Disobedience is a very well written love story between two women, set in a religious community. I loved the acting in it, Rachel McAdams and Rachel Weisz are great in it. What surprised me the most was the complexity of the male character played by Alessandro Nivola, who is a stand out in my opinion. He is incredibly written and the ending of the film where some decisions need to be made gets very touching. The movie is a bit slow in some parts but really that's my only real complaint.
Overall I would recommend this movie to anyone who wants to see a love story done right, well done to everyone involved with the movie as they did a wonderful job.
179 Reviews
A well-told love-story set against a background of religious orthodoxy
Bertaut18 December 2018
Depicting the problems that can arise when deeply held spiritual beliefs clash with notions of personal freedom, Disobedience is the story of a forbidden love given a second chance. Based on Naomi Alderman's 2006 novel, written for the screen by Sebastián Lelio and Rebecca Lenkiewicz, and directed by Lelio, the film covers some of the same thematic territory as Lelio's previous features; Gloria (2013) deals with a 58-year-old divorcée trying to re-enter the dating scene by frequenting singles-bars, and Una mujer fantástica (2017) looks at a transgender waitress trying to come to terms with the death of her boyfriend, whilst also navigating a prejudiced society. In Disobedience, Lelio turns his attention towards a lesbian relationship within London's relatively insular Modern Orthodox Jewish community. What all three films have in common is the centrality of a complex and strong woman facing up to (almost exclusively patriarchal) societal hostility. Kind of like a cross between Carol (2015) and Apostasy (2017), Disobedience eschews melodrama, and is uninterested in presenting a binary story where faith is the Big Bad. Although it is certainly critical of the strictures that can result from a rigid application of Halacha (Jewish religious laws), the community itself is depicted respectfully, with the most representative Jewish character arguably the most sympathetic figure in the film. Although things can be far too on the nose from time to time, Lelio's non-intrusive direction more than compensates for that, and overall, this is a fine film, both thought-provoking and moving.
The film opens with Rav Kruschka (Anton Lesser) abruptly dying in the midst of a service. In New York, his estranged daughter Ronit (Rachel Weisz) gets a call informing her of his death, and she returns home, heading to the house of Dovid (a superb Alessandro Nivola), her childhood friend, and Kruska's protégé. Although the community isn't especially happy to see her back, Dovid offers her a spare room. She accepts and is stunned to learn he is married to Esti (Rachel McAdams), another childhood friend. Over the next few days as the community prepare for Krushka's levaya (funeral), it becomes clear that Ronit and Esti were once more than friends, and the more time they spend in one another's company, the more their suppressed feelings come to the surface.
Thematically, Disobedience is far more concerned with the clash of views that results from Ronit's return than it is with condemning the beliefs of the community per se. When she first arrives at Dovid's house, she instinctively reaches out to hug him, forgetting about negiah (the forbidding of physical contact between men and women not related by blood, or married), and he immediately, although not unkindly, recoils. Later, there is an exceptionally awkward (but very funny) Shabbat meal, where Ronit seems to take great delight in being as outrageous as possible, riling up the assembled guests with her progressive worldview. This kind of ideological conflict, however, is also found within the characters themselves. Esti, for example, is torn between her desire for Ronit on the one hand, and her commitment to Dovid on the other. For her part, Ronit too internalises discord; although she has been estranged from him for many years, she is genuinely hurt to learn just how completely Krushka had divorced himself of her memory, seen most clearly when his obituary refers to him as "sadly childless".
Tellingly, during the Shabbat dinner, Dovid tries to play peacekeeper, whilst a couple of cutaways to Esti show her smiling to herself as Ronit burrows under the skin of those present. This kind of delicate touch on Lelio's part can be seen throughout the film, with numerous wordless gestures allowing the actors to convey backstory in lieu of exposition. For example, after Ronit arrives, although Dovid recoils when she tries to hug him, and although when she tries to light up a cigarette in his kitchen, he asks her to smoke in the garden, he accompanies her outside, shielding the flame from the wind in a gesture both kind and intimate.
On paper, the story might lend itself to a condemnation of the kind of social suffocation and emotional repression that can result from fundamentalism. Instead, however, the film spends time building a respectful, if not idealised, picture of the community's beliefs and practices. A key part of this respect is Dovid himself, an inherently decent and honourable man. In a less nuanced film, Dovid would be a fire-and-brimstone obstacle to Ronit and Esti's happiness, a Roger Chillingworth-type. Instead he is presented as someone who, like Esti, faces a difficult choice - that between his communal position and his faith on the one hand, and his genuine love of Esti and affection for Ronit on the other; his lifelong devotion to the Tanakh conflicting with modern day sensibilities. Indeed, perhaps Dovid's most salient characteristic is internal conflict. This is manifested aesthetically in a scene where he is addressing the synagogue. Lelio films the scene in such a tight close-up, that every time Nivola moves even slightly off his mark, he goes out of focus. It's a brilliant example of content generating form, and is typical of Lelio's directorial lightness of touch.
However, for all that, the film never lets you forget that this is a community of negiah, where married women must wear a sheitel wig in public, and where the genders are strictly divided at religious services. As Ronit and Esti discuss their sexuality, Esti points out that she and Dovid have sex every Friday night, "as is expected", and that the reason she was married to Dovid in the first place was that Krushka hoped "marriage would cure" her, a concept not far from homosexual conversion therapy. In this sense, although respectful of the community, the film does challenge some of the tenets of their belief system, particularly its myopic sexism.
Obviously, a major theme is sexuality. Much has been made of the sex scene between Ronit and Esti, with some critics accusing it of being little more than titillation at best, a graphic example of the male gaze at worst. However, this is to completely miss the point of the scene in relation to the whole. There are actually two sex scenes in the film; one between Ronit and Esti, and the other between Esti and Dovid. And although they couldn't be more different, they also couldn't exist without one another, as the abandonment, lust, and sense of pressure being released when Esti is with Ronit contrasts sharply with the detached, formulaic, and passionless scene with Dovid; the two scenes explicitly comment on one another. The scene between Ronit and Esti is the physical manifestation of the characters' long-repressed desire. It's a wholly justified narrative moment, and a necessary beat for the two characters. It's not an aside or a piece of voyeuristic male fantasy, it's the centre of the whole film. Together, the two scenes represent Esti's binary choice - an unbridled and sexually fulfilling, but unstable relationship with Ronit, or a dutiful and dull, but respectful and secure relationship with Dovid.
