User Reviews

"Big Eyes" was nominated under Comedy & Musical category during the last Golden Globe Awards. Lead actress Amy Adams even won the Best Actress prize for starring in it. While I was watching this film though, it turned out to be furthest from what I had in mind for a comedy. The topic of this film was actually disturbing and depressing. However, being a Tim Burton film, there was certainly dark humor to be had.

This film is a biopic of 1950s novelty pop artist Margaret Keane (formerly Ulbrich, nee Hawkins). She developed a series of haunting acrylic paintings of kids with big dark round eyes. Walter Keane, her rascal salesman of a husband, took advantage of the rising popularity of her paintings. He claimed and mass-marketed them as his own.

Meanwhile, timid Margaret was forced to conform to his web of lies. She was locked in her workroom in their home to paint even more Big Eyes, away from the prying eyes of the public, and even her own daughter. Will Margaret be able to break free from the prison she has trapped herself into?

Amy Adams quietly carried this film capably on her shoulders. There was nothing funny about what she had to do here as Margaret. Her character was the victim of a most cruel crime. Her husband stole not only her art, but also her confidence, and her very freedom. Adams played a weak character, but as an actress, Adams was anything but. With her wise underplaying, Adams successfully won our empathy and compassion for her difficult plight.

Christoph Waltz, on the other hand, was over-the-top, one-dimensional, practically cartoonish, as the manipulative con-man Walter. From his very first scene, you already knew this smooth-talking guy was up to no good. Up to his very last scene in that courtroom, Waltz's Walter was a manic caricature, never really coming across as a real person at all. This may well Tim Burton's direction in play, as this character Walter was the source of most of this film's black humor. Waltz's fiery interaction with Terence Stamp's harsh NY Times art critic character is most memorable as well.

This film's narrative was simple and straightforward. Yet because of Amy Adams' riveting and heart-rending performance, we will be held until the compelling end. The technical aspects of the film, particularly the pastel color palette of the photography, as well as the period production design, costumes and makeup, all contribute to the overall charming look and nostalgic feel of the film as a whole. 7/10.

I'm a big fan of Tim Burton and with his latest "Big Eyes" it clearly is not typical Tim Burton it's more of a serious tone and manner it's different from comic book tales and animation of the dark senses and world of Tim. This film is actually a true take on the life and times of female painter Margaret Keane as it's a true tale of discovery, fate and getting to know your world thru the eyes of art. Set in the 1950's California Margaret Keane(Amy Adams)is a single mother who decides to set out on her own as her talents of the brush and drawing is her only hope to earn her bucks for her and her daughter. Upon meeting Walter(Christoph Waltz)a sharp and arrogant know it all showman type, it's under the spell that Margaret soon becomes Mrs. Keane. And success and fame and public notice comes from the couples paintings only the Mr. takes all the credit! This film becomes a legal dispute as who is claiming the work is in question yet you as the viewer know who's best at the brush! Overall nice little sentimental film from Tim it's different yet that's what makes a director and a film work that's a different take that appeals to the big eyes of viewers!

Greetings from Lithuania.

"Big Eyes" (2014) is more of good feel comedy drama then a serious biography drama as it's genre indicates. Yes, it is based on a very true story, but this is not a typical biopic by any means. It's a "light" and easy movie, with some great performances by both leads, tight pacing, very nice writing and directing. No wonder that it was mentioned in an Comedy or Musical categories at Golden Globes and not in motion picture drama.

Overall, this is true very well made biography drama about some painters and frauds. Won't going to spoil anything, just going to say that i was very surprised by the ending when i find out that this actually happen, well, probably not word by word but the outcome did happen actually how it was portrait in the movie. This is a very fine picture from legendary director Tim Burton, and safe to say that this is his best movie in years simply by not being "a Tim Burton's" movie as we know them. This small budget picture (in terms of other's T.Burton's flicks) actually is much more lovely and intimate then his recent works. I will go even so far and say that i haven't enjoy his movie so much since 1999's "Sleepy Hollow".

