Comments

[BVR]

[SPOILER ALERT] That "bye" at the end that she (barely) utters to the room was the most heartbreaking thing in the movie. [SPOILER ENDS] But I still didn't love the performance (not her fault). The movie kept sidelining her, and Abrahamson didn't help Larson go deeper.

[eurocheese]

She's waiting for her Oscar. And hopefully she gets it.

[Mr.Goodbar]

@BVR
{Spoilers galore} The only one to blame here is the screenwriter. Had she not been so faithful to her own book, in which the character of Ma IS sidelined (granted, she almost dies) to give room to a tonally repetitive sequence of experiences the boy has, maybe the movie would have had a different fate, in my opinion. The interview scene could have been twice as long and built more, Ma's arc after leaving room could have been much more detailed, her relationship with her father could have been explored, the relationship with her mother could have been fleshed out so much more. Instead, we get a flaccid second act in which Ma's character is almost irrelevant to propel the story somewhere unique and poignant. Of course many people disagree and think their experience watching Room was amazing and all, but I believe people are so easily satisfied nowadays. I think there is so much being released in a well marketed/convincing way, so carefully constructed, that it manipulates people into thinking their experiences have to follow the expectations that have been set up for them (don't even get me started with film festivals reactions). Then, they need to share their opinions in social media in hyperbolic ways(favorably or completely against it) to establish their herd mentality. We seem to live in a time in which herd mentality is actually appreciated. I've come to suspect people have been watching fewer and fewer truly great movies from the past and with that, the bar suddenly gets really low. coughthemartiancough

[miguel]

I agree with BVR and Mr. Goodbar. Don't get me wrong, I really liked the movie. Was it a masterpiece? No. Was it great? It had flashes of greatness. The film did sideline Larson's character and we didn't get to see the full scope of her character. When she was insulting Joan Allen during one of the scenes, she came off as a spoiled and whiny brat, even though I'm suppose to understand what she's been through and empathize with her.

[catbaskets]

Wow. It's crazy to me that a (woman) character coping with a trauma would be described as a "spoiled and whiny brat." In fact, I think this is what the movie does so well. {spoilers} The world cares a great deal (understandably) when a child undergoes a trauma. But a woman? She is blamed for not doing enough (the interviewer), seen as an impure object of disgust (her father), and as a petulant child who needs to get over it and play nice (her mother). Then, ma's anger and frustration, telling her mother that maybe if she hadn't been told to be such a "nice girl" then she wouldn't have helped the man find his "dog." Brutal, cruel, and a truthful and incisive observation about gender. We want our girls to be nice and friendly, but when bad things happen to them we blame the for being nice and friendly. If, heaven forbid, they stop being nice and friendly as a result, we're quick to label them bitches, brats, etc. I thought the movie was fantastic, deep, and layered. The fact that the movie "forgets" or "sidelines" Ma is a critical part of the story: we sideline and forget women who undergo trauma other than to blame or make a spectacle of them.

[MARK]

She just doesn't seem like a winner to me,ronan really is sucking up all the buzz but they said that about Swank in 99,Blanchett is like Streep,Tomlin is severly underestimated,i don't know why,she is a beauty in the film,Lawrence is a sight unseen,Rampling needs the Brit vote..

[Petd]

Thank god she didn't get the Sarah Connor role!

[NathanielR]

Petd --- right!?!

[Murtada Elfadl]

the performance that moved was Tremblay's because the story is from his POV. I thought overall a very mediocre effort primarily because the direction is so pedestrian.

[Miguel]

Missed opportunity for what could've been an emotionally dynamic character study

[Mr.Goodbar]

Just wanted to make it clear that I believe Larson to be one of the most talented, brave actresses to come out in many many years. Her performance in Shirt Term 12 was my favorite that year. She also seems to have really strong work ethics and knows about her responsibility as an artist. Maybe this project, as it is, would have served everyone much better had it been conceived a a 4-part miniseries.

[MARK]

I think now Mara AND Vikander are leads that Allen is definitely getting in.

[stella]

@catbaskets -- beautifully said. we're veering off from critique of the movie, but that particular scene isn't poorly directed. your reaction is going to be predicated on how you think a victim/survivor is "supposed" to behave versus how they're actually going to behave.

Oh Brie Larson. I agree that the movie was frustratingly, tantalizingly close to great instead of actually being great, but I loved the crap out of that girl.

[Marcos]

NAT: What do you make of the Foreign Press decision not to accept Vikander and Mara as supporting actresses? Will producers change their campaigns to Lead? Otherwise, they run the risk of dividing their votes and being left out of both categories!

[NATHANIEL R]

wow, i'm surprised to read so many negative appraisals. i loved the movie. just saw it again today. and i think Brie is spectacular in it.

[Jonathan]

I do wish the film followed her character more, but then it *is* all through Jack's eyes, so she isn't really the focus. But yeah... still. They should have found a way to foreground her more and better intertwine her recovery process with Jack's. As is, her arc feels weirdly underpowered and relatively thin emotionally.

[Pam]

Both the screenwriter/ author and director have said publicly that Tremblay's performance wouldn't have been as lauded without Brie Larson, both on and off set. And the film was one of the best adaptations of a novel I've seen in a very long time.