If I had one major criticism, it would be that although Lelio's direction is extremely subtle, some of his and Lenkiewicz's writing choices are spectacularly on the nose. The opening sermon is a good example - a religious diatribe whose subject is mankind's freedom to choose, the concomitant ability to disobey, and the notion that freedom is impossible without sacrifice, in a film about these very same issues. Another example is that Dovid and his yeshiva students are discussing the one book of the Tanakh dealing with sexuality rather than spirituality, the Song of Songs, whilst Esti's secondary school students are studying adultery in Othello. The worst example of this, however, is found when Ronit and Esti go to Krushka's house and Ronit turns on the radio, which just so happens to be playing The Cure's "Lovesong", a song which perfectly encapsulates their situation ("Whenever I'm alone with you/You make me feel like I am home again"). Not exactly subtle.
These issues aside though, this is an excellently crafted film. Once again examining female desire, issues of patriarchal oppression, and profound self-doubt, Lelio delivers a mature and considered meditation on the conflict between faith and sexuality. Eschewing black and white criticism of secular isolationism, Lelio respects the milieu too much to cast it as the villain. Instead, there is an elegance to the way in which he depicts it. Equal parts sensual and spiritual, the lethargic pace and absence of any narrative fireworks will probably alienate some, especially those expecting a pseudo-porn movie, but for the rest of us, this is thoughtful and provocative cinema in the best sense of the term.
The film opens with Rav Kruschka (Anton Lesser) abruptly dying in the midst of a service. In New York, his estranged daughter Ronit (Rachel Weisz) gets a call informing her of his death, and she returns home, heading to the house of Dovid (a superb Alessandro Nivola), her childhood friend, and Kruska's protégé. Although the community isn't especially happy to see her back, Dovid offers her a spare room. She accepts and is stunned to learn he is married to Esti (Rachel McAdams), another childhood friend. Over the next few days as the community prepare for Krushka's levaya (funeral), it becomes clear that Ronit and Esti were once more than friends, and the more time they spend in one another's company, the more their suppressed feelings come to the surface.
Thematically, Disobedience is far more concerned with the clash of views that results from Ronit's return than it is with condemning the beliefs of the community per se. When she first arrives at Dovid's house, she instinctively reaches out to hug him, forgetting about negiah (the forbidding of physical contact between men and women not related by blood, or married), and he immediately, although not unkindly, recoils. Later, there is an exceptionally awkward (but very funny) Shabbat meal, where Ronit seems to take great delight in being as outrageous as possible, riling up the assembled guests with her progressive worldview. This kind of ideological conflict, however, is also found within the characters themselves. Esti, for example, is torn between her desire for Ronit on the one hand, and her commitment to Dovid on the other. For her part, Ronit too internalises discord; although she has been estranged from him for many years, she is genuinely hurt to learn just how completely Krushka had divorced himself of her memory, seen most clearly when his obituary refers to him as "sadly childless".
Tellingly, during the Shabbat dinner, Dovid tries to play peacekeeper, whilst a couple of cutaways to Esti show her smiling to herself as Ronit burrows under the skin of those present. This kind of delicate touch on Lelio's part can be seen throughout the film, with numerous wordless gestures allowing the actors to convey backstory in lieu of exposition. For example, after Ronit arrives, although Dovid recoils when she tries to hug him, and although when she tries to light up a cigarette in his kitchen, he asks her to smoke in the garden, he accompanies her outside, shielding the flame from the wind in a gesture both kind and intimate.
On paper, the story might lend itself to a condemnation of the kind of social suffocation and emotional repression that can result from fundamentalism. Instead, however, the film spends time building a respectful, if not idealised, picture of the community's beliefs and practices. A key part of this respect is Dovid himself, an inherently decent and honourable man. In a less nuanced film, Dovid would be a fire-and-brimstone obstacle to Ronit and Esti's happiness, a Roger Chillingworth-type. Instead he is presented as someone who, like Esti, faces a difficult choice - that between his communal position and his faith on the one hand, and his genuine love of Esti and affection for Ronit on the other; his lifelong devotion to the Tanakh conflicting with modern day sensibilities. Indeed, perhaps Dovid's most salient characteristic is internal conflict. This is manifested aesthetically in a scene where he is addressing the synagogue. Lelio films the scene in such a tight close-up, that every time Nivola moves even slightly off his mark, he goes out of focus. It's a brilliant example of content generating form, and is typical of Lelio's directorial lightness of touch.
However, for all that, the film never lets you forget that this is a community of negiah, where married women must wear a sheitel wig in public, and where the genders are strictly divided at religious services. As Ronit and Esti discuss their sexuality, Esti points out that she and Dovid have sex every Friday night, "as is expected", and that the reason she was married to Dovid in the first place was that Krushka hoped "marriage would cure" her, a concept not far from homosexual conversion therapy. In this sense, although respectful of the community, the film does challenge some of the tenets of their belief system, particularly its myopic sexism.
Obviously, a major theme is sexuality. Much has been made of the sex scene between Ronit and Esti, with some critics accusing it of being little more than titillation at best, a graphic example of the male gaze at worst. However, this is to completely miss the point of the scene in relation to the whole. There are actually two sex scenes in the film; one between Ronit and Esti, and the other between Esti and Dovid. And although they couldn't be more different, they also couldn't exist without one another, as the abandonment, lust, and sense of pressure being released when Esti is with Ronit contrasts sharply with the detached, formulaic, and passionless scene with Dovid; the two scenes explicitly comment on one another. The scene between Ronit and Esti is the physical manifestation of the characters' long-repressed desire. It's a wholly justified narrative moment, and a necessary beat for the two characters. It's not an aside or a piece of voyeuristic male fantasy, it's the centre of the whole film. Together, the two scenes represent Esti's binary choice - an unbridled and sexually fulfilling, but unstable relationship with Ronit, or a dutiful and dull, but respectful and secure relationship with Dovid.
If I had one major criticism, it would be that although Lelio's direction is extremely subtle, some of his and Lenkiewicz's writing choices are spectacularly on the nose. The opening sermon is a good example - a religious diatribe whose subject is mankind's freedom to choose, the concomitant ability to disobey, and the notion that freedom is impossible without sacrifice, in a film about these very same issues. Another example is that Dovid and his yeshiva students are discussing the one book of the Tanakh dealing with sexuality rather than spirituality, the Song of Songs, whilst Esti's secondary school students are studying adultery in Othello. The worst example of this, however, is found when Ronit and Esti go to Krushka's house and Ronit turns on the radio, which just so happens to be playing The Cure's "Lovesong", a song which perfectly encapsulates their situation ("Whenever I'm alone with you/You make me feel like I am home again"). Not exactly subtle.
