Thomas (Pete Postlethwaite) and his beautiful wife, Julianna (Greta Scacchi) live in England around the beginning of the 19th century. They used to reside in town but have since moved to a large estate in the country. This has upset Julianna, as she loves company, games, and excitement. To help smooth things over, Thomas plans to have a gorgeous formal garden installed near the house for Julianna'e enjoyment and as a place for her to entertain guests. He hires Meneer (Ewan McGregor) to plan the gardens, at almost unlimited expense. Secretly, however, Meneer is not the famous gardener he is supposed to be but, rather, an impostor. A cousin of Julianna's (Richard E. Grant) has arranged for Meneer to pose as the horticulture expert because he wants the young gardener to bleed the finances of Thomas dry, to settle old scores. Thomas and Julianna have a beautiful only child, a daughter, Anna (Carmen Chaplin), for since Anna's birth, Julianna has been barren. Anna is decidedly independent and outspoken and often chooses to walk the grounds by herself. This causes her father to believe she may have mental problems and he subjects Anna to a doctor's unusual and unorthodox treatments. Anna has strong feelings, too, about whether the natural beauty of the grounds should be sacrificed for a contrived showplace of formal gardens. So, how will this garden grow? Will Meneer complete his mission or will he be found out? This is a lovely film, with a nice cast and a terrific, unusual story. Although set back in time, the tale shows quite well how human nature changes very little over the years. Money lust, deceit, and revenge are as natural as breathing, for some folks, causing suffering to those around them. As the main heavy, Grant is wonderfully evil while Postlethwaite, Scacchi, and McGregor fulfill their roles nicely. Chaplin, however, although very pretty, gives a rather weak performance overall. As for the scenery and the costumes, they are of the finest caliber, making for a view that is visually compelling, and the direction is faultless. Why not kiss off the mundane entertainment choices, of an evening, and watch this captivating, gorgeous, extraordinary film instead? You will most likely pat yourself on the back for doing so.
25 Reviews
I'm not sure where it was going but I think it got there
cghoover825 August 2002
I found both script and acting to be painfully bad for the first half hour or so, but things seemed to take a turn for the better after Meneer Chrome lost his wig (no, seriously). Scacchi was as glorious as ever; McGregor was as enjoyable as ever; and the other three principles each held down their corner of the story. The biggest weakness was the garden itself - it seems like the filmmakers were even less able to afford Chrome's vision than Smithers was, with a result that was more suited to a stage production than a movie. I'm not convinced that this movie was a good use of two hours of my time, but I also find that I can't get some of the imagery out of my head - generally recommended if you have patience with period pieces and like movies that ask more questions than they answer.
Everything goes without saying
Jedi_Elsra3 July 2001
Like most period pieces, The Serpent's Kiss is long and seemingly drawn out to the average modern day movie goer. However, when it comes to the very core and heart of a movie, (its story and the actors that portray it,) everything is well thought out and enjoyable to watch. Just make sure you are not particularly tired and are up to watching the movie intently. Very surprising, and what makes the movie enjoyable-I might add, is that at the very beginning you find yourself caught in a intriguing plot which slowly unfolds to the unveiling of each character's real motives. Although there are no twist or turns, that would make it suspenseful the movie's full captivator lies in its puzzle piece of a story. Each scene has a plethora of knowledge and insight that proves at times to be quite the delightful opposite of what each character says. Yet, make no mistake, I definitely recommend this movie to anyone with patience and an infatuation for well written, fully understandable stories with moral meaning. If none of this is important to you, however, I would still recommended it. If only on the basis that Ewan McGregor's acting is something to watch intently and eagerly. Catching every detailed moment of his portrayal will leave an impression on even the more action driven movie goer.
The Contract
tedg2 May 2007
If you are an adventurer in film, then you'll know Peter Greenaway. And if you know him, you'll likely know his first feature film: "The Draughtsman's Contract." It wasn't as selfreferentially dense as projects that followed, but its an incredible structure. It references restoration drama in form. While it makes itself that way, the story is of a illustrator who creates reality while drawing it. The "reality" in question is of an English country estate and it involves sexual intrigue toward and by the artist. There's a tussle about who is writing/ drawing the film we see.
