~MONA LISA SMILE~

[Mike]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JMGC.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Genre: DRAMA

Plot:

1953 America was a time ripe for change for women and when Katherine Ann Willis (Julia Roberts) arrives to teach Art History at Wellesley College, she finds the institution drowning in outdated mores. While the nation struggles with the fears that accompany a shifting political culture, the powers that be at Wellesley seem to want to re-corset the women who had been the backbone of the World War II workforce just a few years earlier. A passionate educator, Katherine takes on the establishment and in doing so, deeply affects her students who in turn lead her to alter the course of her life forever.

Release Date: December 19th, 2003 (wide).

MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sexual content and thematic issues.

Runtime: 2 hrs. 05 min.

Distributor: Columbia Tristar


Starring: Julia Roberts, Julia Stiles, Kirsten Dunst, Juliet Stevenson, Maggie Gyllenhaal

Directed by: Mike Newell

Produced by: Elaine Goldsmith, Elaine Goldsmith-Thomas, Paul Schiff, Deborah Schindler

[BorderEevilIII]

Even though I get a FEMALE take of Dead Poets Society/Emperor's Club vibe.......
Kirsten, Julia and maybe that OTHER Julia ;)
too would be the main reasons why I would like to see the movie. I just saw Julia Stiles on TV making the rounds promoting the movie soooooo I am down for this movie.

[Damned Martian]

The movie looks so boring, lame, uninteresting, lame, cliched, lame, derivative, lame, manipulative, lame, manufactured and lame from the trailers, that i haven't got the slightest intention of seeing it. I'm more or less in the same point than The Last Samurai here.


BTW, the bad reviews so far don't help to get my attention either.

[Moviefan1234]

I'm sure it's predictable, but I also feel it'll be a good and heartwarming tale. I'm in the mood for a feel good flick and this may be just the one for me to watch. Plus, it has an awsome cast.

[Scarface98.9]

I can't stand the two Julias, and they're enough to repell me from the movie anyways. But add to the fact that it looks boring, manufactured, and lacking any social revelance a movie like this usually tries to have, and you got a movie I wouldn't pay money to see

[Strider]

Does "Mona Lisa Smile" look boring? Yes! Does "Mona Lisa Smile" look cliched and derivative? Yes! Does "Mona Lisa Smile" stupid, predictable, and manipulative? Yes! And does "Mona Lisa Smile" look like one pile of worthless shit that is better-suited for the Lifetime channel? Hell yeah!

Will I see this film? Over my dead body!

I pray that ROTK gives this film the box-office beating of the century..... :cool:

[thompsoncory]

This doesn't look entirely interesting, but since I love all four of the lead actresses (especially Dunst and Stiles), I'll see it.

[blankpage]

It certainly doen't look great, but the cast is just that, great. I'll check it out. Hopefully, getting the most out of it.

[Lynn Minmei]

Any Oscar chances this had seem to be ruined, as it's just a Dead Poet's Society retread.

[Fisting Ackbar]

I like Kirsten Dunst and Julia Stiles, but this isn't my kind of movie at all, and with ROTK coming out in the same week, I know which film is getting my http://members.lycos.nl/anonymousjohn/emot-10bux.gif

[Mike]

When I saw the trailer in theaters this last summer, I thought it looked alright, but so damn girly. However, the TV spots have been getting me more and more interested, and I now think it looks really good. Of course, I don't think I'd care as much if it had a crappy cast, but with Julia, Kirsten, Julia, and Maggie, I can't resist. Maggie looks cute as hell in this too. Looking at her now, I can't believe how much she's changed, because I used to think she was ugly. My cousin thinks she's ugly though. I told her that I used to think Maggie looked like her brother in a wig, and she says that's how she feels about her now. Maybe eventually, Maggie will grow on her too.

Obviously, it will be cliche, and there's no denying it's a chick flick, even if the term is somewhat of an insult, but I still really want to see it. I didn't care that much until the TV spots started coming on. Now it looks like one I'd like to check out. Yet I'd feel really stupid purchasing tickets to this movie. It would probably be best for me to go with a female friend of mine, and then give her the money and have her purchase the tickets, so then it looks like I'm being dragged to it. That's a great idea, and I think it's what I will do.

So, yeah, I'm interested in seeing this. December is an awful month for movies this year anyway, with the only real good wide releasing that look like they'd be worth seeing in theaters being Something's Gotta Give and this.

[Benny]

Frankly I could care less. My mom is a Wellesley alum, and studied art history there, so she is interested in this. But I'm not a huge chick flick fan, so she and my little sis can go see this while i see ROTK for the 3rd or 4th time...

[Raul Duke]

Maggie Gyllenhall and Julia Styles, are homely, damn just b/c they are in movies doesnt make them hot. Kirstin Dunst is also hit or miss.

Actresses are interchangable, anyone can play these roles

[Jon Lyrik]

A nice cast who look like they are in a Lifetime TV movie of the week. And the director is making Harry Potter 4?

Won't see.

Originally posted by Homer
That's your opinion. Everyone has their own.

You are overreacting. He's not insulting anybody.

[Moviefan1234]

Originally posted by Raul Duke
Maggie Gyllenhall and Julia Styles, are homely, damn just b/c they are in movies doesnt make them hot. Kirstin Dunst is also hit or miss.

Actresses are interchangable, anyone can play these roles

I disagree. Maggie Gyllenhall and Kirsten Dunst are immensely talented individuals and far from interchangable. Juila Stiles on the other hand is a very different story. I do think this will be a well acted movie that is something we've seen before, but it'll still be good.

[Mike]

Originally posted by Moviefan1234
I disagree. Maggie Gyllenhall and Kirsten Dunst are immensely talented individuals and far from interchangable. Juila Stiles on the other hand is a very different story. I do think this will be a well acted movie that is something we've seen before, but it'll still be good.

I pretty much agree, except I find Kirsten Dunst, Maggie Gyllenhaal, AND Julia Stiles to be very talented. All have been in solid movies and given very good/great performances. Not just ANYONE could play their roles as good as them.

I guess if anyone can play the roles just as good, the movie should have starred Courtney Love in place of Julia Roberts, and Tori Spelling, Traci Gold, and Rebecca Gayheart in place of Kirsten, Julia, and Maggie.

[Scarface98.9]

James Berardinelli's 2 star review of MLS can be found here (http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/m/mona_lisa_smile.html)

[Sad man]

I like the trailer. I like the plot. I love the cast. WILL see it.

http://www.joga.net/gifanimes/aom_04.gif

[Jerk Shapiro]

Originally posted by blankpage
It certainly doen't look great, but the cast is just that, great. I'll check it out. Hopefully, getting the most out of it.


And by that you mean...material to sticky your dicky with? Yeah...good man, Man Pimp.


:cool:

[mikeyD]

this looks like the female version of Dead Poets Society.

[Lynn7]

This looks like a movie with a message. I hate movies with a message.

[MadsenOMC]

Great cast and a very talented director, but it looks so generic. The reviews are not encouraging either. I will be lowering my expectations and just hope that it's entertaining and not too insulting to the intelligence. David Ansen's comments have me worried though. Something along the lines of, ironic that a movie that's supposedly against conformity doesn't meet a cliche that it doesn't like.

[dindio]

Well, I know Mona Lisa Smile will be a good movie because of it plots which is so realist. I wish the movie doesnt' dissapoint me
I would like to see for first time Julia Stiles and Kirsten Dunst together as I dreamed on a long time ago

[Arathon]

The cast is very good, but the bad reviews popping up are making me edge away from the movie. But I might change my mind a few days before it comes over here in NZ.

[anakinsrise]

This looks like dead poets for women booooooring.And Julia Roberts is so annoying these days.

[Buck Turgidson]

http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story160052.html

Beth Jones' review in The Roanoke Times. I especially like her comment about Dunst, something that I've long thought.

[blankpage]

Well, I'm gonna be a brave schmoe and go check this film out today. That's right.


*flashbacks of 'The Fighting Temptations'


My review won't be up until tommorrow probably.

[Lynn Minmei]

Originally posted by blankpage
Well, I'm gonna be a brave schmoe and go check this film out today. That's right.


*flashbacks of 'The Fighting Temptations'


My review won't be up until tommorrow probably.

Anything I can do to stop you?

Anything?

[blankpage]

Originally posted by Lynn Minmei
Anything I can do to stop you?

Anything?


Well, too late. I wish there would've been something to stop me.


MONA LISA SMILE (1/10)

It's sad, really, when good talent goes ends up in a horrible mess like this. Man, oh man, I was ready to walk out. I really was. 'Mona Lisa Smile' doesn't even deserve this title 'shit', it deserves something like, 'fuck me with a chainsaw for many days' shit. It was such a pretentious movie, too. It set it's bar WAY too high. It tried to be some kind of Oscar contender, but it ended up like tripe. There are times when Oscar bait movies work, and then there are timed when they don't. This was one of those times when it really didn't work. And now that they failed at what they tried to do, it probably won't be nominated. It brought me back to 'The Hours', another overrated movie that was sort of in the same vein as this. The dialogue, oh the dialogue. Cliched like it was nobody's business.

Why I didn't leave, I don't know. Use me as an example of a movie fan who made a poor choice in viewing this. And for all of you who are going to go see it.....don't.

[Lynn Minmei]

I tried to stop you, Blanky...I really did.

Nothing good can come from this movie. Nothing.

[dindio]

I saw yesterday that movie, after all it wasn't as lame and boring as everyone says, as the matter of fact the movie brought an important message for girls and young women about making their decision in the future as well studying for a career as preparing to get married and attend their future husbands and children. That's the point, if this movie weren't showed on theaters in an important film week debut as ROTK, may be this movie would gross a few more, but everyone decided to see
ROTK. Despite of it poor gross debut in the box office, Mona Lisa Smile debuted to the second place, would be worse if that movie debuted on 8 or 10 place becoming a flop as Gigli.

[paul]

I really thought it was a surprise, and MUCH better then Something's Gotta Give.

SGG - - 5/10 (C-)

Mona Lisa Smile - - 7/10 (B)

[paul]

Also...

Kirsten Dunst was GREAT in it. Oscar worthy.

[blankpage]

Originally posted by Lynn Minmei
I tried to stop you, Blanky...I really did.

Nothing good can come from this movie. Nothing.

I do thank you, though.

And you're right. The only thing that can come out of this movie is evil.

[idealdiscountdude]

Mike Newell''s Mona Lisa Smile is a very good yet technically flawed film that is elevated by some fantastic performances.

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0304415/MLS-073B-DF-3901R-.jpg

My primary problem with the film is with the direction and editing, specifically in the first half of the film. I found that the first half didn't flow properly and I believe it to be due to the editing process. The film, in its 128 minutes encompasses an entire school year at Wellesley and in order to keep the film at a rather short run-time, the film, in its first half was whittled down significantly and this bothered me.

My other problem with the film is that because the film follows 5 characters (Julia Roberts, Julia Stiles, Kirsten Dunst, Gennifer Goodwin, and Maggie Gyllenhaal), the film jumped back and forth between them at times and didn't quite concentrate enough on certain scenes involving the characters to get the full jist as to what precisely was going on.

With that said, I must reiterate that I really dug Mona Lisa Smile for many, many reasons.

First and foremost, the acting.

Julia Roberts, gives yet again, another great performance as Katherine Watson, an unmarried, liberal, bohemian Art History professor from California, thrust into the "old school" world of Wellesley College, a world which teaches young women the things that she essentially shuns. The camera lloves Julia and every nuance, every single emotion felt by her character, Ms. Roberts (Moder) displays on screen. She was absolutely perfect.

Kirsten Dunst as uber-Bitch Betty was pitch-perfect. Betty is a cold young woman, essentially hiding behind her cool exterior in order to hide her troubled self.

Gennifer Goodwin plays the film most sympathetic character, Connie, with ease. The girl could be a major star someday.

Juliet Stevenson's Amanda, although only on screen for a short period of time, shows yet again why she is a great character actress, Gone is her British accent, as the pro-birth control school nurse.

My two favorite performances however come from Maggie Gyllenhaal and Marcia Gay Harden.

As Katherine's fellow professor and roommate Nancy, Marcia Gay Harden delves deep into her character. Nancy is a sad-case, a woman training the young ladies in how to be superb housewives, while unmarried and far from over her dead fiance who died in WWII. Nancy hides her pain through her teaching, and its only at home as a couch potato and while drunk that we see the tortured and sad soul inside. Marcia Gay Harden gives IMO, one of the Best Supporting Female performances of the year here.

As Giselle, the AMAZING Maggie Gyllenhaal is the the most comforting and loving of the girls. The one who idolizes Katherine and is open sexually, much to the chagrin of the other girls. She too is a tortured soul, from a divorced family, frowned upon for her liberal ways and her exploration of her sexuality, not to mention her love of older men, possibly to compensate for the lack of a father figure in her life. Gyllenhaal is superb.

The art direction, music, and costume design is nothing short of astounding. Nothing in the film seemed modern. I felt like I was indeed in 1953-1954.

My favorite scenes in the film involved Katherine's Art History classes. They were superbly crafted and written. The chemistry between Katherine and the students (both negative and positive relationships) seemed natural and real. A difficult feat considering the size of the cast.

Mona Lisa Smile is a film about friendship, exploring ones creativity. A film about the situation of women in the 1950's and how the liberal mind was seen as corrupt. The film examines these various themes and accomplishes it very well.

Never dull, and always fascinating, Mona Lisa Smile, IMO is one hell of an underrated film, unfairly trashed by some critics.

The acting alone makes it worth seeing.

B+

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0304415/MLS-092-DF-2731.jpg

[thompsoncory]

I saw it today and was shocked to find that it was excellent. The performances (especially Julia Roberts, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Kirsten Dunst) are all pitch-perfect and the story is very interesting and well written. Julia Stiles, who I thought would be the best part, was good but had the show stolen from her by Gyllenhaal and Ginnifer Goodwin, who gave a very sweet romantic performance.

9/10 (A-)

[dukenguy18]

May Be Some Spoilers

Mona Lisa Smile isn't nearly as bad as a lot of people would have you believe. It covers the entire year at this college and Katherine Watson, a progressive teacher, tries to make an impact on her students. I think that while the story is uneven, there are good points made. There shouldn't be as much focus on Watson and the Italian teacher, and I didn't find Julia Stiles' or Kirsten Dunst's stories compelling or very original. What I liked about the film is that after all of Watson's preaching that women can do it all, you find out that she doesn't really believe that at all. Her character is strong and flawed, and that's so much more than I expected. If this were like DPS, Watson would have been perfect and right and would have changed so many lives. Sure, the girls admired her, but she didn't help any of them because if they made decisions or changes in their lives, they would have done it even without her influence. Maggie Gyllenhaal was the standout among the girls. And my love for Marcia Gay Harden just grows and grows with almost every role, she's so good at what she does. I really felt for her character in that she never became what she's training the girls to be. It' really touching.