Anthony Clancy

As the main actors were talking under their breath for four fifths of the time this film deserves only one star. We can read words in a book to understand what is going on, but we must be able to hear words that are spoken when it comes to a film. Unless there are sub titles of course, but I think they were trying to speak English.

When films are based on true stories they should not deviate from facts. Lee Miller had an organised, accredited and guided program enabling her to take photographs. She did not have to bribe or deceive anyone and the film should not make the dishonest impression that she had to fight to do her work, as tough and gut-wrenching as it must have been. Drama for drama's sake is rubbish. A good film but could have been better. Aside from distorting the facts, that pseudo intellectual dialogue between Miller and Penrose at the beginning was painful and absurdly written.

Reviewers have summed it all up very well. I agree about the depth of acting performances, the costuming, photography direction etc. So I may be a bit mean to criticise the choice of someone with duck bill lips to play a role set in the 30s when this was a time before vanity led to so many young women puffing up their lips with botox or whatever they do in the false belief that it is attractive. Gemma Atterton was fine but looked so silly with lips that were so out of place.

Good actors can't make up for poor writing and flawed structure. At times the lines were ridiculous and you couldn't imagine people saying or doing such things. Sorry. I try to support local productions but this one is annoying and cringe worthy.

I agree that Hugh Jackman failed this time. Not as convincing as the talented Vera Farmigia or as life-like as the score of minor yet critical characters. If he gets an Oscar I'll go 'he' for chasey.