What's with all these people are go critique q movie far too well as though they're in the business themselves and I just answered my own question. See I don't realize until someone tells me what specifically makes a movie work or what doesn't and I certainly don't know how to break it down or give credit one place and take it away in another. But there's no harm in learning things. Cinematography encompasses what exactly ? Or is it the whole présentation which includes color camera position and the overall effect on our level of enjoyment. My favorite movie, 12 Angry Men, is a grim black gray and dark gray movie where the entirety of its set is a grim kind of dingy jury deliberation room with a big table and 12 chairs and the effect summed up in 1 word - oppressed. But the cleverness the deeply developed characters and the unfolding of the mystery makes it a masterpiece. Funny that the later color remake isn't even close. The actors are talented but the acting (the results) nowhere near and I think reading reviews has explained why. Editing, casting - picking you each character. While in this film that's not as crucial because it's still a pretty film and it's almost meant to scratch the surface at least in my opinion. People criticized Helen Hunt -her intonation isn't varied enough. But in portraying a shallow materialistic woman, it works. I think that was an intentional coldness and I saw most of the cast of A Good Woman disciplined to keeping it just as neutral and detached as necessary to help show them all kind or pompous and limited. Filthy rich doesn't demand as much to attract friends as lovers as having nothing else does. In fact the one with the least was the most interesting. It was supposed be a light and fairly happily ended film sort like a Jane Austin creation. Beautiful dresses good photographed to sparkle and appeal and a fairly forgettable tale of irony maybe ? I enjoyed the lack of authenticity more than missed it.
Review of A Good Woman
