ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

v_bugani First of all, my respects to all the people involved in this short filmed movie and especially to Nicole Conn for her brilliant idea. Never have I seen a story expressed through a standalone picture, so well. The narration was almost dreamy, the poems used were ecstatic especially Dowson's tormented poem for his only lost love...Cynara. The photography was beautiful and I have the feeling that being a bit blurred was the fault that made it so beautiful. A perfect one would be so unrealistic... I mean we don't watch Star Wars here, but a confounded love story. The costumes and the set were a delightful thing to watch addressing the Victorian era perfectly (one cannot argue if have read Jane Austin, Sarah Waters, or watched BBC adaptations of this era). The cinematography was intoxicating…. from where to start and where to finish. The story is as simple as you could ever imagine being. Two women meet in an ocean inn and start to share each other company… a sculptress and a writer. Both seem to be unsatisfied with their life. Cynara( the sculptress) is isolated in this place many years feeling lonely and bored and one might guess why her family sent her away( is it because of her homosexuality that her aunt knew? And was not something to talk about openly at that time). The writer was a tormented soul that was seeking peace within her (that's why she left Paris). These two characters instantly hooked. We see them enjoying playing chess, talking, walking, horseback riding in the beach. It must be noted that the horseback riding added so much value in this movie. Actually all the romance and flirting was expressed through these scenes. The fantasies that each woman had were fantastically shot. The two actresses portrayed wonderfully through their body and face expressions the transition from friendship to desire. The chemistry was so powerful and strong that one could characterize it as volcano explosions. The love making scene was utterly intoxicating and surely to say the best love scene ever filmed between two women. This short filmed movie can move free spirit minds and can even shake the quake and wake the life of conventional ones. Even if I am straight up to now because you never know in this life, I say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with love, passion and desire between women. By all means this movie is not soft porn as many claim to be…. And to be honest I enjoyed more the first 30 minutes than the love making scene. It's a pure drama romance that deserves to be watched especially from people who live for the moment. The rating is very unfair and unjust. Hopefully this movie will not apply to a specific audience as it is design to be. Personally I would love to see such projects coming out.

Robert J. Maxwell It's a little hard to imagine some ordinary straight guy sitting before the TV screen, can of beer in one hand, trying to make any sense out of this unusual movie that can be transduced into something resembling appreciation.Nope. It's a movie made by women for women. The guy with the beer is going to sit there and suffer through the soft seaside breezes of Baycliffe, the glow of candle flames, the sensuous molding of a writhing and naked body, the absent dialog that has been replaced by poetry good and mediocre, the growing affection between two women (one of whom dresses like George Sand and even looks a little like her), the lush romantic music, the stunning but fuzzy photography, the slow motion shot of the two women riding horses along the beach -- and he's thinking, "What about the DILDOS?" And, "When do we bring in the STABLE BOY?" No such luck, dude. Two women in 1888 fall in love, spend a an ecstatic night or two together, and one leaves sadly.There's nothing vulgar about it. It doesn't approach the banal debasement of the human figure that you can watch on a hard-core DVD, all glossy glabrous surfaces and globular dugs. It's about lesbian love, of which sex is merely a part. I know this because, though I'm a straight male, I had sat through the Human Sexuality Training Program at Berkeley. I have seen elephants at work, never mind lesbians. The world today is filled with hysteria and tumult and, trust me, I'd take tribadism over tribalism any day.It's not my kind of movie, but I give the production team extra points for (1) trying something that will appeal to such a limited audience, and (2) apparently having so much fun while making the movie. The credits and acknowledgments at the end are almost as long as the rest of the film. As at the end of "Citizen Kane" we get to see the team joking around while at work. Only one man appears, an "honorary lesbian." It takes a certain amount of courage to put out a movie like this. How many movies can you think of that have no substantial story and no dialog? Not counting Andy Warhol? And it has its felicities. If you thought the chess match between Faye Dunaway and Steve McQueen in "The Thomas Crown Affair" was hot, you ought to see these pale and delicate fingertips pick up an over-sized horse's head from the board. Speaking of horses, why do all women love horses so much? Once, wondering whether any research beyond Freudian fantasies had gone on, I Googled "women and horses" and wound up at this bizarre web site in Brazil which, while entertaining in its own way, explained nothing.I didn't care for the poetry too much either. Didn't mind Byron. Always like Byron. And the rest might have looked better in print. It was all new to me and when I hear something like, "Yea, verily, I have been faithful to thee -- in my fashion," I don't think of liquid love. I think of Cole Porter or Danny Kaye.Anyway, applause for the team for having the chutzpah and the energy to turn out something that was almost certain to be a commercial catastrophe. Tribadism Forever!

