Laara H – Google

There was something rather stilted in Dern's acting.. always hesitancy, no flow of energy. As a character she was always uncomfortable, selfish, needy, and if Owen thought she had a glow when she was writing, he's the only one who saw it. His part was well-written for a modern man... they don't know who they are half the time and do not articulate their feelings well or at all. Also I kept thinking, why couldn't he find a scooter or a driver really quickly to follow the thief? no one but another writer could EVER appreciate what this meant to Catherine -- the devastation of it, the profound loss. "I'm sorry about your book" doesn't do it. This film depicted how truly imperfect we all are, that's for sure. The sex scene against the wall was disappointing. If they were truly developing an affection for each other it would not have culminated in his thrusting into her while her head hit the wall. All wrong....

There is NO WAY you cannot love this series -- the costuming is magnificent, the characters are so sweet and lovable in their suffering and in their joy -- and the ending HAS to make you cry or you are dead already. Especially young George, the King of England, is beautiful and his young Queen, Charlotte, are SO GOOD together, once they get past the lies and obstacles, and Lady Danbury is a sweetheart too -- OH that beastly husband of hers -- excellent that he died half way through. This was REALLY well done in all respects and even the two "men in waiting" on the king and queen were sweet and well presented. Thanks Shonda -- you DO have SUCH a way of writing, and these actors are the BEST. Loved it so much -- it made me feel love inside of me, and that is wonderful!

Once again, a story that hops from time and place, is not well written, and fails to hold my attention from chapter to chapter has received major awards for -- what? I have no idea. The writing is not very good. The characters are not well developed. Because it jumps from before the war to the end of the war and then back into the middle of it -- I don't know why. This is NOT effective and after 200 pages (I WANTED to like it, to find value in it, to get hooked by it) I finally admitted the truth to myself == this is not a good read! I'm not wasting any more time. I don't care about these children or what happened to them because it reads like fiction, with the war watered-down somehow and not even realistic in its setting. I can't think of anything I like about this book and regret giving it the few hours I gave it.

Well, I was glad to read the negative reviews because I was bored and could not appreciate any of the characters or their situations. I DID understand that this was about hate, people who hate, and even if that hate was mostly in the past, it came out in the dialogue and in their actions. Whatever "lovemaking" there was indicated that there was no real love. How can you make love when you are full of hate? So that's all I got out of it -- that there are people who live very lonely lives, are in conflict with each other (even as they have sex) because there is no love -- they just don't have any. The three main characters had no love in their lives. They were all pretty miserable people. And the film was a bore. Who gives this type of film a good review? Roger Ebert's site. I'm losing respect for it. Roger used to do right-on reviews. I don't know who these writers are that can praise a film like this.