Now we have a film built directly on top of that. It stars Ewan McGregor who had the year before starred in Greenaway's most advanced film (as of this writing). You really have to know both of those movies to appreciate this. You have to also know that the "crazy" young woman is the grandchild of our first lucid filmmaker and his wife, herself the daughter of one of our most lucid playwrights. She seems at times to literally control what is seen by all. And it helps to know that the repressed but eager mother is played by the woman who was June Gudmundsdottir in one of our most lucid films.
"Lucid" here in terms of films that see themselves as they unfold.
The actual movie by itself is rather chopped up, and directed in a somewhat incoherent way. But it doesn't matter at all, and I only noticed it the second time. Its about the things behind the things we see. That's what it is and what the story is.
It begins with the most amazing images behind the title. They are blurry images, just barely noticeable as moving humans. Later, they will be conflated with reapers, fishers, statues... and all folded in as the girl's dreams, which are further folded into the book she reads, the letters Ewan's character writes, the design of the garden and its undesign.
Its a mind game. Its lovely without being rich. Its not slick. It has holes. It was done cheaply and without visual flourish. But what a fun ride!
What a ride.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
Now we have a film built directly on top of that. It stars Ewan McGregor who had the year before starred in Greenaway's most advanced film (as of this writing). You really have to know both of those movies to appreciate this. You have to also know that the "crazy" young woman is the grandchild of our first lucid filmmaker and his wife, herself the daughter of one of our most lucid playwrights. She seems at times to literally control what is seen by all. And it helps to know that the repressed but eager mother is played by the woman who was June Gudmundsdottir in one of our most lucid films.
"Lucid" here in terms of films that see themselves as they unfold.
The actual movie by itself is rather chopped up, and directed in a somewhat incoherent way. But it doesn't matter at all, and I only noticed it the second time. Its about the things behind the things we see. That's what it is and what the story is.
It begins with the most amazing images behind the title. They are blurry images, just barely noticeable as moving humans. Later, they will be conflated with reapers, fishers, statues... and all folded in as the girl's dreams, which are further folded into the book she reads, the letters Ewan's character writes, the design of the garden and its undesign.
Its a mind game. Its lovely without being rich. Its not slick. It has holes. It was done cheaply and without visual flourish. But what a fun ride!
What a ride.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
It's a nice movie but would have been better in a different form of media
joeorewan4 May 2002
This story is about a young, Dutch landscaper, Meneer Chrome (Ewan McGregor), who plans to create an extravagant garden for Thomas Smithers and his wife (Pete Postlethwaite and Greta Scacchi). His real plan or the real motive of this garden is to bankrupt Smithers so the not-so nice Fitzmaurice (Richard E. Grant) can seduce Smithers's wife. But Chrome begins having second thoughts about completing the plan after he becomes fascinated by Smithers's daughter Thea (Carmen Chaplin). I think people who have criticized this movie are far too harsh. I found it to have an excellent story with a talented cast. The performance that I felt most touched by was Carmen Chaplin's. Her struggle to find disorder in a world that wants to have order is an interesting element to the story. What I didn't like was the movie's pacing. I felt the message the movie was conveying that you can not control nature. I think this theme would have been better expressed in a short story or a short movie, not a feature length film. A part from that, I can sit through the hour and fifty minutes and feel glad that I saw this movie.