It's 1958 Northern California. Margaret Ulbrich (Amy Adams) leaves her husband and takes her young daughter Jane to San Francisco following her friend DeeAnn. When her husband threatening to take Jane away, Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) proposes to her and they quickly marry. Walter rents wall space from club owner Enrico Banducci and they get into a fight which makes it on the front page. Reporter Dick Nolan writes about Walter and his paintings. What started as a misunderstanding becomes a full blown lie. The paintings become a hit as Walter becomes a salesman taking credit for all the paintings. Eventually Walter finds that selling posters are more profitable and big eyes become everywhere. Times reporter John Canaday is a harsh critic.

This is a surprisingly traditional biopic from director Tim Burton. Other than the big eyed people that Margaret sees in a couple of scenes, there is nothing that is obviously Burtonesque. Amy Adams does a nice performance although I think her character is a little bit too willful at the beginning. It would be more dramatic to have her character grow over time. Christoph Waltz is amazing as the impresario manic salesman. In the end, this is a well made biopic with a couple of good performances and a couple of funny moments.

Just watched this with Mom on a Netflix disc. We both were enthralled by this true story of painter Margaret Keane (Amy Adams) whose defining feature is the big eyes of her subjects and hubby Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) who publicly takes credit for her work for years. It takes place from the late '50s through the '60s and partly seems a comment on how stifled Mrs. Keane felt not being the one getting recognition for her work and the crises that created between her and her husband, not to mention her daughter who was often the subject for the paintings. Tim Burton seems the right director for this film especially when he has Margaret dreaming or during the climatic courtroom scenes. The light and dark colors also contribute to the period atmosphere to pretty compelling effect. While I liked many of the supporting characters, I had to admit I was a bit disappointed by the one portrayed by Krysten Ritter as I half thought she'd play more in the way things turned out in the film than she did. Still, Big Eyes was mostly enjoyable enough the way it was told. P.S. I had also watched a vintage interview with the real Walter Keane on Merv Griffin on YouTube in which he seemed to flirt with a female guest there. (The cad!) Then I saw a couple of interviews on YT with the real Margaret Keane on Mike Douglas' shows-one in Hawaii and one with Shirley Temple whose child portrait Ms. Keane painted for her-and her Southern charm shone through immensely!

I had never heard of Margaret Keane or her paintings before "Big Eyes" got released, making the story all the more forceful. My interpretation of Keane's story is that she was afraid to stand up for herself. Walter manipulated her into accepting his shenanigans.

Amy Adams puts on a really good performance as Margaret. Much like her roles in "Junebug", "Enchanted" and "Doubt", her character's idealism collapses when faced with reality. Christoph Waltz turns Walter into a mixture of smooth and terrifying, but a real creep more than anything.

This is a very different turn for Tim Burton. Far from his homages to horror flicks and swipes at suburban America, he takes a serious approach to the subject matter. I recommend the movie. Whether you know of the story or not, you're sure to be impressed with the movie. Margaret's paintings might not appeal to you - they don't appeal to me - it's important to know what she went through, and the movie does a good job looking at that.

Charming, but uneven, entertaining yet unsatisfying, "Big Eyes" definitely does not come into the category of great or important true story movies. It is clearly a change of style for Tim Burton (if is very relieving not to see Johhny Depp acting all weird), but even though the time at the theater doesn't in any way feel wasted or boring, instead quite pleasant, the movie is too chaotic and quirky for it to be taken seriously in any way.

A premise that has lots of potential is partially wasted in aimless scenes or in repetitiveness. The film doesn't really make a point about anything and has way too much flashy stuff to feel grounded in any way. There would be nothing wrong there, but the fact that in it's uneven tone there seems to emerge a will to give an accurate and worthy recounting of these events makes so much of the drama feel out of nowhere. Storytelling isn't exactly where the movie succeeds. The courtroom scenes are definitely the weakest of all and made me mad multiple times because of their absolute preposterousness.

Anyways, the film is built around a strong enough cast, photography, premise, writing and design that it would be hard to get bored in anyway. The pace is fluent enough and the duration of the film is just about right for the content it presents. I wanted to like this more and see the story be given a better portrayal, but in no way I could say "Big Eyes" was a failure.

