The Proposition (1998)

This movie is visually stunning and very well acted by the WHOLE cast. I think it is better seen at home where you can go back and watch portions over again, because in some scenes you must hear every word and pay attention to body language and expression quite closely or the plot can easily lose you. Bad acting or directing would have made this movie impossible to understand, because the writing is extremely subtle. I think the directing and acting is amazing because of what it conveys without language. (Some of the negative reviews were written by people who did not pay attention to key things are explained in few or no words, once, and once only, or to things that were shown only through non-verbal language. You must look and listen the whole time.) It does have the tragic-amazingly-coincidental stuff going on, but so what? It is entertainment, for goodness sakes, not a documentary! Apparently someone who was involved in making it is embarrassed, because it is impossible to get it on DVD in American format, which is a real shame. I love this movie, and am very sad not to be able to watch it since my VHS player broke. It always absorbs me and lets me forget about my own life for a few hours. I like to watch it once or twice a year, and enjoy sharing it with friends who have not seen it. It has been enjoyed by many people I know, but some did say that my pointing out key scenes was necessary for them to follow the plot. A few friends really did not like it, but none of those particular friends like tragic drama in general. I will continue to look for it on DVD every several months, and I will be looking to fix or replace my VHS player just so I can watch this and one other movie that I also love and can't get on DVD.

This film is a deep moral more than social drama, in spite of the emphasis set on the social surroundings of the situation. It has nothing to do with the high class circumstances of the protagonists. It has all to do with their Christian conscience and then with their souls, or what they believe to be their soul.What can a rich man do if he is sterile and his wife wants a child. In the 1930s that was a real problem. What happens if another man is used to satisfy the woman ? Blackmail of course and death. The problem is who caused that death not what ? What happens if some nephew appears under a catholic cassock and realizes the wish of the woman ?Old family feuds are revived and amplified. What happens if the mother dies just before delivering twins? The drama thickens and the plot sickens too. A necessary agreement between the uncle and the nephew, a gentleman's agreement, a biblical agreement in which the mother is more important than the father and hence the filiation of the children goes through the mother to the husband, that is all. At this moment it is poignant.And it starts when the husband dies in his turn : what can happen then for the children and for the real father ? Nothing. The priest has had time to understand his faith has to be cultivated in humility and silence not blood and bloodlines, and the children would be destroyed if they learned the truth and the lie they have been raised and fed on. And so goes the world, sad and sinister, bleak and hopeless.It is all a lie because it is all a sham, a fake appearance. And appearances have to be saved above all other considerations.Dr Jacques COULARDEAUSECOND THOUGHTSThis is, or could have been, an interesting film, or subject. But it is in fact treated in some kind of shocked ethics that ends well without ending badly, or badly since it does not end well really, or is it really well?A supposedly liberated woman, before the age of women's liberation, at least in Boston, cannot get a child from her husband who seems to be sterile. So she decides to have one nevertheless, with the agreement of her husband. They recruit a young man for that, to be the surrogate provider but he suddenly wants to be the father. A meddling mother of some sort in front of the surrogate becoming demanding (and he could ruin the whole family of course) gets rid of him and the dead body appears in front of the poor woman who is pregnant and she falls into the grave and she loses her child, etc. And she hates her husband she accuses of the crime.This is melodramatic to the utmost. Then a priest comes into the picture as a solace to the poor woman, and that priest is the son of the Nazi- leaning brother of the husband. Isn't that all complicated and maybe far-fetched?And she falls in love with him. And she is going to have twins. But she gets sick and dies just at the proper moment, just before delivering. So a caesarian is performed, post mortem and the two babies are saved. The father will raise them as his in the full recollection of the woman he loved and in the total ignorance, at least proffered ignorance of who is the father.And we are back at the beginning of the film when the lawyer who is dealing with the will of the husband has to come to the priest and ask for his benediction and the full explanation. The husband did know the truth and the priest can remember all these Sundays when he gave communion to the father and the two twins who were in fact his own twin sons.Melodramatic and maybe effective to show what love can be in a man who cannot perform his procreative role. But that is all because the priest did not in anyway develop a relation with his sons, even be it as a priest, thinking maybe that the father's silence would be enough to clear or clean his sin.Too bad because the subject could have been so much more than just this hypocritical hiding of the truth.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

I ran across this film whilst flipping channels one rainy afternoon and found the storyline to be surprisingly engaging. I was glued to the couch waiting to see how it would play out and how such flawed characters could find redemption. I felt the casting was good and Madeline Stowe's character in particular was easy to relate to. As for William Hurt, such a somber and sympathetic character could be compared to the likes of Heathcliffe...so full of longing and unfulfilled dreams. While I am not always fond of movies that have a narrator, I felt that Kenneth Branaugh's voice and character added weight to the tale and only increased my interest in the movie as more was exposed about his involvement in the lives of the "Barrett family". The storyline contained plenty of interesting twists and turns, and was not altogether predictable (as many movies are today). Definitely worthwhile and a lovely depiction of love, charity and forgiveness.

You know there must be a problem when a recent film appears on TV with a cast that includes William Hurt, Kenneth Branagh, Madeleine Stowe, Robert Loggia and Blythe Danner and you've never heard of it. I guess my suspicions were aroused when the TV Channel shoved it out at 3 o'clock in the morning, but I really didn't think it could be that bad.I was wrong. One of the previous comments summed this film up far better than I could but I would still like someone to tell me who the hell is Blythe Danner supposed to be? The mother, sister, best friend,'Mrs Danvers', I still haven't got a clue. I'm certainly not going to watch it again just to find out..However, by far the saddest thing about this movie is watching talent like Blythe Danner, Madeleine Stowe and William Hurt being wasted in rubbish like this (I didn't miss out Mr Branagh by accident , incidentally). Come on Hollywood, give them something decent to get their teeth into!