This review points out the influence of Andrew Marvell's poems on the themes and plot of the movie
Australis3 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I have read the preceding reviews which offer good summaries and some thoughtful insights into the movie which I agree is beautiful visually and has a fascinating and challenging plot. I am surprised that no-one has mentioned the poems of Andrew Marvell(1621-1678) which I believe permeate the film, especially "The Garden" and "To His Coy Mistress". I probably missed some references myself but there were actually quotes from at least one of these poems. For example "Let us roll all our strength and all/Our sweetness up into one ball/And tear our pleasures with rough strife/Thorough the iron gates of life;/Thus though we cannot make our sun/Stand still, yet we will make him run." The other poem, "The Garden" , though too long to quote here could well stand as a model for major themes in the film and there are also some echoes of the Mower poems of Marvell. A minor comment relating to Ewan McGregor's character Chrome is that, although he is clearly identified as Dutch, reviewers unanimously call him Meneer Chrome as if that is his given name rather than mijnheer, Dutch for mister or sir. Finally, is is too far fetched to identify the reflexive symbol of the serpent's kiss with the fate of Fitzmaurice who, after being essentially the instigator of all the action, inadvertently poisons himself.
An incredibly booring period piece
koohii18 July 2021
Amazing actors waste their time, and ours, in this tediously slow period piece that has all the charm of watching molasses run downhill in a January blizzard, and all the personality of oatmeal. None of the characters are remotely interesting, and neither is the plot. I wish I'd turned it off after the first 5 minutes, but I figured with a cast that good, there had to be something worthwhile.
There wasn't.
Do something else with your life, rather than watch this movie.
There wasn't.
Do something else with your life, rather than watch this movie.
A little weird
linele3963 March 2007
The movie was pretty good. It was entertaining and kind of cool.
The great thing about is was that it was unpredictable. The plot is exciting. the story is complicated yet not to hard to follow. The movie manages to give you a feeling of the surroundings and the characters somehow get to you. Sometimes, however, you found yourself thinking that the very thing Phillipe tried to achieve was strangeness and inordinate... which somehow in the end really remains unachieved as the movie turns out to be pretty trite.
Anyway, Ewan McGregor does an excellent acting job. And the movie is worth seeing.
The great thing about is was that it was unpredictable. The plot is exciting. the story is complicated yet not to hard to follow. The movie manages to give you a feeling of the surroundings and the characters somehow get to you. Sometimes, however, you found yourself thinking that the very thing Phillipe tried to achieve was strangeness and inordinate... which somehow in the end really remains unachieved as the movie turns out to be pretty trite.
Anyway, Ewan McGregor does an excellent acting job. And the movie is worth seeing.
Ugh.
hedgiewan21 October 2002
I really really want to like this; it just doesn't seem right that you can make a movie with Ewan McGregor, Pete Postlethwaite, and Richard E. Grant and have it be that bad, but bad it is. Imagine a Peter Greenaway wannabe with an IQ of 67 attempting to produce a Jane Austen short story as a darkly melodramatic full-length movie. You have better things to do with your time than watching this film.
Slow action as life was in the 18th century.
silverauk29 August 2002
You could speak about an architecture-film like the movies of Peter Greenaway. The personality-change of meneer Chrome (a boyish Ewan McGregor) is developed in the movie in a way that it is the backbone of the story but one asks himself if this is not poor for a movie. The 18th century with its superstitions and snuff-powder is the real background of the movie and the garden is in fact the antagonist. Juliana (Greta Scacchi) is not a real person, she seems to be like the statues of the garden. One wonders why she and Thea/Anna, her daughter (Carmen Chaplin) are attracted to meneer Chrome. Thomas Smithers (Pete Postletwaite) is a highly moral person full of strange fantasies, you cannot think of such a person in real life. Tim Rose Price should be aware that producing such a movie demands other skills than writing it.
a bad imitation of Greenaway
Cath-1011 November 1998
What seems really incredible in that movie is that the talented Philippe Rousselot chose its screenplay to shoot his first movie as director. From the beginning of the movie, it is clear that the plot displays some striking similitudes with the masterpiece of Peter Greenaway, "The draughtsman's contract". Therefore, Rousselot spent his time trying to make his own movie look different, but the result is sadly bad. The cinematography of the movie is beautiful, but there is no valuable plot and the characters have no existence. This is definitely a failure.
A beautiful story, but not for the average viewer
Amashelle13 September 2005
As an independent period flick, the movie supports a decent set and accurate costumes. The acting is, more or less, well done (Ewan McGregor is, as usual, brilliant, Carmen Chaplin made a smashing debut, and the rest of the cast was easy to watch).