Directed by Tim Burton and written by Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski, Big Eyes brings to the screen the story of artist Margaret Keane (Amy Adams), who was producing a number of paintings of waifs with big eyes that captured the art world's imagination. Unfortunately her charlatan husband (Christolph Waltz) manipulated the interest in her work to claim it as his own, leading to Margaret having to front up to the lie and take the case to court.

Quite often the beauty of filmic cinema is that it can bring notice to the public about certain topics in history. The story of Margaret Keane is a story well worth telling, it may not be all encompassing as a biography since it is just about the key part of her life, but getting the story out there is to be applauded. I myself knew nothing about the Keane case, but I'm glad I do now, this film adaptation forcing me to seek out further reading on the subject.

It actually doesn't matter if you have a bent for art on canvas (me, but I do find those paintings beautifully beguiling), this is more about the human spirit, the crushing of such and the birth of. However, sadly to a degree the film often seems at odds with itself via tonal flows. There's whimsy where there shouldn't be, the drama should be front and centre, whilst Waltz's performance is awfully cartoonish, way too animated, and these problems are laid firmly at Burton's door, an odd choice of director for the material, it's like they felt the off kilter look of the paintings marked Burton as a shoe-in to direct.

Conversely he gets a sparkling turn out of Adams, she plays Margaret as being so vulnerable but radiant, yet she's perfectly infuriating as well, tugging our heart strings whilst troubling our anger senses. It's the strength of Adams' turn that steers Big Eyes away from choppy waters, for even as the court case that makes up the finale is given too little time to breath and make the ultimate mark, Adams as Margaret holds her own court and seals the deal for a big uplift - which in turn marks Big Eyes out as a film of great warmth and importance. 7.5/10

Not a week ago did I write a review for Chris Rock's "Top Five," a film about self-reliance and the belief in oneself in order to remain relevant and exercise one's creative and artistic drive in a brazen manner. It hasn't even been two months since I wrote a review for "Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)," another film about self-worth, self-reliance, and the desire to remain relevant and important, not compromising your artistic integrity so others, including yourself, can profit, but so you can maintain the kind of value that could potentially last you a lifetime. Now, on Christmas Day, I'm faced with Tim Burton's "Big Eyes," cementing my comments that 2014 has really been a year for artists in every sense, showing their struggles, their ability to be corrupted and used, and showing their rhino-skinned interiors make for incredible films about determination and drive in a way that doesn't have to be a pit of clichés.

"Big Eyes," by far, is the saddest film of the three, concerning a young mother who chose to separate from her husband in the "all is well," cheery times of the 1950's to only become entangled in a second marriage that would further exploit her for all she was worth in a way that could've been worse than her first. The story is of Margaret (Amy Adams), who left her husband almost dead broke and with little employment options being inexperienced and a woman. All Margaret knew was she loved to paint and was good at it, often drumming up solid business at local art fairs where she would paint pictures of patrons, emphasizing the features brought forth on their eyes and their pupils. She believed the eyes were the windows to the soul and defined emotion and momentary contentment through those particular windows.

Margaret's art drew the attention of Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz), a self-proclaimed artist who spoke of studying extensively in France, who also worked as a salesman of his personal portraits of the streets of France. Walter saw opportunity in Margaret's work, and immediately went after her, basically seeing her figures' large eyes as large, gleaming dollar signs ready to be taken to the bank and cashed for every cent they were worth. After only knowing each other for a short time, Margaret fell into Walter's trap of marriage and profit, as he took credit for painting the art while soliciting it to different venues, exhibits, and clients while she sat back in her study, slaving away at a worn paintbrush.

Tim Burton's "Big Eyes" focuses on the artistic corruption of Margaret's work through the act of reproducing original paintings by use of mass-printing, and how one person's original vision and deep-rooted symbolism within his or her works can be corrupted by another person's ability to smooth-talk and coerce. Walter promised riches, and, for the record, he made both him and Margaret a great deal of money on her works, but at what cost? The cost of artistic integrity and the compromise of one's original vision, which are priceless in the grand scheme to amounts jotted down in a checkbook or a ledger.

