Never let me go

[HarrietJones]

This was the best film I've seen this year.

want to give away any plot as I had no idea what it was about and think that was the best way. But just recommending it .

[upahill]

I'm hoping to go and see this but it might be a bit tight.
I drive back from France and arrive in the NW of England at 4.00pm on the Sunday it is showing at 6.00pm 30 miles from my house!!!

Fingers crossed but I'm notholding much hope of getting there especially as it will be school next morning for the kids and the uniforms won't have been washed!

[temporary1]

Bit rubbish, I thought

[upahill]

Missed it!

[mrszimmerman]

Watched this on Fri pm.
brilliant film, bleak but brilliant.

[SuburbanDream]

I've just finished the book and can't wait to get it out on DVD.

[OracleInaCoracle]

I liked it, but was a tad disappointed after the book, felt the film was just too slow.

[OracleInaCoracle]

I liked it, but was a tad disappointed after the book, felt the film was just too slow.

[SuburbanDream]

It's always interesting to see how well books translate onto the screen. I hope I'm not disappointed! TBH I hadn't heard of the book but I'd seen a bit of hype about the film, then I bought the book on one of those 3 for 2's at Waterstones and loved it.

[OracleInaCoracle]

I love the book, its one of my favourites, I loved the inevitability of it.

[OracleInaCoracle]

I love the book, its one of my favourites, I loved the inevitability of it.

[SuburbanDream]

Yes I know what you mean, I was wondering what would happen all the way through and was glad there wasn't a happy ending IYSWIM

[LadyClariceCannockMonty]

I think it's an excellent film and very under-rated and misunderstood. Reviewers have slagged off its 'tastefulness' but surely that understatedness is part of what makes it so powerful?

I thought the kid playing the young Carey Mulligan was an incredible actor. Completely convincing and even had the same mannerisms as the older girl. Andrew Garfield too was extraordinary.

[OracleInaCoracle]

I think it had to be a tad tasteless, its not a comfortable subject. I loved the speech given by the "headmistress" at the end. Although I felt that more could have been made of the other centres, to stress how lucky ruth, tommy and kathy were in comparison. Also loved the scene in the diner (have to read the book again now)

[LadyClariceCannockMonty]

lissie, I meant that the reviewers were criticising it because they didn't find it tasteless; they didn't feel that there was enough of a sense of outrage at what was going on. But for me that criticism misses the point; in both book and film, the restraint, the fact that things were just accepted by the individuals involved and society as a whole, and the limited nature of the narrator's self-expression, were all part of the pathos, tragedy and horror of it.

I agree that a bit of comparison might have been interesting. Then again, the characters' lives and worldviews were so limited and small that to open out the view might have gone against the aesthetic and schematics.

[OracleInaCoracle]

Ah, iswymn. I agree. The acceptance was the most heartbreaking aspect. And the underlying sense of revulsion that surrounded the children. God, its hard to discuss without spoilers. Some schools are using it as a-level text iirc, which I think is great. It's an important issue.

[LadyClariceCannockMonty]

Yes, really hard to talk so elliptically isn't it? I'd love to have studied it at school or uni. How fascinating it must be to really dig into it ? both the subject matter and the text itself.

[OracleInaCoracle]

Totally agree, it makes you examine your own attitudes towards the subject, and question your own stance. The issue of "what makes us human" is so interesting, after all, they loved, they hurt, they cried...

I would have liked the film to have made more of miss lucy, and the guardians' relationships with the students. Ruths protection team for miss geraldine, was a great story arc in the book and showed how much they craved affection.

[LadyClariceCannockMonty]

The film did major on the love triangle, understandably really. I didn't mind too much because I thought the love story actually reflected some of the wider issues in the book, including the craving for affection, the need to make and keep connections, and the quiet acceptance of it all (apart from 'that scene' with Andrew Garfield getting out of the car, which just about ripped my insides out).

[mrszimmerman]

DH said "let's watch this!"
(I knew he was thinking 'maybe Ikea Twice Nightly will get her ickle Baps out')
I said: "Are you sure? It's pretty bleak..." ( I knew the basic plot had read reviews )
DH: "Yeah, I've like, seen the trailer!" (quite aggressive)
Me: "Well, if you're sure..."


A little bit into the film dh: "Shit, what's going on? Are they like, orphans?"
A little bit later dh, " God this film is BLEAK! You could have TOLD me."

need I say more!!
He did love it in the end thought, hard but a good film and worth seeing.

[echt]

Just watched this DVD. What a crock. What I couldn't get my head around was why anyone would want organs from such unhealthy-looking wimpoids.

Maybe I should have read the book first.

I can see from other posters that the whole set-up was part of a normal state of affairs, but the lack of an account of the social controls which enabled this to happen was unsatisfying.

I'm probably more of a "Nineteen Eighty-Four" person - the novel, not the films.

[nonpractisingVirgin]

I watched this film months ago (hadn't read the book) and I still can't get it out of my head, it's so bleak and depressing. The scene when Keira Knightly is alone in the hospital chair is just awful

[ThePathanKhansWitch]

I loved the book, can,t wait to see the film.
Glad you,ve mostly given it a thumbs up.

The book did leave me with a huge gaping hole of a yearning sad feeling.

.