These issues aside though, this is an excellently crafted film. Once again examining female desire, issues of patriarchal oppression, and profound self-doubt, Lelio delivers a mature and considered meditation on the conflict between faith and sexuality. Eschewing black and white criticism of secular isolationism, Lelio respects the milieu too much to cast it as the villain. Instead, there is an elegance to the way in which he depicts it. Equal parts sensual and spiritual, the lethargic pace and absence of any narrative fireworks will probably alienate some, especially those expecting a pseudo-porn movie, but for the rest of us, this is thoughtful and provocative cinema in the best sense of the term.
Seems Many Totally Missed The Main Story, LMAO!
TheAnimalMother6 November 2019
It's a sad fact too and I'm sorry for laughing about it. I'm imperfect just as you are. Some people perhaps were too offended, others just too interested and overinvolved in the lesbian aspect or a certain moral value or political slant blinded them. Whatever the case. So far this is DEFINITLY the 2nd best film I've seen from 2017. If you need to know, no, I'm not gay, I didn't even feel that the gay issue in the film was of any large significance. It is of some significance, sure, but they could've used another issue entirely; And the overall meaning and theme of the film would've still been essentially the exact same.
I thought the acting, story and direction were superb. I'm really surprised more people have not found this film to be as fantastic as I did. The current IMDb rating of 6.6 seems extremely low to me. Many critics loved it, as did I. Disobedience I suppose is not a film for everyone. Overthinking can easily get in the way of this one. Just sit back and watch this subtle and beautiful film and think about it later. As the Buddha is often credited with saying, "Think less, observe more.".
I'm pretty sure many people got so offended by certain things in the film that they missed nearly all of the rich and beautiful depth that this film actually has. Sometimes the most clever truths are not so obvious, especially to the distracted mind. Scientists at this point have actually even proven the very narrow focus of the average human mind.
In my view most of the greatest pieces of art in history are the pieces that challenge the way you/we look at things. This is definitely that kind of film. This is not just another piece of entertainment like much of the regurgitated and/or meaningless trash movies of our day. This truly is a beautiful piece of art; And to those of you who watched it and missed this fact...too bad for you. More than anything else, this film is about human choice, and sadly for many, that is a very scary subject. Far too scary for some to honestly deal with. May we All hope for a today filled with greater clarity. For those of you that thought this film was good, but not that good, I challenge you to watch it again without overthinking it while watching it. Shhh...just watch and listen. 8.5/10.
I thought the acting, story and direction were superb. I'm really surprised more people have not found this film to be as fantastic as I did. The current IMDb rating of 6.6 seems extremely low to me. Many critics loved it, as did I. Disobedience I suppose is not a film for everyone. Overthinking can easily get in the way of this one. Just sit back and watch this subtle and beautiful film and think about it later. As the Buddha is often credited with saying, "Think less, observe more.".
I'm pretty sure many people got so offended by certain things in the film that they missed nearly all of the rich and beautiful depth that this film actually has. Sometimes the most clever truths are not so obvious, especially to the distracted mind. Scientists at this point have actually even proven the very narrow focus of the average human mind.
In my view most of the greatest pieces of art in history are the pieces that challenge the way you/we look at things. This is definitely that kind of film. This is not just another piece of entertainment like much of the regurgitated and/or meaningless trash movies of our day. This truly is a beautiful piece of art; And to those of you who watched it and missed this fact...too bad for you. More than anything else, this film is about human choice, and sadly for many, that is a very scary subject. Far too scary for some to honestly deal with. May we All hope for a today filled with greater clarity. For those of you that thought this film was good, but not that good, I challenge you to watch it again without overthinking it while watching it. Shhh...just watch and listen. 8.5/10.
Disobedience (2018)
rockman18230 April 2018
Yes, there was another film that came out during Avengers: Infinity War release week. I was immediately excited for Disobedience as soon as I heard about it. I mean how could you not be? Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams (who I am infatuated with) in a film about a forbidden romance? I was so in. I did see Sebastián Lelio's A Fantastic Woman earlier this year, so I was really pleasantly surprised to hear he had another project out so soon. I can draw parallels between the two films and while Disobedience is not perfect and has lapses its well acted and has an interesting look at a religious community being scarred by a "scandalous" affair.
The film is about a woman who returns to a very strict Orthodox Jewish community when her father dies. While there she sees her former lover who is now married. The problem is the fact that people in the Jewish community do not know about the relationship that has occured and also because a lesbian affair is frowned upon in the community. Both women also must deal with harboring the feelings that they have for each other, while attempting to maintain their standing in the Jewish community.
The first thing that's instantly noticeable about the film is its depth into an Orthodox Jewish world. The films backdrop is its strict nature and how a lesbian romance must be hidden from the community. Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams are great in this as expected, and have great chemistry. Their intimate scenes (which are very very intimate) are believable and are a strong point in selling the romance. I always knew McAdams was a talent since she had a good showing on season 2 of True Detective.
The film reminded me of A Fantastic Woman in a way because in that film there is a struggle to accept a transgender person, although the implications in that film are more hostile. I also couldn't help but compare this film to Carol (which is one of the very best films of the decade). Its nowhere near the levels of Carol but does a decent job for what the film is. There are lapses where the film seems slow and it suffers from its best moments being purely when Weisz and McAdams share the screen. Its still a worthy watch, just don't expect anything spectacular.
6/10
The film is about a woman who returns to a very strict Orthodox Jewish community when her father dies. While there she sees her former lover who is now married. The problem is the fact that people in the Jewish community do not know about the relationship that has occured and also because a lesbian affair is frowned upon in the community. Both women also must deal with harboring the feelings that they have for each other, while attempting to maintain their standing in the Jewish community.
The first thing that's instantly noticeable about the film is its depth into an Orthodox Jewish world. The films backdrop is its strict nature and how a lesbian romance must be hidden from the community. Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams are great in this as expected, and have great chemistry. Their intimate scenes (which are very very intimate) are believable and are a strong point in selling the romance. I always knew McAdams was a talent since she had a good showing on season 2 of True Detective.
The film reminded me of A Fantastic Woman in a way because in that film there is a struggle to accept a transgender person, although the implications in that film are more hostile. I also couldn't help but compare this film to Carol (which is one of the very best films of the decade). Its nowhere near the levels of Carol but does a decent job for what the film is. There are lapses where the film seems slow and it suffers from its best moments being purely when Weisz and McAdams share the screen. Its still a worthy watch, just don't expect anything spectacular.
