If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Fantastic!

Absolutely Fantastic

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Nearly unbearable chronicle of condescending, British, henpecking shrews in Italy. The point seems to be about watching people transpose their freakishly uptight values onto a different culture, but it's played so broadly that one "gets it" in the first scene and there seems to no point to the rest of it. These insufferable, condescending, moralizing, determined-to-be-miserable know-it-all martinet/harridans are incapable of realizing that the screeching incivility they deploy to uphold propriety is a much greater offence.Judy Davis is a complete lunatic both in the role and in her performance choices. Why anyone would want to assay the "most evil, screwed-up, shrew ever depicted on film" escapes me. She rages like a dry drunk until a viewer would be overjoyed to see her pushed from a cliff, or kicked in the face by a horse. It's unfathomable why viewers have been asked to identify with these insufferable prigs or to consider their dilemma.

I found Judy Davis very engaging as well I am scratching my head a little about the ending Can anybody tell me what actually happened at the ending? Why was her blouse splotched with purple? Was it from dust from the train window? I found the characters lacking in much emotion except for Judy Davis. I was distressed that there was not a closed captioning option. I couldn't understand some of the mumbling. The movie seems to not have a real message to me. Anyone agree at all ? ............................................... ................................................................... ................................................................ .......................................................

Such is the credo of a trio of Edwardian English gentry who travel to Italy to save a new born baby from the clutches of its Italian father upon the death of its English mother. "Where Angels Fear to Tread" is an excellent film in need of a story. A well crafted, well acted, well directed period piece (circa 1906), the film peers deeply into the marginally interesting group of characters, their relationships and idiosyncrasies, and their difficulty bridging the English/Italian culture gap. Unfortunately this tedious work only seems to get interesting about the time credits roll and one is left wondering what happened to the on screen "To Be Continued" declaration. An okay watch for those into the subtleties of European period films with little to offer all others.

Charles Sturridge's adaption of E.M. Forster's classic novel is well in line with such other greats as "Howards End", "A Room With a View", and "A Passage To India". As with all of Forster's work, "Where Angels Fear to Tread" treats the topic of Edwardian British society with poignancy and humour.Cultures clash when Philip Herriton is forced by his mother to retrieve the only child of his dead sister-in-law, Lilia, from its Italian father. The baby represents both the English and Italian way of life, and the ensuing struggle over it is an analysis of just how futile our own nativist prejudices can be.Such a sensitive topic is dealt with by a charming cast. Rupert Graves is perfect as a man transformed by his horrific experiences; Helen Mirren is both laughable and lamentable as the tragically flighty Lilia; Helena Bonham-Carter is the soul of goodness, and Judy Davis (a Forster veteran from "A Passage to India") provides comic relief as stuffy Harriet. These fine performances are matched with a beautiful score by Rachel Portman and even more beautiful Italian vistas courtesy of Mr. Sturridge.Stimulating and provocative, I highly recommend this film to those interested in either Forsters' work or the imperialistic inclinations of the British circa 1900.