.
It reminded me a little of the kind of ‘B’ films being made in Britain in the 1950s into the 60s where suburban pubescents (usually girls) were lured by the bright lights, big city of London (often Soho, though not here), falling momentarily off the tracks only to firmly directed back to suburbia an enriched person for the experience. Neat and mildly diverting.
It’s a small film with small ambitions, but none the poorer for it.
It’s not the complexity of the story that makes this film good, it’s how well such a simple story can be told. Kudos to Lone for achieving what few storytellers are able to achieve.
Clint
This has been getting a lot of Oscar buzz and good reviews. But frankly, I thought this downright sucked.
First of all, it is way too short. The character of Jenny meets David once and suddenly decides to go on a date with him. Scenes fly by, and their are so many jump cuts it starts to make your head spin. Her parents, who have pushed and sheltered their daughter all her life, suddenly decide to let her date an older man (that they know absolutely nothing about) because he is charming and nice?
I also wished it had shown more of David’s world that she was so drawn into. We hear her talk constantly about “reading interesting books and seeing interesting films”, but that is never materialized. We see them at a nightclub and a horse race and that’s about it. The character of Helen is an absolute grotesque caricature, and shows the glaring lack of confidence on the writer’s part in his decision to include such a broadly drawn plot element to drive his point home.
I’m just mad because it has such potential. It could have been a dark and mature exploration of the pre-swinging 60’s era in London. But instead it chickens out, and becomes a Feel Good Story of Young Girl Getting Her Life Back On Track. In the end she gets everything she wants and emerges totally happy (despite having her virginity taken away and having to spend an extra year studying before University), cue end credit song by MTV superstar Duffy!