MovieChat Forums > Kristin Lavransdatter (1995) Discussion > Regarding the bad review someone gave th...

Regarding the bad review someone gave this movie

posted 20 years ago by ladyscarlet18705
13 replies | jump to latest

I found this movie while I was researching a play about Norway.

I think this movie is excellent. The visual imagery is way up there in my book. There were layers and textures to this movie that made it compelling to watch.

There is such beauty in this film which tells about family relationships and life itself.

It is also filled with such wonderful lyrical notions as:

love creates no laws
it breaks them all

The actors did an incredible job and the actress who played the title role is a real beauty. There was such an incredible passion felt with impending love scenes between the two lovers and the actors emotions are something to behold in a world that has become so blase and numb from all the negative energy being passed around.

I think Liv Ullman did incredible directing and should have been highly rewarded for bringing this story to the screen.

A movie is meant to bring up ideas that are worthy of discussion. This film has plenty of stuff within it to generate many such discussions to clarify the notion of love.

[–] E_D_N 19 years ago

I absolutely agree with your assessment, ladyscarlet18705 and can't for the life of me fathom the low score that this film has garnered.

LIV ULMANN has done a marvelous job adapting the novel to the screen. The script is sensational, melding Middle-Age pagan beliefs with an awareness of supernatural powers lording over men's lives, an awareness of

The actors, esp. ELIZABETH MATHESON in the title role bring an honesty and such trasparency in their performances -- the emotions are raw and heartfelt.

SVEN NYKVIST's cinematography is superlative in every sense of the term and it succeeds in making alive even the most inanimate of objects, thus showing us that there may be life in all things. The movie almost seems like a WATERHOUSE painting come alive. It's the height of romanticism for a love story as grand and poignant as the mythical tale of the knight TRISTAN and the maiden ISEULT (ISOLDE).

The most important, of course, is how ULMANN and the screenwriter were able to show that each action in time will have its repercussions in the future. Each of these characters are bound by fate, by the will of unseen deities, and to a greater degree -- by their own free will, live down the consequences of their choices in life and here, most of these said choices revolve around emotional attachments to a beloved, attachments that may erode in time. Thus, the core of the relationship between two people is examined, and the betrayals and regrets that come once love is gone and a new one has come to take its place are shown to be part of the cycle, the cycle that is love -- a force as synonymous with birth, healing, and life as it is with destruction.

[–] Hattrem-4 18 years ago

I believe the inflated number of "1"s are protest votes from disgruntled school kids who had to watch the movie and didn't like the running time.

[–] Renaldo Matlin 18 years ago

Heh.. gotta laugh at the last comment... In Norway, "Kristin Lavransdatter" was the typical movie your teacher would drag you to see and if you're maybe 13, a 3 hour epic based on a Sigrid Undset-novel seemed more like a sleeping pill than anything else.

Personally (now an adult) I find the movie very beautiful to look at, but some of the acting is a bit theatrical (and Matheson was not the best choice for the lead, the fact that she has barely been since ever since should be a pointer to this). But I guess this movie might seem even better if you're not Norwegian. When you can't understand the language the acting will seem less theatrical, add on top of this the entire story and locations will seem more exotic. In my opinion, Sven Nykvist's cinematography is what really makes this movie (and I guess to some extent Liv Ullmann's direction, from the Ingmar Bergman school of directing).

[–] jedibt 18 years ago

Are you insane? This is one of the worst movies ever made.

All important events in this movie can be summed up in five seconds, and thats WITHOUT leaving any of the drama or tension out. The rest of the film the actors are just staring blankly into the air, capturing the "dramatic" moment (Read: Boring as hell and no plotdevelopment).

[–] kallizmartin 17 years ago

I think you and I are in complete agreement, jedibt. This movie is horrible and not worthy of recognition.

[–] orjantveita 17 years ago

Worst movie ever made!!

"Oh im sorry, did i break your concentration"

[–] Blueghost 17 years ago

jedibt; it's a good film. It's not plot driven. It's character driven, which is why you're not understanding nor enjoying it.

Go back and watch Star Wars again, because apparently that's the only thing you understand.

[–] saerin 17 years ago

I didn't like this film. I found it incredibly dull. And before anyone gives me any "oh well watch an action movie then, stupid lazy person", I *loved* the book. It's one of my favourites.

Yes the film *is* character driven. And in the film, I didn't like any of the characters. I didn't feel like any one of the main characters was tranmitted successfully from the page to the screen. I said as much in my review, also.

Life *is* pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.

[–] dirringblob 16 years ago

As with many great movies that move outside the conventional narrative style, this will put some of, and they might find it boring. I find this movie to be one of the best norwegian films I have ever seen. Sometimes it has this Bergmaneque feel that almost cant be avoided when Sven Nykvist has filmed the whole film. Many complain about the main actress playing Kristin, because it doesnt fit with their vision of how she should be like, but I think the actress does a very good job. She is pretty good. Liv Ullman shows that she is a firm and good director.

[–] Blueghost 15 years ago

Yeah, but your screen name isn't "jedi bt".

This film is long, slow, ponderous, a little over wrought in some areas, and visually skewed in others. But it's an interesting look at a period film from a foreign land. That is to say it isn't a Hollywood film where the Norwegian characters all speak English, and there's a fight every few scenes.

I certainly wouldn't call this a highly commercial film, and it's got a few pacing and flavor flaws, but it's not as horrible as people are making it out to be.

I think what really torpedos this film for a lot of viewers is the fact that it's mostly a female perspective. I'll also admit that the film seems a bit miscast.

A few tweaks here and there, and this could have been a highly commercial film. As it is now, it's just a nice diversion.

[–] marudd50 8 years ago

Films have to be from a male perspective? Oh dear. And maybe if Kristin could have worn a thong.....

Beauty is truth, truth beauty.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] marudd50 8 years ago

The low rating and negative comments are yet another indication of what a stupid country this is. We didn't need Donald Trump to prove that, but he has certainly put the icing on the cake. This is a lovely film. When it debuted in Norway, virtually the entire country turned out to see it. But it does require imagination and appreciation of history and beauty and a willingness to forego car crashes and big-titted blondes with chainsaws, so I see why some Americans would find it challenging.
Beauty is truth, truth beauty.