yojimbo1

Has anyone seen this movie yet? If so, any thoughts? Please no spoilers. Also how is Scarlet Johanson's performance?

Tarnower

Still waiting on this, "Monster" and "The Cooler" to show up down here in south Florida. Looking forward to seeing all three.

jarofclay73

I thought Scarlett Johansson's performance was good. Although I liked her a lot in "Ghost World" and "Lost In Translation" I wasn't sure she had the tools for this movie. I think she did an admirable job. As for the movie itself, I didn't care for it. Beautiful cinematography by Eduardo Serra, by the way. But, most of the time I wasn't captivated by the story. I'll get the "Lost In Translation" DVD but I'll pass on "Girl With A Pearl Earring." Recommended only for harcore Scarlett Johansson fans or for people who read the book.

Jackskeleton

I wasn't all that into the story as well. Scarletts perfomance in it is indeed top notch. Glad to have seen this one. bring on more johansson flicks, I can't get enough of her.

Frank TJ Mackey

Scarlett's performance in this is excellent and very subtle.
She barely speaks at all in the film, and when she does it's usually
not much more than a sentence at a time.

it's only about 90 minutes, but i enjoyed it.

nothing spectacular but if you enjoy her work you'll appreciate this more than her upcoming SAT stealing movie with the teeny boppers. (I'm assuming at least).

littlefuzzy

Is this from the same guy that did "Girl with a Pearl Necklace??"

MrN

I searched IMDB and could nothing matching that title - could it be just 'the pearl necklace'?

As for Girl with a Pearl Earring, I thought Johansson was excellent as was the cinematography. And the film was a textbook example of visual storytelling using actors to their strengths.

Plotwise, this seems to be a retread of Shakespeare in Love since its just reimagining what might have been. The events are borderline melodrama but the film is saved by the talent involved.

7/10

Patman

Jan Vermeer's painting comes to life in this film. The look at art in the 17th century and the connection between artist/painter and patron drives much of the backstory of why paintings exist (social standing and vanity drove patrons to seek out talented painter, while painters sought out to make a living by appealing to the wealthy who could sustain them). Many frames of this film feel like paintings in and of themselves, the production values make for interesting gazing. The film tries to get across the idea that while painting is the end product, there is the human cost associated with it, but rarely does it ever enter into the exercise of appreciating the painting itself.

The performances are filled with sparse dialogue, relying on facial expressions and viewer interpretation, and it does its best to show, rather than tell, which is a reflection of its subject matter (art/paintings), so it's understandable of the choice to embrace that concept in telling the story behind the painting "Girl With The Pearl Earring".

This film isn't for everyone, it's very languid and moves at a pace that recalls the adage "You can't rush art".

I give it 3 stars or a grade of B.