Burton conducts "Big Eyes" with his trademark sense of manipulation and exaggeration of conventions, situations, and environments. Consider how dreamlike and antiseptic Margaret's suburban home with her first husband looks, echoing the plasticity of the environment in Burton's classic "Edward Scissorhands." Consider how frequently lush and saturated Margaret's environment becomes when she starts painting, as colors and fine details push themselves into the foreground and show you how beautiful of a film this becomes from a visual standpoint. The way Burton blends surrealism into the film makes the madness unfold in an even greater manner, with the scene where Margaret is shopping in a supermarket and sees her paintings and artistic works cheapened to ubiquitous reproductions being one of my favorite scenes this year.

Some will comment on how Waltz seems to be overacting at times here, but frankly, I feel it kind of works, as he is supposed to be a hyperactive, impulsive, and idealistic salesman, so his personality should be something along the lines of exaggerated. He pulls it off tremendously here, being menacing at times but always fiercely watchable thanks to his character's ability to do such horrible things while remaining smiley and acting as if he is not doing anything wrong. Adams, here, is a marvel as well, quiet, thoughtful, unlike her husband, and carries robot-like sentiment in the best way during the film, moving like a programmed automaton when we can see so much is going on inside her that she's on the brink of a mental burnout.

"Big Eyes" is a great film thanks to its performances and impeccable visuals, but sneaks up on you with the weight and emotional-strength of its themes about artistic integrity and being coerced into the compromise of one's vision in the worst possible way. It wasn't until I walked out of this film, alone and in a contemplative mood, that I realized this was one of the saddest films I have seen all year while simultaneously the most beautiful.

When I first read the brief synopsis of this biography feature from Tim Burton about painter Margaret Keane, and the notorious scandal in the art scene of 1960s in America, my prompt answer to how to solve the chief issue - who is the real creator behind all these paintings, Margaret (Adams) or her husband Walter (Waltz)?- is rather simple, unlike literature and music, painting is an art form too visual-dependent, so why not just let them paint? Then a second thought strikes me that maybe Walter is capable of simulating Margaret's trademark style, which could elongate this lawsuit case into a more complicated protracted battle. Well, the truth is, I was thinking too much, during the court sequences, after a long- standing filibuster from Walter, which presumably should be funny but only feels insufferable, finally the judge orders them to paint, but as audience has already been informed that Walter simply cannot paint, that is all, case closed, Margaret's win is such a duck soup, what a stroke of bathos!

They could be a perfect match, as the fact proves before their fallout, Margaret has the talent and Walter has the shrewd business mind, one redundant thing is Walter's pompous artistic ambition, which seems pretty senseless in hindsight due to the fact that he is a complete sham, however Margaret is not completely scot-free in this since obviously she condones Walter's actions, succumbs to the gender inequity of its time and sates to the easy success as his ghost painter, only occasionally, she is perturbed that there is something missing in her self-esteem and artistic integrity and the fact that there is a missing link between her and her daughter because she has to lie to her all the time. Perhaps, wealth could compensate all this, if Walter was smart enough. Yet his escalating ambition blinds his eyes, he is not satisfied with all the wealth, he craves the rarefied prestige in the fine arts, and forgets it takes time for artworks to become classics. He fails miserably, and stupid enough, he blames it on Margaret, the goldmine of their unity. Since then, he is downhill all the way.

As a Tim Burton picture, apart from the variegated colour scheme which underlines a polished San Francisco and Hawaii in 1960s, overtly the real-life story does foil Burton from letting his fantasy soar, merely in the supermarket scenes where the usual Burton-esque surrealism comes to blink in a jiffy.