charcoalRed Criticism first: I did not know what to expect as I was given the DVD, so I was a bit run over, foremost by the fact that it was only 40 mins long. Being a photographer/writer myself I am maybe even too critical. The idea was/is brilliant and timeless, BUT: it would have deserved a better quality (meaning the film material), much better editing (a lot is lost with sudden cuts, music bisected etc), better tuning of voices & soundtrack so the 2 do not destroy one another. I was pretty irritated by the soundtrack at first because it was simply too loud over the voice-overs. The Praise: as said above, the idea is fantastic. The poetry used is delicious, and even Conn's own is very good, seamlessly interspersed with Byron and Dowson: A-plus. The costumes were beautiful, a lot of variety in so short a feature, detailed perfectly down to the jewellery of the period. Have a look at all the jackets/cravats on Hellman and the dresses on Nemeth. The cast! I have never before seen 2 such beautiful women paired in a film. On the one hand we have Nemeth's utterly feminine beauty, full curves, delicate face, all so befitting for the role she plays. On the other, we have Hellman's sculpted, lean, muscular perfection, crowned by her face. Unfairly to Nemeth, someone so stunning she would put Greek Gods to shame. Together, a perfect pairing for the girly heroine and the Byronic hero. Dreamy. Chemistry enough.The scenes: Conn obviously wanted to fulfill as many fantasies as she could get into under 40 mins. Again, the idea with the clay and the whole b&w vision is brilliant, as is the quoting of the poetry. Horseriding on a beach, already great: seeing Hellman ride, greater! (She could ride; kudos to Nemeth's horse, because she couldn't - mine would have trampled her) Seeing both together barebacked on one horse, what more could anyone ask (Isn't that also a male fantasy?). The chess scenes, fountain etc are also nice; another great scene is the "dream" scene on the revolving stand (ahem: it would have been so much better if that one had rotated smoothly and if it had been cut so one does NOT see what it is) Again, undoing of tight stays & corset is about as Victorian fantasy fulfilled as there is. Another thumbs up. I would have found it more romantic/realistic if they had actually undressed each other instead of a cut from fully clothed to shedding a morning robe fully naked. Hm. The love scene was especially in the beginning more sweet than arousing, I found the choreography a bit off. Too artistic there, maybe. Due to the fact that they later inter-cut several different scenes and patched like a quilt, it lacks a bit of flow, continuity. Some awesome material there, though. Brownie points for being looong. However one would think that, having some very explicit scenes where it does not feature, they could have done without the blanket between them in the tamer ones. Soundtrack: takes some getting used to, but if you give it a chance you will discover it was, like the rest of the film, lovingly written and performed, with a very good tune. The poetry: Conn obviously is a fan of Byron, choosing some of his most famous poems, She Walks In Beauty, The First Kiss of Love, and Maid of Athens. Dowson's more tormented Sub Regno Cynarae to complement this works beautifully. Conn's own Naked Heart manages to capture the sentiment of the period nicely (made me think of anatomical lessons in whitewashed medical theatres, hm)I didn't want to descend to pure fandom, but I thought what MAKES this film literally is Melissa Hellman. She manages to carry off cross dressing as something enhancing beauty, not awkwardness. If I am not mistaken it is her voice we hear re-awakening lines from Byron and Dowson, making them shine again. It is her whom we see as the B&W (almost stills) vision of Cynara while she sculpts. The riding I already mentioned. Simply a breathtaking presence on screen. Finally, this would have deserved to be a full feature film with more dialogue and a bit more plot. As a love token to someone as Conn intended it I guess, it is perfect (what did you get on your last b-day??) For being done in 1996 it was a milestone and there is still nothing that could compare. Before you see this, take the time to have a romantic candle-light dinner with someone special first, read up on Byron, on the 19th century, buy some roses and get into the mood. Watch it twice so you get over the flaws you'll notice the first time. A thing of beauty is a joy forever. I wish they'd do a sequel, preferably with the same cast if still available.

mbritian Way to pretentious,not enough story to care about the characters.The pace was very slow and actually not much really happens in this film. Scenes are frequently reused also After about 10 minutes going into this film I knew this was going to be dull.Image seems to more important than substance. One also have to wonder why the movie is set in the 19th century, because the overall affect and camera work would not lead you to think so. You really don't get that feel in this movie Also the love scene was unnecessary long and explicit. It was like watching a pretentious soft core skinamax film. If I had to choose between revealing sex and good characterization I would choose character and plot, which this film was lacking in both character and plot. Very Borrrrinnng.