6/10
Oh, what could have been
mi-rakel7 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I was really looking forward to seeing this film because I was hoping to get an insight into the world of Orthodox Jews in north London, which is a world I know little about and a world that isn't really open to people that aren't already a part of it. Sadly is seems like the director Sebastián Lelio knows as little as me about this world. What we get is not an inside perspective of either the orthodox Jewish community or a lesbian relationship. The two main women in the film are always viewed through the male gaze. The whole sex scene between the two women which is completely cringe and stylised and seems to be screaming: look omg two women are having sex and they have all the same parts!! (Like the shot of hands in matching pants). And Esti's climax which according to a quote on IMDb's trivia page is very important for the story. I can agree with that but not with the way it's shot; in profile, slowing zooming in on her face. It's very stylised and obviously an outside perspective. It's not her own POV and it's certainly not Ronit's. It's the voyueristic male gaze. And of course, in the end they don't get to be together, as in all lesbian love stories coming out of Hollywood. The highlights of this film is the acting from Rachel McAdams, she has a few brilliant, intriguing moments. Alessandro Nivola's acting is also very good. Rachel Weisz's characters is so cliche she fails to ever become very interesting. As for the rest of the cast (well-known British faces) they just come across as Brits in wigs rather than members of the Jewish community.
The story has so much potential but sadly, the film falls short. Perhaps if they had chosen a director who was either Jewish or a lesbian they would have had better luck...
The story has so much potential but sadly, the film falls short. Perhaps if they had chosen a director who was either Jewish or a lesbian they would have had better luck...
The challenges of being human.
PK_7123 August 2023
Disobedience is a truly beautiful film about the challenges of being human, balancing your beliefs, your expectations and your true self. So many people struggle to accept who they really are, because they're afraid of the reactions of others. Perhaps deeply religious people have a tougher time than others, because they often judge themselves at least as harshly as their communities.
Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams do a great job playing the two childhood friends (Ronit and Esti) who meet again years later, only to discover that their feelings for each other haven't changed. Alessandro Nivola plays the young rabbi husband (Dovid) of Rachel McAdams character (Esti), and portrays him beautifully.
I encourage you to see it. I doubt that you'll regret it.
Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams do a great job playing the two childhood friends (Ronit and Esti) who meet again years later, only to discover that their feelings for each other haven't changed. Alessandro Nivola plays the young rabbi husband (Dovid) of Rachel McAdams character (Esti), and portrays him beautifully.
I encourage you to see it. I doubt that you'll regret it.
Rewrite and a new Editor
itgirlx22 May 2018
I really wanted to love this movie. Some parts I enjoyed but was repeatedly taken out of the narrative by filmmaker choices.
The editing left much to be desired-scenes are awkwardly edited where you can see it's a different take of the same scene. Many of the edits simply appeared ham-handed and amateur.
Continuity also seems an issue; the progress of the story is chunked out, like skipping around chapters in a book. The screenplay lacks the dialog which would convey the depth of the story and it's characters.
The actors are quite good but not able to fill all the missing bits of good filmmaking. The score was musically fine but seems to have been written for a different movie. The pacing too, is slow and awkward like much of this film.
The Rachels handled what little they had to work with well. The sex scene was interesting and respectfully shot but again, the editing sucked all the life out of this love story.
Though I think this film was a missed opportunity, the potential for a well-written and directed sequel could fix what didn't work in this outing.
I really wanted to like it but kinda didn't.
The editing left much to be desired-scenes are awkwardly edited where you can see it's a different take of the same scene. Many of the edits simply appeared ham-handed and amateur.
Continuity also seems an issue; the progress of the story is chunked out, like skipping around chapters in a book. The screenplay lacks the dialog which would convey the depth of the story and it's characters.
The actors are quite good but not able to fill all the missing bits of good filmmaking. The score was musically fine but seems to have been written for a different movie. The pacing too, is slow and awkward like much of this film.
The Rachels handled what little they had to work with well. The sex scene was interesting and respectfully shot but again, the editing sucked all the life out of this love story.
Though I think this film was a missed opportunity, the potential for a well-written and directed sequel could fix what didn't work in this outing.
I really wanted to like it but kinda didn't.
Sexy, good in some details, but weak in its major points
gphgrm0130 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Nobody will deny that erotic scenes between Rachel W. and Rachel M. are quite an asset; however, this movie is far from perfect. It seems like the movie actually does not bring much new, except for the picture of a desire forbidden in a certain community, along with the women emancipation, again, forbidden in a certain community. This is all pretty much seen in like 80% of LGBT movie, so the viewer more or less pretty much knows what every next scene will be about. There are a lot of cliches. The narration is too slow for a plot that already contains common places. The plot is actually quite explosive taken as an idea, but the script, the story in itself, does not allow characters to develop fully, they stay quite unmotivated in number of situations, and the minimalism of dialogues is not very well done.
Still there are some intriguing points worth mentioning. One is a picante trigger created around Esti, the character played masterfully by Rachel McAdams, rabi's wife and school teacher, who quite happily made an escape to a reunion lesbian sex, with her ex lover, Ronnit, without much hesitation, immediately when she had a chance - the audience might expect a little bit more hesitation about it, but there was no any. After Esti's and Ronnit's conversation, we soon realize why. The shy and decent rabi's wife, actually identifies herself completely as woman-to-woman sex oriented, and she is pretty much faking her performance in her married life, simply because she enjoys other things about her status - respectable school teacher who loves her job, and loves the community she lives in. So, contrary to expectations, the rebellious Ronnit who paid a huge price for loving Esti in the early youth is not the one who is "the queerest" part of the story. Esti and her marriage to a childhood friend who knows his wife is into women is much more queer than Ronnit, whose is more like a sexually fluid and haunted by her father's decision to disown her, than really "the lesbian". This shift in expectation from these two characters is interesting, and it explains why, in the end, what exists between them is more childhood friendship and a huge sexual lust for each other, accumulated by the resistance and abstinence, than a mature love. However, the complications show up, since even faked sex with the man can bring a woman to pregnancy, and this is how Esti all of a sudden has to decide what she wants not just for herself, but also for her unborn child.