This is supposed to be Amy Adam's another Oscar-inviting performance after she miraculously acquires 5 nominations in a pretty short span, but I actually quite relieved that she didn't get her sixth this time, not that I don't appreciate her as an actress, she is always pleasantly welcoming on screen and has become one of my favourites among her peers, only that her performance as Margaret Keane is just not Oscar-worthy by any criterion, if she had secured another filler nomination with this, she would literally become the most overpraised actress presently (probably even in the entire Oscar history), it is never a good sign with that label. She need some time off the radar and finally seizes her opportunity using her overdue status from a trumping card, like Julianne Moore has done for STILL ALICE (2014). But here, in favour of the broad comical tone, Burton and the screenwriters fail to invest more into Margaret's psyche, all the strife has conveniently dumbed down to a marital battle for their valuable assets. Another setback is Christopher Waltz, a two-time Oscar winner, severely miscast with his buffoonish impersonation of an oil-tongued charlatan, and Burton indulges him too much which in the final court confrontation, he is insufferably annoying, not in the same page with Adam's more poised and empathetic endeavour.

BIG EYES is an awkward commodity in Burton's output, mediocre on every level, it has the potential to make a mordant mockery of contemporary art sphere, for all its pop art Vs. highbrow elitism confrontation, but it barely takes off from that domain, it seems Burton now reaches a middling plateau in his career coincides with an unexpected termination of his marriage with muse Helena Bonham Carter, please go back to the fantasy world Mr. Burton, maybe finding a new muse is much more urgent right now.

Christoph Waltz steals the show in Big Eyes, Tim Burton's whimsical tale of an artist and a scandal set in the transporting setting of California in the 60's.

The story of Big Eyes is something straight out of the movies, but no, the tale of Margaret Keane and her artistry is based on fact and real life.

Tim Burton's Big Eyes is a dramatic narrative of Margaret Keane, the painter, mother and wife. Having left her husband, with daughter in tow, she seeks a new beginning in California. While there, she hopes to make a living through her art and subsequently meets and marries a man named Walter. Trying to navigate the art world and make a living, her husband claims credit for her artwork which eventually becomes highly profitable. Burton focuses on the awakening of Keane as an artist and to her husband's shortcomings and the legal difficulties in claiming ownership of her work.

Margaret Keane's life is a fascinating and near unbelievable one. And much of Big Eyes' success as a film rests comfortably on that very story. Well, Big Eyes rests on the story of Keane and on Christoph Waltz's immeasurable charm in his performance as Walter Keane.

The sad big eyed children made commercially famous by Keane are uniquely peculiar. Stylistically, it was only right that Tim Burton should direct a film about the painter. It is apparent that Big Eyes is a Burton film; however, Tim Burton subdues his style substantially so that the narrative of this marvelous woman can take center stage. Creatively, this is a refreshing departure for the director.

The Big Eyes movie parallels the artwork of Margaret Keane in an unintentional manner. Margaret Keane was able to look at a person and capture their essence and then put it on canvas with her own twist through large sad eyes. Similarly, Tim Burton takes the core elements of Keane's life and translates it to film with his own fanciful creative liberties. Though everything is in the movie adaptation of Big Eyes, it lacks substance and heart to connect with the audience to have a lasting impression.

Please check out our WEBSITE for all the reviews of recent releases and awards contenders.

Tim Burton, quite simply, should have left this material alone. It doesn't work as anything more than a mind-bogglingly superficial look at a deeply serious subject - the exploitation of a woman at the hands of an opportunistic, sadistic, immoral prick.

Amy Adams does a good job at portraying Margaret Keane, who is cajoled by said opportunistic sleazebag into letting him take credit for her now-legendary big-eyed waif paintings, telling her 'we're a team, let's work together', blah blah blah.

She goes into this disgusting relationship after having left her previous husband (taking her daughter with her), but she hasn't really gone anywhere; she's still brain-washed by society to believe that 'nobody buys lady art', so she's basically broken already when she hooks up with Walter Keane, or rather when he slimes his way into her life.

Serious stuff, the subjugation of women, made even worse when the woman is question is a major part of the problem. But Burton handles the whole thing so lightly, so completely vapidly, that the underlying story comes across as sadly predictable and devoid of any true payoff at the end.

I'm not saying he should have gone the opposite route, into some dreadfully horrific dark mode, with Walter Keane coming across like Doctor Doom, or even worse, the slivering slimy succubus known as Venom, but the tone he does take, as I've already said - don't want to run it into the ground - hardly does this non-amusing cautionary true-life story justice.