The plot of the movie, however, must be watched carefully, or you'll miss the subtle dynamics of the characters, and the beautiful undertones of the themes. If you go into it with expectations, you'll be disappointed. While the main love story is not at all original, I can't see this movie being a box-office hit, or at all popular with main-stream viewers.
I guess the main thing you need to know when going into this movie is, while the plot is an important factor, the real reason I would give for watching it is to see the wonderful way the characters interact with each other. Like so many independent films, The Serpent's Kiss relies on its script and characters more than events and elaborate sets.
The plot of the movie, however, must be watched carefully, or you'll miss the subtle dynamics of the characters, and the beautiful undertones of the themes. If you go into it with expectations, you'll be disappointed. While the main love story is not at all original, I can't see this movie being a box-office hit, or at all popular with main-stream viewers.
I guess the main thing you need to know when going into this movie is, while the plot is an important factor, the real reason I would give for watching it is to see the wonderful way the characters interact with each other. Like so many independent films, The Serpent's Kiss relies on its script and characters more than events and elaborate sets.
His own version of Versailles
bkoganbing4 April 2014
I'm afraid a lot in America won't get the significance of The Serpent's Kiss as far as the gardens were concerned. At the point of time that this film is depicting 1699 in the reign of William I in Great Britain, the rich nobility even the nouveau rich that Peter Postlethwaite is portraying had this passion for ornate gardens. It was a style trend among those who could afford it. King Louis XIV in France designed the best for Versailles and everyone tried to copy him. So Postlethwaite who is a munitions manufacturer by trade and rich because of it has to have the most ornate garden in the kingdom so he can proclaim his status to the world.
Enter Ewan MacGregor who plays a Dutch designer of gardens, he even worked for William of Orange. He goes to work for Postelthwaite and his wife Greta Sacchi to do his own version of Versailles and he's encouraged in this by Sacchi's cousin Richard Grant who has more than a passing interest in this project. It's his hope to bankrupt Postelthwaite and in turn win Sacchi for himself. Grant got something on MacGregor and he forces MacGregor to help him in his designs.
Without the ornate status symbol garden Postelthwaite may still go bankrupt as he has an ill daughter in Carmen Chaplin and he's paying some heavy duty bills to quack doctors for her care.
Some really fine mansion gardens in the UK that are great tourist attractions still serve as the backdrop of a most aesthetically pleasing film. Things don't quite work out for the plotter Grant and the people he uses and the ones he plots against. But that you see the film for.
If you understand the concept that in 1699 those ornate gardens were a status symbol than The Serpent's Kiss will make sense to you.
Enter Ewan MacGregor who plays a Dutch designer of gardens, he even worked for William of Orange. He goes to work for Postelthwaite and his wife Greta Sacchi to do his own version of Versailles and he's encouraged in this by Sacchi's cousin Richard Grant who has more than a passing interest in this project. It's his hope to bankrupt Postelthwaite and in turn win Sacchi for himself. Grant got something on MacGregor and he forces MacGregor to help him in his designs.
Without the ornate status symbol garden Postelthwaite may still go bankrupt as he has an ill daughter in Carmen Chaplin and he's paying some heavy duty bills to quack doctors for her care.
Some really fine mansion gardens in the UK that are great tourist attractions still serve as the backdrop of a most aesthetically pleasing film. Things don't quite work out for the plotter Grant and the people he uses and the ones he plots against. But that you see the film for.
If you understand the concept that in 1699 those ornate gardens were a status symbol than The Serpent's Kiss will make sense to you.
Breathtakingly Bad in Every Respect
marsanobill26 November 2023
Boring, and featuring characters about whom it is impossible to give one whit, it moves at a pace somewhere between arthritic and glacial. It is aggressively stagey, the plot is impenetrably convoluted, the characters'' motivations stem entirely on the scriptwriter's say-so, and the acting is so wooden you can count the growth rings. The dialogue is similarly atrocious. The plot revolves--or totters, actually--around the task of a young-genius landscape designer, who has beem hired to create a garden of the kind that will be remembered forever (a la Versailles and Sissinghurst) as the legacy of a nobody but rich English merchant who has no children to carry on his name We are expected to believe that HE believes a garden is the way to achieve this. Magical realism is also thrown on top of everything else. Did I forget to include intimations of witchcraft? And the supernatural?