Still the end of the film is its weakest part. In the end, Esti, realizing that her husband (former childhood friend) will never stop her from leaving, dismisses the idea of actual leaving with or without Ronnit and consummating the sexual and romantic freedom, or raising a child outside the Orthodox rigidity. It seems her husband's readiness to let her go if she wants so, which looks a bit hasted and non-convincing, gives her enough motivation to stay in this faked marriage, deliver the child and maintain the order, with everybody's blessing. Also, it seems that Ronnit's only real sin was not being in love with a woman at the time, but wanting to show it openly, and its not quite clear why she never openly condemns her community for expelling her for being truthful. And finally, the end in which Esti stays where she is, still sexually crazy about Ronnit, but ready to continue with her faked life, looks like a bad solution. It sends a message that a freedom to chose a faked life is more important than living a real life in accordance to your real interests and passions. To me it looks like a painful self-denial which will kill Esti this way or another. However, the movie does not acknowledge this concern, in the end everybody behaves as if Esti's choice is a smart thing to do, while Ronnit also behaves as if its understandable that her father loved Torah more than her, and never really reached out to her. In the end, there is too much abolition of the lifestyle that is so apparently so repressive for women, and pushes them to doing naughty things only in deepest secrecy. Too much of a lie for my taste.
Still there are some intriguing points worth mentioning. One is a picante trigger created around Esti, the character played masterfully by Rachel McAdams, rabi's wife and school teacher, who quite happily made an escape to a reunion lesbian sex, with her ex lover, Ronnit, without much hesitation, immediately when she had a chance - the audience might expect a little bit more hesitation about it, but there was no any. After Esti's and Ronnit's conversation, we soon realize why. The shy and decent rabi's wife, actually identifies herself completely as woman-to-woman sex oriented, and she is pretty much faking her performance in her married life, simply because she enjoys other things about her status - respectable school teacher who loves her job, and loves the community she lives in. So, contrary to expectations, the rebellious Ronnit who paid a huge price for loving Esti in the early youth is not the one who is "the queerest" part of the story. Esti and her marriage to a childhood friend who knows his wife is into women is much more queer than Ronnit, whose is more like a sexually fluid and haunted by her father's decision to disown her, than really "the lesbian". This shift in expectation from these two characters is interesting, and it explains why, in the end, what exists between them is more childhood friendship and a huge sexual lust for each other, accumulated by the resistance and abstinence, than a mature love. However, the complications show up, since even faked sex with the man can bring a woman to pregnancy, and this is how Esti all of a sudden has to decide what she wants not just for herself, but also for her unborn child.
Still the end of the film is its weakest part. In the end, Esti, realizing that her husband (former childhood friend) will never stop her from leaving, dismisses the idea of actual leaving with or without Ronnit and consummating the sexual and romantic freedom, or raising a child outside the Orthodox rigidity. It seems her husband's readiness to let her go if she wants so, which looks a bit hasted and non-convincing, gives her enough motivation to stay in this faked marriage, deliver the child and maintain the order, with everybody's blessing. Also, it seems that Ronnit's only real sin was not being in love with a woman at the time, but wanting to show it openly, and its not quite clear why she never openly condemns her community for expelling her for being truthful. And finally, the end in which Esti stays where she is, still sexually crazy about Ronnit, but ready to continue with her faked life, looks like a bad solution. It sends a message that a freedom to chose a faked life is more important than living a real life in accordance to your real interests and passions. To me it looks like a painful self-denial which will kill Esti this way or another. However, the movie does not acknowledge this concern, in the end everybody behaves as if Esti's choice is a smart thing to do, while Ronnit also behaves as if its understandable that her father loved Torah more than her, and never really reached out to her. In the end, there is too much abolition of the lifestyle that is so apparently so repressive for women, and pushes them to doing naughty things only in deepest secrecy. Too much of a lie for my taste.
This doesn't end bad as some may say
anelsg31 July 2018
This is not a story of a women caving in as some said, this is a realistic portait of a women that grew in a harsh community and succeed to confront her homosexuality. The acting of both Rachaels is superb, academy material ! And the male character is really complex and beautiful
Slow Burn but Worth it
heidibokor3 September 2022
This is what we call a "slow burn" type of movie. The premise is that a woman returns for her fathers funeral in a highly restrictive Jewish community that she was shunned from for having relations with another woman. And while home, of course, her and this other woman rekindle what was lost long ago. First of all, Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams have absolutely stellar chemistry, some of the best chemistry I have seen on TV ever....regardless of what gender they are. Second, yes there is an explosive sex scene, but it's not the raunchy, nudity filled scenes you see nowadays. It's a very tasteful scene that shows desire and love. And of course, these women again have insane chemistry. There are several stories going on in this movie. One story is this love between these two women. The second story is about this woman living in this Jewish community not being able to be who she really is and forced to marry a man she doesn't love. So you see the struggles she has with that. The third story follows the husband who is dealing with all of this coming to a head and how he handles everything. This is a great movie, slow yes, but still worth it. The acting from the three leads is amazing. The ending....it's probably not what most people wanted, but it's more realistic than just the usual happy ending drivel we get nowadays.
Interesting premise, bad finish and poor editing.
earthboli20 July 2018
I wanted to like this movie. It's rare that A-list actresses sign on to play lovers, and rare to see romance between women on the big screen. But a lot of things didn't quite fit, from the editing, to the storyline, to the music, to the pacing.
The score: whimsical at times, even in dramatic/tense scenes, which felt completely inappropriate. The score seemed like it belonged in a bizarre children's movie, but yet the singing scenes were very dark and sad/somber-sounding. This movie clearly took itself very seriously, so why the carnival music in parts? The cast: good acting overall, no complaints. The story: decent premise. A Rabbi's death brings together old flames in a strictly orthodox Jewish London community, and tensions rise, as well as feelings. But the end...no thanks. Editing/pacing: abrupt at times and feeling disjointed, yet also slow and lingering too long in scenes that dragged. So many directors think that if you are slow and have long, tedious scenes, you will be considered a genius for being artsy and understated. That just isn't how it works. Character development: eh. This movie really would have benefitted from more than just a few words about the past, but scenes depicting more of the history and story between the women. I want to see more depth with these women, but it does end up feeling one-dimensional due to the script and/or editing.
In sum, even today, in 2018, 9 out of 10 movies about women who love each other end with suicide/murder, a woman going back to a man, a woman cheating on her partner with a man (or woman), or some other equally unforgivable outcome, and I say unforgivable because movie producers love to portray gay/bi women as tortured and unable to experience a healthy same-sex relationship. Guess which one this movie falls under, because I won't spoil it...
My advice, skip this and re-watch Carol. I felt like this one wasted my time.
The score: whimsical at times, even in dramatic/tense scenes, which felt completely inappropriate. The score seemed like it belonged in a bizarre children's movie, but yet the singing scenes were very dark and sad/somber-sounding. This movie clearly took itself very seriously, so why the carnival music in parts? The cast: good acting overall, no complaints. The story: decent premise. A Rabbi's death brings together old flames in a strictly orthodox Jewish London community, and tensions rise, as well as feelings. But the end...no thanks. Editing/pacing: abrupt at times and feeling disjointed, yet also slow and lingering too long in scenes that dragged. So many directors think that if you are slow and have long, tedious scenes, you will be considered a genius for being artsy and understated. That just isn't how it works. Character development: eh. This movie really would have benefitted from more than just a few words about the past, but scenes depicting more of the history and story between the women. I want to see more depth with these women, but it does end up feeling one-dimensional due to the script and/or editing.
In sum, even today, in 2018, 9 out of 10 movies about women who love each other end with suicide/murder, a woman going back to a man, a woman cheating on her partner with a man (or woman), or some other equally unforgivable outcome, and I say unforgivable because movie producers love to portray gay/bi women as tortured and unable to experience a healthy same-sex relationship. Guess which one this movie falls under, because I won't spoil it...
My advice, skip this and re-watch Carol. I felt like this one wasted my time.
Must watch !!
Adilovelana15 November 2018
Passionate and Thought Provoking
ThomasDrufke7 June 2018
Aside from being the first in line to see the next blockbuster or superhero film, I really enjoy going to see movies that show you a different side of life. Whether that be a post-apocalyptic wasteland, a medieval love story, or an inner city crime drama, movies have a way of shaping the world through different eyes and impacting your viewpoint on things for the better. Disobedience is a nice example of a film that displays a forbidden but passionate love story from a fascinating point of view, the religious angle. I no longer consider myself an overtly religious person, but if done right, the stories that derive from that of faith are certainly interesting to watch. And in Disobedience, religion is at the forefront without being overpowering. Rachel McAdams and Rachel Weisz play Esti and Ronit respectively, two lovers who find themselves back in the same town after the ladder was essentially exiled for being in love with Esti as a young woman. It's these performances, along with Alessandro Nivola as Dovid that bolster this deep drama with humanity and heart. What each of the trio goes through individually is incredibly powerful, especially when you come to realize the emotional stakes that become involved as the film near its end. I found Disobedience to be an extremely thought provoking and unique take on a romance.
7.8/10
7.8/10
Brokeback Mountain-Style Film With Too Many False Endings
lavatch23 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
"Disobedience" would have had a better title in "Secrets and Lies." It was wasn't that the characters Ronit Krushka (Rachel Weisz) and Esti Kuperman (Rachel McAdams) were disobeying their God in their lesbian relationship. Rather, all the evidence points to their repressed community that resulted in their stultifying and tortured lives.
If there is any character who is central to the lives of Ronit, Esti, and the kindly young rabbi Dovid Kuperman, it is the elderly Rav Shlomo Krushka, who hovers over them all, even after his death. At one critical point in the past, the Rav had caught Ronit and Esti in flagrante dilecto, resulting in Ronit fleeing to New York and Esti trying to "straighten up and flight right" by marrying Dovid.
The film has a symmetry in the final words of Rav speaking to his synagogue about Hashem creating the angels, beasts, and the humans after six days of hard labor that are finally analyzed at the end of the film by Dovid. The gist of the argument is that the angels and beasts are naturally disposed to obedience, while human beings have free will. We never learn the Rav's feelings about what it means to have free will. Rather, it takes two hours of this laboriously paced movie for Dovid to finally understand the "tangled life" of the love triangle in which he lives.
This was a muddied film with good intentions, but poor execution. The symbols were much overused, such as the wig denoting Esti's straight-jacketed existence, the teaching of the "Othello" love triangle of Othello-Desdemona-Iago by Esti to her young students, the smoking of cigarettes to denote rebelliousness, and the euphemism "May you live a long life" as a brush-off line were all overused and heavy-handed.
Above all, there were far too many false endings, including a prospective suicide attempt, a trip to the airport that ends in a turnaround after check-in, and a smarmy embrace of the threesome that denotes forgiveness. The bottom drops out of this film around the midpoint, and it never recovers.
If there is any character who is central to the lives of Ronit, Esti, and the kindly young rabbi Dovid Kuperman, it is the elderly Rav Shlomo Krushka, who hovers over them all, even after his death. At one critical point in the past, the Rav had caught Ronit and Esti in flagrante dilecto, resulting in Ronit fleeing to New York and Esti trying to "straighten up and flight right" by marrying Dovid.
The film has a symmetry in the final words of Rav speaking to his synagogue about Hashem creating the angels, beasts, and the humans after six days of hard labor that are finally analyzed at the end of the film by Dovid. The gist of the argument is that the angels and beasts are naturally disposed to obedience, while human beings have free will. We never learn the Rav's feelings about what it means to have free will. Rather, it takes two hours of this laboriously paced movie for Dovid to finally understand the "tangled life" of the love triangle in which he lives.
This was a muddied film with good intentions, but poor execution. The symbols were much overused, such as the wig denoting Esti's straight-jacketed existence, the teaching of the "Othello" love triangle of Othello-Desdemona-Iago by Esti to her young students, the smoking of cigarettes to denote rebelliousness, and the euphemism "May you live a long life" as a brush-off line were all overused and heavy-handed.
Above all, there were far too many false endings, including a prospective suicide attempt, a trip to the airport that ends in a turnaround after check-in, and a smarmy embrace of the threesome that denotes forgiveness. The bottom drops out of this film around the midpoint, and it never recovers.
Far too slow for me
Gordon-1113 August 2018
This film tells the story of a disgraced Jewish woman who returns home uninvited.
The topic of this film is quite possibly under represented in the cinema, so it is refreshing to have a film on this topic. It is a great plus to see two very good actresses as the lead, and I am particularly impressed that they are willing to star in this film. As for the film itself, I find it way too slow. I got so bored that I had to watch it at 1.5 times the speed after just 30 minutes. Even then, I still thought the pacing was slow. By the time the emotional climax arrives, I was already rather indifferent to the outcome of the story. Though I think it is an alright film, it does require extensive editing to speed the film up.
The topic of this film is quite possibly under represented in the cinema, so it is refreshing to have a film on this topic. It is a great plus to see two very good actresses as the lead, and I am particularly impressed that they are willing to star in this film. As for the film itself, I find it way too slow. I got so bored that I had to watch it at 1.5 times the speed after just 30 minutes. Even then, I still thought the pacing was slow. By the time the emotional climax arrives, I was already rather indifferent to the outcome of the story. Though I think it is an alright film, it does require extensive editing to speed the film up.
