Read Negative User Reviews for The Beguiled (2017)

2

bocapopeJul 4, 2017

A good cast and location cannot save this poorly developed, written and directed yawnfest. Coppola misses the successes of the original and ignores the opportunities to make it better. Kidman's character is too reverent and lacks any sexualA good cast and location cannot save this poorly developed, written and directed yawnfest. Coppola misses the successes of the original and ignores the opportunities to make it better. Kidman's character is too reverent and lacks any sexual tension with Farrell. Elle Fanning's bad girl was softened to the point of indifference. With barely any dialog that shows feelings or builds tensions between the characters, all the original themes of the book are left unfulfilled. Jealousy barely even made an appearance on the screen.
A remake must be better than the original to succeed, and her feminist version of a handsome Union soldier being found and nursed to health in a Southern house of 7 frightened yet highly venerable young women near the end of the civil war almost ignores the laws of physical attraction. No sex, barely a flirt, or even a puppy love smile moment, and fear of provocation castrate this movie from start to finish. Skip it, not even worth renting.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

2

GreatMartinJul 4, 2017

Of the 60 plus movies that Nicole Kidman has made I have seen at least 30 and she is always good, many times rising above the material given her to work with. Of the 6 movies Sofia Coppola has made I have seen 3 and have no desire to see anyOf the 60 plus movies that Nicole Kidman has made I have seen at least 30 and she is always good, many times rising above the material given her to work with. Of the 6 movies Sofia Coppola has made I have seen 3 and have no desire to see any more by her.
In “The Beguiled” Kidman once again rises above the material while only Colin Farrell and Kirsten Dunst equal her. Oh yes the plantation, the inside and outside, which is the set of the movie, also rises above the material.
Coppola, directing and writing, remade the movie, originally directed by Don Siegel and starring Clint Eastwood and Geraldine Page, eliminating a very interesting aspect from the original, and leaves many questions as to why and what did she think she was bringing to the film? We have seen Southern women and girls in peril during the civil war before in many movies and she brings nothing new to that angle and her two most forceful scenes will have the audience turning their head away and/or closing their eyes.
I found “The Beguiled” to be a slow, quite boring movie.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

2

darkogavJul 5, 2017

A beautifully shot film - but very slow. As much as I like Sofia Coppola's other films (and I really wanted to like this one), this film was a turkey. The entire film takes place in a large southern mansion and most of the film is shot in twoA beautifully shot film - but very slow. As much as I like Sofia Coppola's other films (and I really wanted to like this one), this film was a turkey. The entire film takes place in a large southern mansion and most of the film is shot in two rooms -- the bedroom where Colin Farrel is bedridden and the living room. The first 80 minutes is very slow character buildup centered around Kidman, Dunst and Farrell. The film picks up a little and then drifts back down to a mellow conclusion. The lack of a discernible soundtrack adds to the slowness. Great acting from Kidman and Farrell and supporting cast.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

3

Rebecca31Jul 18, 2017

The unexpected arrival of Colin Farrell causes mayhem in school full of “vengeful b****s (his words). That’s the short version but it’s enough to know you should definitely skip this one. It's the American Civil War. Open with a scenic shotThe unexpected arrival of Colin Farrell causes mayhem in school full of “vengeful b****s (his words). That’s the short version but it’s enough to know you should definitely skip this one. It's the American Civil War. Open with a scenic shot of the woods with lots of cricket sound effects. Then you get another scenic shot of a house accompanied by more crickets. Followed by another shot of the house at sunset and from a slightly different angle and you can see where this is going. I’m not faulting the cinematography but it’s so in your face constantly it loses any desired effect.
The school of prim and proper ladies run by Nicole Kidman decide to take in a wounded soldier while he recovers. Can they trust him or can he trust them? Right away I was expecting a tense and suspenseful gothic drama instead I got bland, non-engaging and lots of running around the house with flowy nightgowns and candles. All tied together with acting so bad it will make you laugh. Not from Kidman of course, she carries the movie but that’s simply not enough. I’ve never seen the original but I’m willing to bet it’s better than this remake. Not recommended, seriously I wasted my time so there’s no need to waste yours.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

1

SadiePJul 4, 2017

A little girl from a female finishing school comes across a wounded Union soldier (Collin Farrell) while in the woods picking mushrooms & brings him back to the school for medical help. There were 2 adult women & 5 young girls at the schoolA little girl from a female finishing school comes across a wounded Union soldier (Collin Farrell) while in the woods picking mushrooms & brings him back to the school for medical help. There were 2 adult women & 5 young girls at the school & 3 became 'interested' in the soldier - it was not realistic & felt stupid. The first 3/4 of the film was painfully slow, and boring, with no obvious plot or content to keep our attention .... then a story suddenly developed. I thought, 'well finally here we go, a story line' - nope, not really! It could have been really good but fell dead flat. Nicole Kidman did an ok job, but really not much for her to do with her character & Kristen Dunst's character was simply a frustrated woman with no depth at all. Costuming & scenery was good but the film was mostly dark. The end???? Terrible! 1st thing someone said when the lights came on was "can we get our money back?" followed by "that was horrible!"… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

3

RooneyRebertJul 1, 2017

While the exterior shots were lovely, this movie was exceptionally dull and not very steamy. There were some amusing moments, but I was glad for it to end. And those exterior shots that were supposedly in Virginia? No. Clearly notWhile the exterior shots were lovely, this movie was exceptionally dull and not very steamy. There were some amusing moments, but I was glad for it to end. And those exterior shots that were supposedly in Virginia? No. Clearly not Virginia, but southern Louisiana. The best part by far: cuddling with my guy.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

