The Beguiled | Movie Review 

The great thing about the movie is the small details. yes they were mild mannered because it was during a different time when showing your shoulder was considered provocative. acting was excellent and the movie was beautiful.

I agree that the movie lacked tension. I was looking for a fruit sunday covered in sweet molasses but I got plain vanilla.

I actually really liked the movie and I enjoyed the subtleties. I didn’t think it was boring.

I saw this recently. Very disappointed! Actually found myself closing my eyes during early parts of the movie just to pass the time. The only other movie I've done that for was rogue one lol

It's sad you think they are so boring. I saw each character's unique outlooks and personalities. You also get to watch the manipulation creep in. It's not Oscar worthy, but it was well told. I think period peices aren't for you if you can't be entertained by this.

Wow love how frequently you are posting vids. Good work ;)

Agreed 💯!! I felt like it was missing something...it needed a twist or something.... ***SPOILER** Like I thought when the girl went to go get the mushrooms to poison John...she would find a dead body of a man stripped of his uniform and come to find out John wasn't who he said he was after all... and he was a psychopath who has been going from home to home taking advantage of all these women left to fend for themselves and murdering them as he goes... he never was a soldier but somehow got caught by yankee soldiers and that was how he got injured trying to escape..... now that is a movie I would of rather watched!!! Or at the very least Kirsten Dunst character could of ate the mushrooms too and no body warned her in fear that John would figure out what they were trying to do to him and they die together.

I understand Sofia Coppola's decision to remove the original black and biracial characters, and to stick with the ethnicity and economic class she is most familiar with. Exactly how she invites viewers to always remain as outsiders in Lost in Translation, always staying in the periphery of real engagement with Japanese society. That technique works well with movie's theme of loneliness and finding friendship with your own people. It sounds like Coppola's interests still remain within the confine of her own ethnocentric and socio-economic view in The Beguiled. Then again, doing it this way probably serves her personal message best.

The script was already there... from the original 70's version. She stripped it down, made the female characters kinda faultless and lifted all the shots and art direction from Picnic at Hanging Rock.

I completely agree. I'm glad I'm not the only one who walked out of this movie disappointed. I've watched the original and it is so much better in terms of the story and the performances. This version is feels like a huge chunk of the story is missing and it is because of the choices Sofia Coppola makes where she completely strips down the story rather than adding anything now. It's just another pointless remake that happens to be beautifully shot!

I have not seen the S. Coppola version but I can tell that the 71 version was slow paced but it was pretty gritty and dark, not boring.

I wanted to see it because I'm an Elle Fanning fan. It might be a rental someday. Good review, though...:)

ooohhhh, that's a pretty low score. Thanks for the heads up. Btw, the swear jar must be FULL.... lol

I wonder if the original was better than the remake, especially with Clint Eastwood as the leading man.

Like Okja being a retelling of Charlotes Web, the orginal Begiuled as I recall was much more tense and seemed to have chemistry with Clint Eastwood in it. Since I remebered the orginal movie I took a pass on this one. Never read the book though...

I didn't understand if she did that to him because she actually wanted to save his life, or if she did it bc of the conversation they had had where he said it was a shame he couldn't stay an invalid forever / couldn't stay with them forever. If they had leaned into that more, making it a bit more obvious that she obsessed over him and wanted him to stay as either her worker (in the garden) or as just a male presence to excite her, they could have made her character and the story overall a lot more interesting and dark. But it felt like the direction wasn't clear, like they didn't pick one or the other

Better off watching the 1971 film

The original Eastwood movie was pretty good.

I hope you went out of your way to see the original. I think you hit on the subtlety of this films issues quite well. I love this review because you touched upon the exact problem with what Sophia did wrong. In my opinion, everything with the film was wrong actually. I saw both yesterday. Backstory for you - I'm old enough to have seen the original many times over. I watch it every so often because I'm a guy who looks at every detail in film and I enjoy the challenge of seeing more at each viewing. Plus, forgive me but I love Clint from this era too. The original screenplay is brilliant if you pay attention to every little detail and let it take you... Siegel does a much better job in every respect because he didn't use a redundant word heavy script for dummies like Coppola. I think the original film might give you what you thought was missing from this 2017 version. Albeit with an a "old movie" type feel or version of what you seek. I think it still holds up because you're going back in time with your suspension of disbelief to begin with. All the way back to the civil war anyway. So the older film plays into the authenticity for me in that respect. If anything, honor yourselves with a simple scene by scene comparison of the opening only. In the original, if you can forgive our need for NEW and improved, you can see what was done within these scenes right and what was done wrong. I think you will find the suspense and tension you wanted. But you personally may want a bit more. I could be wrong. Anyway... Wanted to reach out and say something... You hit it... Watch the original folks... PEACE

great review

Also.....I think Alachia Queen should start doing some auditions. Alachia Queen should be in a movie or a TV show.