This movie will make you wonder what you did in a former life to deserve such punishment.
This movie will make you wonder what you did in a former life to deserve such punishment.
Ewan McGregor as Desirable, Obsessed Garden Artist
semioticz19 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
When Maneer Chrome (Ewan McGregor) is hired by a wealthy patron Thomas Smithers (Pete Postlethwaite) to create out of "chaos" a magnificent garden that reflects the family's aristocracy, Chrome has no idea that Mrs. Juliana Smither's (Greta Sacchi) 'kissing cousin', James Fitzmaurice (Richard E. Grant) has plotted to bankrupt the family so that he can finally have Juliana for himself.
While that is the apparent main plot, there's an intriguing ongoing subplot. Seems the Smither's daughter, Thea/Anna (Carmen Chaplin), thrives in the wooded 'chaos' with a home life that is so stringently ordered & controlled during the Romantic era. Chrome's going to completely destroy Thea's (as she calls herself instead of Anna) refuge: nature in the woods behind her home. This brings her to the brink of insanity, or so her father believes. Therefore, he calls in a (sadistic) physician (Donal McCann) to "cure" the young woman of her "ailments." Chrome is the only one in the picture who realizes that Thea's probably the only sane member of the family. So, in order to show her that he understands her need for the wild & freedom of nature, he builds into the garden a spring just for her. While this begins to endear him to her, Lady Juliana has begun to pay seductive attention to Chrome & the smitten Thea witnesses this. Juliana's attempts to seduce Chrome while her husband is away doesn't escape the notice of her pathologically jealous cousin James, either. Philippe Rousselot directs Tim Rose Price's screenplay.
This is an odd show that would seem more like a film coming from Lynch, Cronenberg, Nero or Waters. I keep watching it out of intrigue with the story's intricacies.
While that is the apparent main plot, there's an intriguing ongoing subplot. Seems the Smither's daughter, Thea/Anna (Carmen Chaplin), thrives in the wooded 'chaos' with a home life that is so stringently ordered & controlled during the Romantic era. Chrome's going to completely destroy Thea's (as she calls herself instead of Anna) refuge: nature in the woods behind her home. This brings her to the brink of insanity, or so her father believes. Therefore, he calls in a (sadistic) physician (Donal McCann) to "cure" the young woman of her "ailments." Chrome is the only one in the picture who realizes that Thea's probably the only sane member of the family. So, in order to show her that he understands her need for the wild & freedom of nature, he builds into the garden a spring just for her. While this begins to endear him to her, Lady Juliana has begun to pay seductive attention to Chrome & the smitten Thea witnesses this. Juliana's attempts to seduce Chrome while her husband is away doesn't escape the notice of her pathologically jealous cousin James, either. Philippe Rousselot directs Tim Rose Price's screenplay.
This is an odd show that would seem more like a film coming from Lynch, Cronenberg, Nero or Waters. I keep watching it out of intrigue with the story's intricacies.
A bit slow, but a good story.
JesNollie15 July 2001
I found this movie to be a bit slow moving at times, but it was packed with great performances, particularly those of McGregor and Postlewait. The story was interesting, but I think it would have been better had they spent more time on development of the story. Or perhaps made it a short film.
Alot better than I was expecting given the reviews
PatrynXX16 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Among my older movies on dvd I hadn't watched yet from before 2005 , 2001 was my first dvd player earlier in the year so sometime in that region..
The um... artwork on the outside put me off. But the movie overall is a work of art. Not exactly understandable thus some poisons got mixed up like the villains drink that the end (whoops) forgot who did it. Was subtle so I didn't think of it when they did it. I do remember someone putting something in the bottle but it was worse than the mandrake .. It's all about a fake garden. One can assume anything from the ending , and some endings are left open as they should be. Who gets what. Lend to your imagination a bit. It stirred mine. What is the movie again just a work of art. Not exactly a movie.