The screenplay, of course, doesn't help - it always starts with the script, naturally - bad writing is a nail in the coffin for a director, even one of Burton's stature. The best thing the film has going for it is Amy Adams, as Margaret. who brings a genuine poignancy to the role, a poignancy that is certainly not contained in the screenplay. She manages to make us feel SOMETHING at least, no easy task considering what she was given (or not given) to work with. (I gave the film 4 out of 10, my IMDb equivalent to 2 stars, only because of her brave performance.)

Walter's character, on the other hand, comes across as a complete cartoon caricature, with no human qualities whatsoever. Is this bad acting on the part of Waltz, who can surely shred scenery in his sleep? Probably. Everyone has to take responsibility for this fiasco, which I don't believe should have been green-lighted in the first place. Talk about exploitation.

You can learn a lot about a person based on the things that they put on their walls. Guys like me who have movie poster can be identified as obvious film geeks. Those that fill their walls with classical art tend to be prim and proper, even if what they own are copies. Those that have sports imagery tend to be more aggressive and a tad more ambitious with their plans. Those that choose to place nothing on their walls are minimalist and value their own lives over the thoughts of others. The art that one ones not only tells a thousand words in the picture, but it says millions about the owner.

Going on the subject of classical, those that are not of higher class at least want to be seen as classy. Hence those that can't afford true art will buy posters. Once such poster that filled plenty of homes were the "Big Eyes" paintings that Margaret Keane produced. Distinct by the dark imagery of children with oversize pupils, this is a rare form of art that is both challenging yet simple enough that even non art fans can perceive this as "interesting" looking. Big Eyes gives us a different perspective of the artist behind the brush.

In 1958, Margaret Hawkins (played by Amy Adams) left her first husband, taking her child Jane with her, and moving to San Francisco where she hopes she can become a true artist. She uses her painting skills to get a job at a furniture design store while she paints caricatures on the weekends at art fairs. She's set up next to another artist Walter Keane (played by Christoph Waltz) who see's that her work as fascinating. In order to prevent Jane from being taken away, she agrees to marry Walter and she's pretty swoon by his charming, salesman-like attitude.

A misunderstanding at a nightclub causes Walter to claim one of Margret's paintings as his own. At first she's mad by this, but when her husband convinces her that the art would sale better if the public knew that a man painted the "Big Eyes", she agrees to go along with the charade. Walter becomes a celebrity by the public as a genus and manages to sell more posters of the "Big Eyes" then of the art. The pressure persuades Margaret to eventually divorce him and even try to get her credit back, but of course have to challenge Walter on his insistence that the "Big Eyes" are his.

What people are not going to guess out of Big Eyes is that Tim Burton directed it. It seems odd because the story is too human for an artsy guy like him (even though he also directed another great biopic, Ed Wood). But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that Tim Burton really knew what he was doing for this. Sure, Big Eyes doesn't have the traditional German Expressionism that Burton is more established with, but he does have an eye for giving the past a postcard look to it. San Francisco and Hawaii look really nice here.

I can tell that what attracted Amy Adams to this story is that Big Eyes is a feminist movie. It addresses the trouble of the position women were in and how the public perceived that Margaret could have not been talented enough to paint these images. She's really likable as you want to she her prove justice to her art. Christoph Waltz is just perfect here, playing the scumbag con artist that Walter Keane probably was. These two make a good team in a story about art that should appeal to most people.

I'll give this ten "Big Eyes" paintings out of ten. Even those that are not into art will probably enjoy this movie as it's more about the painter then the paintings. It's really a story about a strange marriage and claiming ones right to their work. If you can, open your own big eyes to such a great film.

The Warhol quote is making fun of its ghastliness and the invisible hand of the market. An odd choice to start on by mocking its own subject. As well I sense a subconscious undercurrent reflecting his own brand.

But the key to Tim Burton has always been Disney not Gothic. Here is finally a proper Gothic work in being everything but, with its colorful San Francisco and Hawaii; Waltz through structures of mental control, abuse in power, serial plagiarizing, is a Gothic monster.

There would be inheritances in stories like this.