2

shpostalJul 1, 2017

Given good reviews ahead of time, I was expecting a movie that used both atmosphere and the tensions of war to create maybe a suspenseful borderline psychotic thriller and the trailer seemed to indicate that these little private girl's schoolGiven good reviews ahead of time, I was expecting a movie that used both atmosphere and the tensions of war to create maybe a suspenseful borderline psychotic thriller and the trailer seemed to indicate that these little private girl's school deep in the Spanish moss covered Virginia backwoods during the Civil War, 1964 to be exact, was a sinister place with hints of madness blossoming into a real fruit cake of a movie. I was wrong. For a movie called "The Beguiled", there is nothing particularly beguiling about it. Colin Farrell plays a wounded Union soldier taken in by the home to heal from his wounds, and the movie drags along to the half way point with no real action, suspense, and very little moving plot. Only after that point does it begin to show promise, and despite some great possibilities for a truly frightening movie, it falls flat. We never get past the prissy performance by Nicole Kidman, who shows about as much depth as a kiddie pool. What is supposed to pass for real sexual frustration and tension barely scratches the surface, and even when Farrell starts getting "creepy", unconvincingly at that, the movie just doesn't connect. We get a lot of praise for Sofia Coppola, but I don't see the greatness that she supposedly possesses. This is a movie long on expectation, boring in its delivery, and left my wife and I wondering just what the fuss was all about. It's a dud and that's too bad because in the right director's hands, it could have been special. Instead it's just another remake of a movie that didn't need remaking in the first place.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

0

titmo71Jun 30, 2017

This movie just flat out sucks. I wish I could have my hour and a half of life back that I wasted watching this boring, pointless garbage. There isn't that much more to say about it except, stay away, far, far, away.

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

2

Brent_MarchantJul 2, 2017

While atmospherically on target, this tedious snoozer never engages, leaving viewers waiting for an ending that takes far too long to come, even in an offering with a scant runtime of 94 minutes. Half-baked performances that could have beenWhile atmospherically on target, this tedious snoozer never engages, leaving viewers waiting for an ending that takes far too long to come, even in an offering with a scant runtime of 94 minutes. Half-baked performances that could have been phoned in, underscored by virtually nonexistent Southern accents, make for a cast of confederate belles who look bored, disinterested, even robotic at times. The sinister, macabre suspense depicted in the preview make the film appear more captivating than it is, a genuine disappointment to be sure. So watch the trailer instead of the theatrical release for this one, and you'll see a better movie.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

3

ThomassJul 9, 2017

Really did not care for it. A lot of "atmosphere" ? I guess. I wanted to get some fresh air the whole time I saw it. Really hard to believe this was from a novel. Seemed like a short story plot with a twist (slow in coming and kind of likeReally did not care for it. A lot of "atmosphere" ? I guess. I wanted to get some fresh air the whole time I saw it. Really hard to believe this was from a novel. Seemed like a short story plot with a twist (slow in coming and kind of like Poe's stories). Just not very much of a movie. If this is female empowerment I think Wonder Woman would have been better!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

qJan 31, 2018

"The Beguiled" suffers from artsy-fartsy filmmaking techniques that may impress critics but simply distract and annoy normal audience members. Apparently, the director likes to use natural light. I spent the entire film struggling to see"The Beguiled" suffers from artsy-fartsy filmmaking techniques that may impress critics but simply distract and annoy normal audience members. Apparently, the director likes to use natural light. I spent the entire film struggling to see the actors' faces, which made it pretty challenging for them to convey much in the way of emotion while playing their parts. The movie plodded along until it mercifully ended. There were a few moments of high dramatic tension; but, because there really were no characters in the movie about whom I cared enough to be concerned about what might happen to them, even those moments fell flat. The fascination about this movie and so many others is how out of tune the critics' evaluations are with those of normal movie-goers. I'm getting to the point at which I am reluctant to see a movie the critics have praised.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

alexantorchaJul 8, 2017

I entered this movie with much anticipation and far too high expectation. The tactical previews and other reviews misled me to imagine a twisting thriller, and per Sophia Copolla-style, I spent the entire movie exciting myself by predictingI entered this movie with much anticipation and far too high expectation. The tactical previews and other reviews misled me to imagine a twisting thriller, and per Sophia Copolla-style, I spent the entire movie exciting myself by predicting all of the unfortunate finale possibilities that the plot of the movie provided. I was left completely underwhelmed and disappointed in myself for even expecting anything fulfilling in the first place... This IS 2017 Hollywood - And this director seems comfortable producing an empty pile of recycled plastic garbage and feeding it to the public with a spray coating of 'floral wallpaper aesthetic', throwing leaves on top of it, and hoping nobody is hungry for anything of substance. The acting was mostly inconsistent, although given such a dull script, it must have been a challenge to act emotive and passionate. Nicole Kidman and Kirsten Dunst did well, considering. Went home unsatisfied with this film, and would never suggest anyone pay money to see it. Just watch the trailer, it's the entire film, 'spoiler'!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

KungpowmurrayFeb 6, 2020

Wow, this movie was terrible. The trailer itself spoiled LITERALLY EVERY plot point. Such a boring story where nothing interesting ever happens.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews