Well, what have we here? How did I fail to watch this film until now? I must have mistakenly expected this to be a run-of-the-mill romantic melodrama, but writer-director Sally Potter has far more ambition than that. With "Yes," she boldly offers us a fully Shakespearian drama, complete with chorus, rude mechanicals, asides, and a long philosophical disquisition from a character not central to the plot--and just to make sure we don't miss it, she does all this in iambic pentameter. As with Iñárritu's illusion of continuous tracking in "Birdman," I both admired this achievement and found it quite distracting throughout. Potter is thoughtful about big issues and shows an acute understanding of human emotions, but she's not really a very impressive poet. The cast, good on the whole, varied in how well they could make the rhymed verse sound natural--with none better at this than star Joan Allen, who is luminous (and sexy) throughout. The pacing is also a problem: at times the story seems to be moving too slowly, while at other times sharp emotional transitions feel too abrupt (but note that one could also say such things about Shakespeare). Nonetheless, you do care about these characters, and there are many piquant moments. The music is excellent, the photography thrilling, and Sheila Hancock's one long soliloquy is quite glorious. The movie is well worth taking the time to watch. I recommend it to anyone who loves film, loves Shakespeare, or both.
Review of Yes