But it's about speech as well and how if you don't say it it'll never be said, begging the tragedy how painting isn't enough. Her eyes don't just see but can't not see. They gaze the heightened details of the world. Then would be susceptible to larger than life psychologies which would entice her in love. A Gothic torture how love controls her. Then when images can't be hers, she chooses numbers. Numerology in the pop 60s make her almost a chosen one for backing the zeitgeist: late 20th century advanced statistics would forecast and streamline every single industry. Her drawings very much forecasted the medium of anime, which rivals all of world cinema. By her own devices left unchecked might've lead to some great garage start-up, Mac, PC... Keane. In all seriousness societal mechanics denying her ability to grow in art reminds me of Burton himself trapped in the machine of his brand.

Credit. Silence. Eyes. Its elements fuse a true fright. "Mother, I know..." Few will know the soul-crushing abuse of others taking credit for their work.

Usually, a woman so pretty would not be a Tim Burton outsider but the spark of her ghoulish secret drawings make her as him. Oddest. The whole film is about these demonic traumatized orphans happening in its background. A battlefield seems to be the anger as the commodification of western privilege. But against the abstract expressionist backdrop it's a valid contrary.

Most beautiful is it's this Tim Burton art film where performers are allowed to act not pose, even though it abuses green screen (its artifice you could say is Warholian at least...); much is said about the overacting, where Waltz has to strut around and make a great show of it, but he's being watched by Burton and Keane's; eyes so big warrant big visions.

Greetings again from the darkness. Based on the true events of artist Margaret Keane and her husband Walter, the latest from director Tim Burton is the closest thing to reality he has produced since his only other biopic, Ed Wood (1994). But fear not, ye fans of the Burton universe, his style and flair remains ever-present with a stunning color palette on this trek through the 1950's and 60's.

If you have never heard the story, Margaret Keane is an artist with a unique style that features exaggerated eyes of her subjects, hence the movie title. When she first met Walter, she fell hard for his charm and his exuberance and professed love of her work. What happened next seems impossible to imagine these days, but this was the 1950's. Walter began to market and sell her paintings as his own … in fact, the real marketing was himself as an artist. The empire of Keane paintings, postcards, posters, etc literally exploded forcing Margaret to paint in silence and solitude while her husband inexplicably took public credit, sighting his defense as no one will buy "lady art".

That may sound like the description of an "issues" film – one that digs into the male dominance of the pre-women's movement era, or possibly even a look at artistic integrity or the battle of popular kitsch versus critical acclaim. Instead, this is more of a relationship film and a character study. We witness how Walter (Christoph Waltz) lures Margaret (Amy Adams) into this trap and truly undervalues her as an artist or a person. She is merely a means to his financial and public success. Margaret feels trapped right up to the point where she doesn't.

There could have been real fun in the exploration of Dick Nolan (played by Danny Huston) from the "San Francisco Examiner" in his role as cheesy journalist contrasted against the socially revered serious art critic John Camady (played by Terence Stamp). Instead, both the relationship aspects of the Keanes and the tabloid battles of the critics come off as a bit lightweight, though right in line with Mr. Waltz' incessant smirk through most of his lines. Fortunately, the film is filled with subtext … each scene carrying the weight of multiple issues.

Many will enjoy the deliciously evil approach Waltz takes for the role, but I mostly felt sad that a woman as apparently smart as Margaret would fall for this obvious shyster and his over the top self-promotion. Still, her battle for independence and ownership is quite interesting given the times and the hole that was dug. Adams is terrific in the role, and she is one of many actresses who bring their own "big eyes" to the picture (Krysten Ritter and Madeleine Arthur are others).

The film never attempts to answer any social issues or even take on the question of "what is art?". The lack of a stance doesn't change the fact that it's beautiful to look at, and brings to light an incredible true story. The set design and costumes are wonderful, and composer Danny Elfman delivers a complimentary score. For those wondering, neither Johnny Depp nor Helena Bonham Carter (both Burton staples) appears in the film. However, the real Margaret Keane is shown sitting on a park bench while Ms. Adams paints in one scene. So if you are after a good-looking film that doesn't (on the surface seem to) ruffle many feathers, the battle of the Keanes is one that should satisfy. If you are willing to dig a little deeper, there is much to discuss afterwards.