Wanted to like it more
Marzy_Hart30 September 2018
two big time actresses
SnoopyStyle17 July 2018
Ronit Krushka (Rachel Weisz) is a liberated woman living in New York City. She returns to her Orthodox Jewish community in London after her estranged rabbi father's death. There are conflicted feelings about the return of the rabbi's wayward only child. She's surprised to find her former best friends Dovid Kuperman (Alessandro Nivola) and Esti (Rachel McAdams) married to each other.
Weisz and McAdams are two of the best actresses around and they deliver powerfully controlled performances. The first part is a bit slow. Mostly, that's due to the advertising that gave away its lesbian twist. The sex scene does have a quick awkward shot and I'm not enamored with the ending. This does have these actresses doing some big time lifting but the story doesn't have the highest of tension. Outside of the big three roles, this is a rather striped down movie.
Weisz and McAdams are two of the best actresses around and they deliver powerfully controlled performances. The first part is a bit slow. Mostly, that's due to the advertising that gave away its lesbian twist. The sex scene does have a quick awkward shot and I'm not enamored with the ending. This does have these actresses doing some big time lifting but the story doesn't have the highest of tension. Outside of the big three roles, this is a rather striped down movie.
Not awful but ..
for_raluca18 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The beginning doesn't make much sense, it doesn't hint at all about whatever happened in the past. I got the feeling that there was something between Ronit and Dovid. You see no attraction between the two women and all of a sudden they start kissing! However, Ronit doesn't seem to want it. The end is better, still I don't think there was any chemistry between the two.
I really wanted to love it.
Amonute-Matoaka30 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
When the two actresses shared moments alone it was wonderful. Minutes dipped in sweetness and sadness, with an air of nostalgia. Not that I expected any less of them.
Still, this movie was made by a man, and while it is soft, and feels sometimes like it has a woman's touch, the eye is clearly male. So the intricacies of a female friendship, the tight weaves, especially of one that evolved into a romance, are subdued. These two women would hardly waste time discussing trivial things. They would hardly need words to connect emotionally. Their dialogue should have entirely been a clash of viewpoints, with huge emotional undercurrents, love and lust stuck in a web of formalities and banned through a strict, religious upbringing.
Lastly, this movie lacks a resolution. Esti married her husband to be "cured". While I understand her upbringing wouldn't leave her much choice, either do as your told or be an outcast, after all these years, after the fallout with her husband, after admitting she is not attracted to men, after realising she doesn't want to raise a child in such an environment, and after she is provided with an alternative, she stays with her husband because, what? He gave a freedom speech? It just didn't make any sense. She was an educated, full grown woman living in London of all places, she had options.
Still, this movie was made by a man, and while it is soft, and feels sometimes like it has a woman's touch, the eye is clearly male. So the intricacies of a female friendship, the tight weaves, especially of one that evolved into a romance, are subdued. These two women would hardly waste time discussing trivial things. They would hardly need words to connect emotionally. Their dialogue should have entirely been a clash of viewpoints, with huge emotional undercurrents, love and lust stuck in a web of formalities and banned through a strict, religious upbringing.
Lastly, this movie lacks a resolution. Esti married her husband to be "cured". While I understand her upbringing wouldn't leave her much choice, either do as your told or be an outcast, after all these years, after the fallout with her husband, after admitting she is not attracted to men, after realising she doesn't want to raise a child in such an environment, and after she is provided with an alternative, she stays with her husband because, what? He gave a freedom speech? It just didn't make any sense. She was an educated, full grown woman living in London of all places, she had options.
very complex and very well done
michaeljtrubic11 September 2017
This project attracted the efforts of an abundance of talents because these are very good roles. Men and women alike. Roles that actors really want.
The complexity of the two leading lady roles must have drawn an abundance of female actresses and the two Rachels are close to perfect.
The Q&A was particularly revealing.
The young and very witty director shone at the Q&A.
This was his first English language film from this Spanish speaking Chilean director and for him to put together a smooth running evenly paced film with such complexity is very illustrative of his talent and abilities.
As to which female role is the supporting role I am not sure. They are both very good roles.
The complexity of the two leading lady roles must have drawn an abundance of female actresses and the two Rachels are close to perfect.
The Q&A was particularly revealing.
The young and very witty director shone at the Q&A.
This was his first English language film from this Spanish speaking Chilean director and for him to put together a smooth running evenly paced film with such complexity is very illustrative of his talent and abilities.
As to which female role is the supporting role I am not sure. They are both very good roles.
Authentic and raw, but who is Ronit?
Fredericolo12 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This was a fantastic film in many ways - it felt honest, authentic and portrayed the many conflicting ways we identify ourselves as humans in this world. London looked it's absolute true self in all its grey, colorless areas. I struggled slightly to fully understand who Ronit was as a character. Who is she? What makes her Ronit? I would have like to have known more about this central character and allow her character to be revealed and developed more in the film. Besides this, a great film and a refreshingly different ending.
A glorified Hallmark movie
ccamp8929 May 2018
There's no doubt that Disobedience attempts to tell an important story about growing up gay in a fundamentalist religious community and the lasting impact such an experience could have on someone. But as much as I'd like to sing its praises for tackling the subject matter, the execution sadly just isn't there.
This is an incredibly self-serious film, which isn't a problem in of itself should it have contained the level of substance and drama to match that tone. Instead, Disobedience repeatedly offers up melodrama and clichés more befitting of a Lifetime movie, right down to a scene where one of the leads frantically chases after the other as she departs in a taxi. There's nothing inherently wrong with melodrama, but the problem is that the film has no self-awareness. These stiff, wooden, cheesy moments are presented as if this were an Oscar-worthy feature without any of the necessary depth or nuance in the screenplay to be on such a level.
Though Weisz and McAdams are talented actors who give the material their best effort, it's for naught as their roles are severely lacking in basic characterization - you can boil them down to "the defiant, rebellious one" and "the timid, repressed one" and you've basically got it covered. And there's barely any thematic exploration beyond the very surface-level notions of repression being negative, acceptance being positive, and the basic clash between fundamentalism and the modern era. The film drags on with very little in the way of plot or intrigue once the premise has been set up, and the overly serious tone becomes more and more suffocating as it plods along. It has a somewhat grating score as well that does not fit the material very well - lush. alternately melancholic and hopeful orchestration that reaches for a grandeur that the movie itself just doesn't justify.
I'm sad to have had such a negative reaction as I really would've loved to see a great film about this subject. Unfortunately, this is really nothing more than a glorified Hallmark movie. At least they tried, I guess.
