Realização:
Peter GreenawayArgumento:
Peter GreenawayCâmara:
Sacha ViernyMúsica:
Michael NymanElenco:
Joan Plowright, Juliet Stevenson, Joely Richardson, Bernard Hill, David Morrissey, Vanni Corbellini, Trevor Cooper, Ian Talbot, Edward Felix Pole Tudor (mais)Sinopses(1)
Three generations of women who share the same name -- 63-year-old Cissie Colpitts (Joan Plowright), her daughter Cissie Colpitts II (Juliet Stevenson), and granddaughter Cissie Colpitts III (Joely Richardson) -- have all discovered the same way of dealing with their marital problems. The senior Cissie has drowned her husband Jake (Bryan Pringle) in the bathtub, her daughter sent her spouse Hardy (Trevor Cooper) to a watery grave in the ocean, and the youngest Cissie sent her husband Bellamy (David Morrissey) down in a swimming pool. Needless to say, local coroner Henry Madgett (Barnard Hill) has some questions about this sudden rash of drownings among the Colpitts husbands, and again all three women respond in the same way: they promise to sleep with Henry in exchange for recording the deaths as accidental (though none of the Cissies make good on this promise). When the local gossip mill begins working overtime about this sudden rash of water-related deaths, Henry's teenage son Smut (Jason Edwards) comes to the aid of the Cissies and organizes a tug-of-war, with he and the Colpitts women on one side and the doubting townspeople on the other (and, of course, a river in the middle). (texto oficial do distribuidor)
(mais)Críticas (3)
The usual intellectual plaything for festival audience from the workshop of Peter Greenaway, which this time I think will mainly satisfy feminists and stubborn masochists among men. I watched the movie in a film club, where it belongs due to its content. It's actually a very dark comedy about a peculiar resolution of relationship conflicts. Overall impression: 65%.
()
Peter Greenaway might not be the director for me. His film has a plot, it has ideas, and something is going on throughout, but I just didn't resonate with that approach. However, I acknowledge the fact that it doesn't try to unnecessarily beautify shots and it shows what can't be shown but should be, and which has its significance in the film by being natural.
()
1 Greenaway 2 is 3 the son of 4 Flemish 5 painting 6 just 7 as 8 turnover 9 to 10 language 11 determinedly 12 can 13 reproduce 14 classical 15 Cartesian 16 desire 17 for 18 calculability, 19 symmetry 20 Spinozian 21 more 22 geometrico. 23 His 24 films 25 are 26 also 27 perfectly 28 symmetrical, 29 circles 30 of stories 31 and 30 visual 31 elements 32 that 33 are shaping 34 themselves 35 always 36 eventually 37 connect 38 in 39 perfect 40 motion. 41 And 42 it 43 is 44 in 45 them 46 the capture 47 of the absurdity 48 of speech, 49 giving birth 50 to the madness 51 of lives 52 of characters 53 and 54 film 55 stories, 56 and 57 that 58 in 59 connection 60 and 61 not 62 against 63 the given 64 symmetry, 65 which 66 we 67 illusively 68 create 69 around 70 ourselves. 71 However, 72 his 73 films 74 are 75 also 76 opulent; 77 gluttony 78 of images 79 and 80 scenography, 81 scripts - 82 when 83 all 84 elements 85 successfully 87 connect, 88 it 89 becomes 90 the genius, 92 visually 93 captivating, 94 iconoclastic, 95 socially 96 provocative 97 Greenaway. 98 However, 99 when 100 they don’t... [* It becomes an empty pose, a perfectly circled form, but enclosed within itself. You can see that it didn't turn out in a perfectly metric system like Greenaway's, but he is simply a genius, even though not every work of his has to be a masterpiece.]
()
Galeria (9)
Photo © Miramax Films
![Maridos à Água - Cartões lobby](http://image.pmgstatic.com/cache/resized/w663/files/images/film/photos/160/582/160582718_5733cd.jpg)
Publicidade