I saw this film a couple weeks ago

What superhero is on your pajamas?

Lost in Translation wuz same. Subtelty to point that nothing happened is soooo edgy man. Talk about nepo babies... but at least she's paving the way for more women nep-babe directors so 🤷‍♂️

I hate movies where the trailer is better than the movie

Remakes, reboots... :( most of her movies appear to be scriptless.

Do they not kill him with poison mushrooms?

You are absolutely right the whole movie is boring boring boring

I'll watch this if I need to sleep, I guess.

Its o k but i still like clints l

Virgin Suicides is such a good movie!

Is this one of those films that uses visual story telling more than dialogue? - so if you're into that you'll like it, but if you're more into "talkies" then you'll be put off by it. I haven't watched it. The idea of the film, the period and the context and the director behind it interests me though if it was viewed through a modern lense. But I think it's one of those films I'll catch 20 minutes of and then watch it if it's any good. Mainly I am not drawn to the cast - Nicole Kidman and Colin Farrell never do it for me (or just put me off entirely) and I don't really warm to Kirsten Dunst either. But I am a bit of a masochist, so if Sofia Coppola was maybe trying to just present and examine a zone of self-repressed chinese torture levels of boredom with this film - a bit like a scene in "Lost in Translation" in-which they mistakenly order just a plate of thick cold meat paste for dinner - then I might give it some time. I don't go for the emotional or psychological tension types of films - it is pretty much guaranteed to find the very worst and most darkest psycho-manipulative subliminally brain altering side of my personality if anyone tries that kind of shit on me to be honest LOL! Though I don't enjoy it (but the other person will be conditioned to enjoy it though muh ha ha ha ha!!!!).

It's an okay movie. The 1971 version is a lil better

Boring?Boring?Ok we weren't watching the same movie I guess.

I probably think too deeply into the movie (I never read the book or saw the original) but while its pretty boring I find more enjoyment when I think about the possible thoughts, feelings and interactions that took place. Like, who was lying and how much did they lie? Who actually was sincere in their feelings? Was Kirsten Dunst's character in love with the soldier or in love with the idea of getting out of there? I dunno, it at least brings more interesting elements to the movie I think. lol

Id like to see your opinion of the original movie... I thought the original was good .

i started watching this review and i said to myself if she say this film was good i will unsub cause this film was the worst ever literally took mins from my life with no return. as soon as she said this film was soooooo boring i said thank you lawd

I disappointed that Alachia is disappointed in this movie.

This film is just a period piece

I think the problem is as follow (SPOILERS)s: at the end of the day, McFarrell talked to a couple of girls, and tried to please all of them, so thats kind of manipulative, sure. One girl especially tried to seduce him, by actually kissing him first, and so, being a young guy and all, he just decided to go for the one who kissed him. Also, he just didnt like Kidman, I guess, thats why he didnt go for her. So, this is just a guy making a decision he should be allowed to make on his own, except that he should have known that Kidman wouldnt like it, but then again, how can you suspect someone turning into a psychopath?. Anyways, then. Problems arise: ... 1): the girl lies about him saying that he was abusing her 2): Dunst was lying about him, saying that he was doing something to the girl 3). Kidman lies about the necessity of having to hack off his leg. 4): then, they all lie when they give him the poison mushrooms. So, at the end of the day, its McFarrell being totally screwed by lying bitches. BUT, the problem is: this movie doesnt actually convices me that it was necessary that they became such lying bitches. They didnt actually show any concern for ethics and morality or emotional torment. Nobody sayd 'wait a minute here, whats going on, except Kidman telling Dunst that she should do something about her shoulders, or telling the girls to get lost, instead of hanging around McFarrell. I just dont really see the point of them suddenly turning into psychopathic lying bitches. Thats my problem with this movie.

Before watching the review video or the movie, I have to ask; Is this a feminist/feminazi dream movie?

The original was a morality tale about game and the danger of being a player. Eastwood seduced every girl in the house which created tension and when he finally lost it it was super satisfying. Limp and pointless remake. I'm uploading my review on my channel right now.