Strong 1.5/5
This is an incredibly self-serious film, which isn't a problem in of itself should it have contained the level of substance and drama to match that tone. Instead, Disobedience repeatedly offers up melodrama and clichés more befitting of a Lifetime movie, right down to a scene where one of the leads frantically chases after the other as she departs in a taxi. There's nothing inherently wrong with melodrama, but the problem is that the film has no self-awareness. These stiff, wooden, cheesy moments are presented as if this were an Oscar-worthy feature without any of the necessary depth or nuance in the screenplay to be on such a level.
Though Weisz and McAdams are talented actors who give the material their best effort, it's for naught as their roles are severely lacking in basic characterization - you can boil them down to "the defiant, rebellious one" and "the timid, repressed one" and you've basically got it covered. And there's barely any thematic exploration beyond the very surface-level notions of repression being negative, acceptance being positive, and the basic clash between fundamentalism and the modern era. The film drags on with very little in the way of plot or intrigue once the premise has been set up, and the overly serious tone becomes more and more suffocating as it plods along. It has a somewhat grating score as well that does not fit the material very well - lush. alternately melancholic and hopeful orchestration that reaches for a grandeur that the movie itself just doesn't justify.
I'm sad to have had such a negative reaction as I really would've loved to see a great film about this subject. Unfortunately, this is really nothing more than a glorified Hallmark movie. At least they tried, I guess.
Strong 1.5/5
Incredible and Authentic Depiction
Jaffe17 May 2018
Ronit (Rachel Weisz), a single middle-aged photographer, returns to England from New York following the death of her father, an esteemed ultra-Orthodox rabbi who had been the spiritual leader of this non-Hasidic congregation and its institutions. It immediately becomes evident that due to personal issues she had left the community at a very young age and never looked back. As the story develops, we learn that Esti (Rachel McAdams), now wife of Dovid Kuperman (the departed rabbi's chief disciple and heir apparent, played by Alessandro Nivola) had struggled with similar issues alongside Ronit in their youth but had chosen a drastically different method of coping.
With Ronit's return, old sentiments are dredged up in a manner that upends the lives of all three in a community that simply has not developed tools for dealing with the full spectrum of matters involving private life, nature and choice that have in recent years become so normalized that we hardly lend them so much weight.
As each of the three struggle to cope with their issues, it becomes clear that there is a void in place of a guide in the doctrine of the community and that there is no one right way to cope with outlying struggles.
The directing of the picture and the portrayal of the three main characters is stellar. Aside from two seven-candle menorahs (which have no place in a Jewish home), this picture stands out as perhaps the most authentic portrayal of the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in motion picture history.
With Ronit's return, old sentiments are dredged up in a manner that upends the lives of all three in a community that simply has not developed tools for dealing with the full spectrum of matters involving private life, nature and choice that have in recent years become so normalized that we hardly lend them so much weight.
As each of the three struggle to cope with their issues, it becomes clear that there is a void in place of a guide in the doctrine of the community and that there is no one right way to cope with outlying struggles.
The directing of the picture and the portrayal of the three main characters is stellar. Aside from two seven-candle menorahs (which have no place in a Jewish home), this picture stands out as perhaps the most authentic portrayal of the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in motion picture history.
A strong message about rebelling against conformity and following your heart (as well as fighting oppression).
Hellmant25 May 2018
'DISOBEDIENCE': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)
An indie drama about a woman who goes back to the Orthodox Jewish Community she grew up in, after being outcast from it decades earlier due to her attraction to a female friend. The movie stars Rachel Weisz, Rachel McAdams and Alessandro Nivola. It was directed by Sebastián Lelio, and it was written by Lelio and Rebecca Lenkiewicz. The script is based on the book of the same name, by Naomi Alderman. It's received nearly unanimous positive reviews from critics, and it's now playing in indie theaters (like Portland and Corvallis, OR). I found it to be moving and somewhat involving, but just a little too slow-paced.
Ronit Krushka (Weisz) learns of her father's passing, and then returns to the Orthodox Jewish Community she grew up in (for the funeral). She was outcast from the community, decades earlier, due to a childhood attraction to another girl, Esti Kuperman (McAdams). Ronit is shocked to learn that Esti is now married to David (Nivola), despite the fact that Esti only ever liked girls. A forbidden love affair between the two women once again comes to formation, and it once again shocks the community.
The movie has a strong message about rebelling against conformity and following your heart (as well as fighting oppression). It's a touching love story in the end, filled with decent performances. The film is really depressing and slow-moving though. I admire how well made it is, and the important story it tells, but I definitely can't say I had a good time watching it at all. It's neither entertaining, nor uplifting. It is true to life though, and it's still an important film for people to see (I think).
An indie drama about a woman who goes back to the Orthodox Jewish Community she grew up in, after being outcast from it decades earlier due to her attraction to a female friend. The movie stars Rachel Weisz, Rachel McAdams and Alessandro Nivola. It was directed by Sebastián Lelio, and it was written by Lelio and Rebecca Lenkiewicz. The script is based on the book of the same name, by Naomi Alderman. It's received nearly unanimous positive reviews from critics, and it's now playing in indie theaters (like Portland and Corvallis, OR). I found it to be moving and somewhat involving, but just a little too slow-paced.
Ronit Krushka (Weisz) learns of her father's passing, and then returns to the Orthodox Jewish Community she grew up in (for the funeral). She was outcast from the community, decades earlier, due to a childhood attraction to another girl, Esti Kuperman (McAdams). Ronit is shocked to learn that Esti is now married to David (Nivola), despite the fact that Esti only ever liked girls. A forbidden love affair between the two women once again comes to formation, and it once again shocks the community.
The movie has a strong message about rebelling against conformity and following your heart (as well as fighting oppression). It's a touching love story in the end, filled with decent performances. The film is really depressing and slow-moving though. I admire how well made it is, and the important story it tells, but I definitely can't say I had a good time watching it at all. It's neither entertaining, nor uplifting. It is true to life though, and it's still an important film for people to see (I think).
Over done
esrubilsky18 September 2018
Unbearably over wrought plot, most of the time slow and boring (she leaves but she doesn't but she leaves but she doesn't but she goes to the airport but she doesn't they both go but they don't). The vulgar and explicit sex scene was totally unnecessary (the director was probably sitting there with his hard on as they endlessly redid it because it was never quite 'there') - we get it they are very much in love. The movie in numerous places shows ignorance of judaism (constantly saying 'hashem' doesn't make it an authentic movie) . Rachel McAdams was great but didn't manage to make up for Rachel Weisz's evident self loathing coming from her over dramatic gestures.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
