Below is a snapshot of the Web page as it appeared on 12/5/2023 (the last time our crawler visited it). This is the version of the page that was used for ranking your search results. The page may have changed since we last cached it. To see what might have changed (without the highlights), go to the current page.
Bing is not responsible for the content of this page.
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
This was totally worth the wait. Julianne Moore did a brilliant job of playing the bored wife character against her even more boring husband. The dialogue and the inner monologues were witty and funny. Julianne Moore is at her best in this role and look more beautiful than ever. I would recommend this to anyone who loves the independent film works or something that makes you laugh out-loud from the plainess that it portrays life as.
This took five years for Genius to get around onto DVD, but I suppose they are trying to span some of their little-known sets like this over time. Am still trying to find a category for this, but mostly it fits into the day in the life of a dysfunctional marriage in Manhattan film.
Julianne Moore is why I watch any movie, and in the end, was the only reason I suffered through to see the credits role. Imagine a mix of What Dreams May Come, meets Blindness, meets Broderick running from the Out on a Limb set (filmed locally here and I swear he is wearing the same clothes and glasses) meets a mid-life crisis. The film is narrated by our married couple both to the camera and in their heads, sometimes blurring what is real and what becomes a dream through the coarse of one day in the city.
The dialogue becomes so tedious and frustrating by anyone who opens their mouth that you wish it would have stayed on the stage, as I believe this was the original location of this pedantic story. I cannot find the words to describe the variety of self loathing narratives and forced conversations. To summarize briefly, nothing jumped out at me to hold an interest and I give it another star just on JM's ability to hold a film together with her expressions and genuine look of disgust in what she is doing.
one of the WORST movies i have ever seen!! PAINFUL!! ugh!!! i saw this at a pawn shop for .49 cents and thought 'well maybe' but boy was i wrong!! i fast forwarded through most of it and it def shows that Matthew can only 'act' (if you really want to call it that) as his 'one note' or 'variations of ' his 'Ferris Buellers' character which is fine but for any other movies he is dreadful. (i mean did anyone really believe he was a 'leader' and this o so strong commander or whatever his rank was in Glory'? cmon!) i just kept thinking that if this film had a premiere i would have love to been in that audience when the lights went up to see how embarrassed anyone in this film was n how they would have to pretend that this was such a 'great film' etc lol save yourselves and run away from this one!
"Marie and Bruce," based on a play by Wallace Shawn, focuses on one day in the life of a dysfunctional Manhattan couple (Julianne Moore, Matthew Broderick). The film opens with Marie's pronouncement that their long-deteriorating marriage is over and she is leaving. During the next 24 hours, each vents, recalls happier times, and expresses hopes for the future. Despite a few attempts to open up the action the movie can't shake its stage origins. It is very talky, and because you have two unhappy people unloading their frustrations and gripes, things become pretty grating. Both Moore and Broderick are good, but it's hard to warm to their characters. Though "Marie and Bruce" is only 90 minutes long, it seems endless. Language is often profane and there is some nudity, which explains the R rating. There are no bonus extras in this bare-bones edition.
Having just come across this movie on cable by chance we gave it a shot, in lack of any better option expecting a drama with a comedy twist as was advertised. Never had we imagined we would be faced with a Woody Allen (without the humor and wit) meets Eyes Wide Shut (without the sensuality but with amble weirdness).
It depicts a woman craving for the attention from her husband, who is totally bizarre and without a clue what she is lacking. Surely not infrequent sentiments in relationships. She is longing for sensuality and sensitivity (personified in her dreams as a fluffy golden retriever) and he merely longs for more sex.
The two reasonably well known actors play the roles exactly as seems to be intended but it is doubtful either of their characters would resonate much with any even grossly bizarre people among us? In fact all this movie left us with was brief contemplation as to whether to get a second dog - perhaps a golden retriever?
If any of you Freudians manage to sit through movie in its entirety would you be so kind to add your perspective on this movie and why anyone should see it least to say would finance it.