Quality: 9/10 Entertainmetn: 7/10 Re-Playable : 5/10
The um... artwork on the outside put me off. But the movie overall is a work of art. Not exactly understandable thus some poisons got mixed up like the villains drink that the end (whoops) forgot who did it. Was subtle so I didn't think of it when they did it. I do remember someone putting something in the bottle but it was worse than the mandrake .. It's all about a fake garden. One can assume anything from the ending , and some endings are left open as they should be. Who gets what. Lend to your imagination a bit. It stirred mine. What is the movie again just a work of art. Not exactly a movie.
Quality: 9/10 Entertainmetn: 7/10 Re-Playable : 5/10
More to be learned from the insightful reviews here...
trancelucence18 March 2022
....than from the film itself, perhaps. I was still puzzled after watching it so I read the reviews here and learned a lot. If only the filmmaker had made these intricate threads clearer in some organic fashion throughout. I recommend reading reviews before viewing as to the philosophical and historical roots of the tale and production. As for me, after my initial viewing I was left with the impression that there was loads of style and less substance, and a preponderance of posturing and meaningful looks leading mostly to very little. Not enough going on, rather boring, dull. The actors did their best, Pete Postlethwaite and Carmen Chaplin in particular, not their fault. Ewan McGregor was perhaps trying to be mysterious, and though a pleasure to look at, I didn't find him very... dynamic (as compared to Richard E. Grant, for example, a bright spark).
I laughed aloud unexpectedly more than once at The Naked Gun-like camera angles in the film- wherein the camera would pull back from a closeup of someone appearing to be surveying something important from afar (such as a person or landscape) only to reveal s/he was standing mere feet from the object. In several scenes the director didn't seem to know what to have the actors doing, or, perhaps wanted them to look like tableaus from old masters' paintings (striking poses?), awkward and distracting, strange people in scenes for no reason. Throughout the film I sometimes didn't have a clue what was going on (and not in a provocative way). The entire theme of the daughter's mental health as analogous to the garden eluded me completely.
As an aside, Ewan McGregor looks so baby-faced in this he scarcely seems old enough to be an architect of fame and renown. (Perhaps a minor gripe, but his hair style in the second half didn't seem in keeping with the era). I liked the ending, but after so much misdirection and confusion I found it too little loo late. A shame, with so much to work with it could have been a winner. I'll definitely be watching it again, perhaps I'll get more out it the second time around.
I laughed aloud unexpectedly more than once at The Naked Gun-like camera angles in the film- wherein the camera would pull back from a closeup of someone appearing to be surveying something important from afar (such as a person or landscape) only to reveal s/he was standing mere feet from the object. In several scenes the director didn't seem to know what to have the actors doing, or, perhaps wanted them to look like tableaus from old masters' paintings (striking poses?), awkward and distracting, strange people in scenes for no reason. Throughout the film I sometimes didn't have a clue what was going on (and not in a provocative way). The entire theme of the daughter's mental health as analogous to the garden eluded me completely.
As an aside, Ewan McGregor looks so baby-faced in this he scarcely seems old enough to be an architect of fame and renown. (Perhaps a minor gripe, but his hair style in the second half didn't seem in keeping with the era). I liked the ending, but after so much misdirection and confusion I found it too little loo late. A shame, with so much to work with it could have been a winner. I'll definitely be watching it again, perhaps I'll get more out it the second time around.
Marvell
paipe-5454019 January 2022
This is a beautiful movie about human's relationship with love and nature and accepting the true nature of them. It is greatly inspired by the poet Adrew Marvell and it's just as poetic. It's a movie to breath in with it's slow paced lingering scenes. Beautiful scenery, acting, lines, music and costumes. Excellent actors. The plot I find really special and not something you come by very often and love the strong essence it has and it's soul. So sad this movie is rated so low, I guess it isn't for everybody but it might be really something for someobe who is willing to capture it's message and it's mesmerazing rhytm.
