writers_reign Not easy to classify, Francois Ozon's Angel just about keeps you watching. At one level it's a 'Rise and Fall of ... saga, on the other it's a bodice-ripper once removed, and on yet a third it's a chocolate box full of soft centres with just one acid drop lurking in the second layer. The protagonist as played by Romola Garai is a one-off, a total eccentric who goes her own way not caring a whit or a jot who she upsets, who laughs at her, who loathes her. Her goal is to be a writer and though we never hear a quotation from one of her novels it is clear that her role model is Barbara Cartland. Against the run of play she lands a publisher whilst still in her teens and never looks back - at least not till she reaches thirty-five at which point she is burnt out. I have still to see what all the fuss is about in the case of Francois Ozon and this entry fails to make it clearer.

kefinka I have to say that after I started to watch this movie I was not sure whether I would be able to finish it. The heroine is so unlikeable to me at first, she is completely detached from the reality. But as I got through the first half-hour, I must say that this is a brilliant movie that touched me to my very core. In a sense it is like 8 femmes - you see only blue skies and you do not realise something is wrong at first but you have this creepy feeling all the time (it cannot go on like that forever, right?). And before you know it, there is a storm so strong that you can barely keep up and the whole perfect world falls apart like the house of cards. I must especially point out the performances by Romola Garai and Michael Fassbender who did an AMAZING job but it would not feel right to leave out all the other supporting actors who made the story complete - Sam Neill and Lucy Russell. This movie reminds me of the Wurthering Heights by Emily Bronte and has everything I seek in a film - bunch of extremely talented people working together with absolute precision, marvelous costume and stages and above all - very deep idea that sticks with you even after the final credits are rolled and makes you think how tricky the life can be... Brava!

i-burgess1 Now I must admit I've not read the book, but I cannot believe that it can be this bad. The dialogue is awful. At the beginning of the film the lead (totally out of her depth) speaks like a 21st century adolescent. What child in Victorian times would have spoken to her mother like she did, stomped off, slammed her bedroom door and not come down to dinner? I was amazed that she didn't switch on her I-Pod. A totally unsympathetic character - gauche is probably a compliment. And the literature she was supposed to be producing? Gothic rubbish (see Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey for a put down of this tripe)? The outcome of the relationship with her husband was totally predictable - oh, how ironic at the end! What a waste of Sam Neill and one of my favourite actresses, Charlotte Rampling. Tyntesfield looked good though - mind you, in these days of 'global warming' we don't get snow in Wraxall anymore.

lurpak Spoiler from start, because its the crux of why this film is so dire. it starts off as a dickensian/bronte type story, which I was quite in the mood for, and it begins much like "Miss Potter" (go and watch instead of this) but instantly you will take a dislike to the main character who seems to be a spoiled brat and very well played by Romola Garai (lets make it clear the acting was good I can't fault the entire cast) who is a young undiscovered writer but prone to flights of fantasy she envisions herself being a world famous writer however nobody thinks she has it in her. her first book gets a publishing letter and her publisher (sam niel) points out the glaring mistakes in her writing because she is young an inexperianced eg. she wrote that champaign would be opened using a corkscrew. however he like her innocent style and sure enough she became the JKRowling of her day. sure enough one by one and without fail all her dreams come true, and in a very childlike way, so you begin to think that the whole film is not really happening, but is one of her flights of fantasy, especially with scenes of London as she coaches by being filmed like a 1950's musical or austin powers parody. you expect the film to come back to reality, that would explain the childish, pathetic storyline...it literally has EVERY Cliché EVER one by one, just like a nursery rhyme princess...but no, this really is the film, how in the name of god someone commisioned this twaddle, how in the name of god SAM NEIL read this script and agreed to put his name to it I will never know. I would be disappointed if this was my 8 year olds school play. please please do not watch this film.