BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment
Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.
Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.
scoochie9 This is a fantastic movie. I don't know thing one about the life and death of Doris Duke, and as it says in the beginning credits: "Some of this film is based on facts...Some of it isn't." What writer Hugh Costello, director Bob Balaban, actors Susan Sarandon and Ralph Fiennes have come up with here is sheer brilliance. Two troubled people who come together, almost accidentally, only to find that each of their unique psychological troubles meshes extremely well with the other's. Yes, it's a story about "enabling" and "codependence", but it's also a story of the power of friendship and loyalty (no matter how sadly unhealthy it might be for both parties involved). I can't say enough good things about the performances of both Sarandon & Fiennes, not to mention all the other actors, and the director, cinematographer, etc... But I must say, the writing is paritcularly effective. The story of these two people's intertwining lives comes off as so true, so kind-of tragic, and so compelling, that I will never forget this film. Bravo!!!
almostgone-1 The film is more than watchable- it's very, very good. Just don't confuse it with biography. Nothing that we know about the reality of either person is admirable. If you forget about the "real" Doris Duke, whoever she "really" was, you can enjoy the performances for what they are- excellent, engaging, even charming, and certainly proficient. Neither actor is ever less than excellent, even when performing poor material, and this material isn't bad. Realistic- well, maybe not so much. The Doris of "Bernard and Doris" was a monster, warped almost beyond human recognition by unimaginable wealth - it's a terrific portrayal of a person who lacks intellect and real education almost entirely but who has unlimited resources for self indulgence - a sort of a rock star cubed. Bernard admired and wanted to BE that monster, as the last scene reveals. Rather instructive, really.
Len9876 As a gay man, I must say that I was captivated by Fiennes brilliant, gentle, and sensitive portrayal of an individual who became Doris Duke's confidante. He was not a gold-digger or a hustler but, rather, a man who had a great deal of love and respect for Doris Duke. I truly believe that he died, just a few short years after Doris Duke's death, because he was heartbroken without her. Like myself, he had no love for money. All he consistently set out to do was to make Doris Duke happy and, in her final years and right up to the end of her life on earth, he successfully achieved that goal by always 'being there' for Doris Duke. Sarandon, like Fiennes, is a top-notch actor. Like fine wine, she gets better and better with age. Was Sarandon too young to play the part of Doris Duke? Absolutely not! She captured Doris Duke's energy, youth, and zeal for life. Like "Emotional Arithmetic," I rate this movie a 9 out of 10. It is captivating. It delivers award-winning performances, and it is definitely a movie worth watching. I've done extensive research on Doris Duke, but the movie brings me much closer to her, and Doris Duke is a person I would like to have known in real life. She was a person filled with positive energy, and Sarandon shows that. Fiennes and Sarandon provide a mirror reflection of the vibrant life of Doris Duke. A gay man can deeply love a woman--but he is drawn, like a magnet, to a person of the same sex. If you will permit me to use a cliché, "a (gay) leopard cannot change his (homosexual) spots," but he has the capacity to love--not in spite of, but because of his "spots." The power to love is greater, and more powerful, than hate.
tedg I wonder. Sometimes I really do value something simple done extraordinarily well over something deep and ambitious done incompletely. Its rare, and I can feel it coming on with an aura that gives me warning. At such times, I have films like this ready. You never know if they will work, but you do know generally that they are built to be simple and direct.And you can judge something of the approach by the people involved. This was far less perfect than it would have had to been to justify the situation which is simple. Rich woman, needy subservient man, along the lines of "The Dresser," or a dozen other approaches to the type. She accepts and rewards the devotion. End.So you have three individuals here, the two actors and the director. Each is placed for our judgment. Sarandon has by far the simplest task: to portray a simple woman. I believe her to be an actress with one or two mannerisms that were invested long ago in compelling characters, and thus unavailable here. She's not someone you could be charmed by.That could work well, even amplify the pitiful state of the character Fiennes plays. Unless he is allowed to shout, Fiennes brings only one quality: the portrayal of the suppressed self. This was perfect for one of my favorite films: "Oscar and Lucinda," where that effect was apt. Unlike Sarandon, he's not afraid to be the same guy over and over.Well, we could still be saved by Balaban. He is an intelligent man who knows staging, and who knows paired acting. But he's the big disappointment here. Everything is derived. Nothing is original. The whole idea was supposed to be that this woman was rare, unique. That merely being with her was an experience worth the effort. Fiennes' character is our surrogate, working to get close and stay close. This could have been effected by all manner of dramatic and cinematic devices, none of which seem to have been tried.Its as if this were a cheap play, not a rich life and a half.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.