A portrait of the real-life Keanes, San Francisco married couple of the late 1950s and '60s: Walter is a braggart and storyteller (i.e., a good liar) who is masterful at promoting his wife Margaret's paintings of saucer-eyed waifs--but when it comes down to turning the spotlight on the actual artist, he seizes an early opportunity to take credit for the work himself, even though he has absolutely no artistic talent. A study of ego, delusion and, that old standby, how success destroys a marriage, each theme taking precedence over the process of artistic creation. Tim Burton directed, and was obviously more interested in Walter's preening self-importance and Hollywood hobnobbing than in Margaret's inspirations (she churns out paintings--off-camera--at a rapid pace). Christoph Waltz and Amy Adams are unconvincing as the Keanes, neither able to overcome Burton's uncomfortable imbalance of moods gleaned from Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski's curiously thin screenplay. As a movie about art, "Big Eyes" is surely a failure, with a timeline presented to us in shorthand. Viewers attracted by the picture's nostalgic trimmings--as a jaunt back in time to a simpler era--might enjoy it, even though the family dynamics are a mess and Waltz's larger-than-life portrayal gets more annoying as the film progresses. *1/2 from ****

After years of letting her charismatic husband take credit for her paintings, artist Margaret Keane decides to speak out in this Golden Globe winning biopic from Tim Burton. The film is a noticeable change of pace for Burton with the lead performances outshining the sets, camera-work, mood and atmosphere, but this is not necessarily a bad thing as the performances are superb. Amy Adams is well cast as the all-too-vulnerable Margaret Keane, torn between helping her husband perpetuate the lie (lest bad publicity affect sales) and wanting recognition for her own art. Christoph Waltz is also superb as her charming husband who always seems to have a card up his sleeve. Some have called his performance over-the-top, and with his manic running back forth in the courtroom scenes, it is easy to see why, but Waltz renders his character more human than just that; he is lost in the delusion just as much as Adams is consumed by it. The film nevertheless only scratches the surface of what was going on between the two real life Keanes. There is a suggestion that Margaret stayed quiet believing that it would be best for her daughter. There is also a suggestion that her husband was a necessary catalyst since she would have never had the courage to promote her work on her own. These only ever remain suggestions though with the film never quite getting at the symbiotic nature of their relationship and why she stayed silent for so long. Whatever the case, the film is encapsulating for the most part, which is always a plus with a biopic like this where the outcome is well known.

So this is probably where Burtons big Eyes inspiration came from. Sometimes it feels like the main character (Amy Adams) is speaking for him, when she talks about inspiration or why she does things. While the character she is playing is a real life person and this is based on real events, there seems to be a bit of Burton in her character too. But that just might be the case, because he was probably inspired by her.

Christoph Waltz is amazing in this one too. Playing his role with a gusto and energy that he seems to thrive on. A man equal parts likable, but also completely over the top. It's a tough one to pull off, but he does a great job. Combined with the amazing effort from Adams, this makes a great interesting relationship between those two. Also, back then, there were many other issues, women had to deal with ... A great, if sometimes draining watch!

A drama about the awakening of the painter Margaret Keane (Amy Adams), her phenomenal success in the 1950s, and the subsequent legal difficulties she had with her husband (Christoph Waltz), who claimed credit for her works in the 1960s.

It is no secret that Tim Burton has had a rough decade. Although films like "Alice in Wonderland" and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" may have been commercial successes, they were largely looked down on by critics. What was the last great Burton film? Perhaps "Sweeney Todd".

Here, he goes outside of what anyone expected. Nothing weird, nothing involving his regular cast or crew. No Johnny Depp, or Gothic themes, or odd inventions. This is as close to a regular, dramatic biopic as one can get. And it works very, very well, making the audience care about an artist they may not have even been aware of.

One concern is the casting of Waltz. While he does the job very well, and makes the film's comedy really come to the forefront, there is just no getting around his accent. Walter Keane was not German. Faulting Waltz for his voice may be unfair, but it still stands out as a strange inconsistency with the rest of the story.