Thoroughly Enjoyable
MummyPhan30 July 2002
Well, to say the least I "thoroughly enjoyed" this movie. Having only watched it on TV I may not have seen it in it's entirety but what I did see I liked. Ewan McGregor just can't be bad in anything I suppose, or at least I haven't seen a movie yet where he didn't steal the show with his dazzling ability to become his character. The movie itself had quite a beautiful look to it and the odd loveliness of the daughter in the movie really gave you a funny sense all throughout it. It's not your ordinary tale, but the writing was wonderful and the acting superb. If you like odd love stories with a twist, this is the perfect example. And it doesn't hurt if you like Ewan McGregor, he absolutely shines.
Nice period piece - weak plot
richlieu27 February 1999
The story being a wee bit weak is more than carried by the class actors. Greta Scacchi is just magnificent and you can literally FEEL the tension when she lusts for McGregor in the greenhouse-scene. Not at all as bad as some would make it out to be. Nice period piece shot in beautiful surroundings.
Strange...
meusiclver23 April 2003
I found this movie to be very strange, and indeed it is! The first time I watched this movie I thought to myself "What the heck is going on here!" I completely missed the point of the movie the first time I saw it. Fortunately, I was already acquainted with some of Ewan M.'s work, and thought that surely Mr. Mcgregor would have more sense than to make a pointless movie. Thankfully I was right. I would advise anyone who doesn't understand this movie, or who has only seen it once, to watch it again. There is a deeper meaning. All of the actors and actresses were fabulous in this movie! Although the movie could have served just as well as a short feature, I'm glad that it is longer so that I can enjoy the chemistry between the cast members longer.
A manifestly arty film, it succeeds because it sees the relationship between aesthetics and ethics.
rlchianese10 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
A manifestly arty film, it succeeds because it sees the relationship between aesthetics and ethics. Anything artificial breeds illness and cruelty, while what is natural heals and elevates-- this is pure romantic doctrine. Andrew Marvel provides the poetic line of the story while Vermeer and Copley shape the visual. The film is essentially a fantasy about consciousness and design, with the uroboros snake a double symbol of infinity and self-destruction. Great scenes of building a "French" Garden in an English (Irish actually) countryside.The Garden turns out rather bleak and by magic gets its comeuppance. Everything about the film is artificial and that plays against its romantic/Shakespearean true love theme. Erotic frustrations under gird motives and Scacchi and Carmen Chaplin supply the juice for the happy tensions. Fine film, with time-shifted homages to restoration drama.
A nicely executed but highly typical costume drama for those in the mood.
TheVid28 May 2002
This watchable, derivative, turn-of-the-century piece has a good cast, which could perform this kind of script in their sleep. You can't help but think of THE DRAUGHTMAN'S CONTRACT and ANGEL AND INSECTS all the while you watch it. There's no harm in enjoying this sumptuous film, but remember it's all been done before and better. I'd say Scacchi is the standout here.
Ewan MacGregor was still a kid, pleasant period piece.
TxMike30 July 2002
Warning: Spoilers
McGregor poses as landscape architect Meneer Chrome (great name!!) to build a spectacular garden for a British family. Evil cousin catches on, threatens to expose him unless he agrees to help in a scheme to bankrupt the man so the evil cousin can rekindle his old affair with the wife. Family has a daughter everyone thinks is crazy, but she really isn't and she and Meneer end up at the ocean at the end of the story.
Pleasant period piece, although there's no big surprise anywhere. It is a British film made in Ireland, MacGregor is fine in the early role, Pete Postlethwiate perfect as the oblivious husband, and Greta Scacchi is charming and beautiful as usual as the wife and mother.
Pleasant period piece, although there's no big surprise anywhere. It is a British film made in Ireland, MacGregor is fine in the early role, Pete Postlethwiate perfect as the oblivious husband, and Greta Scacchi is charming and beautiful as usual as the wife and mother.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
