Subject: REVIEW: TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY

From: [email-masked] (Mark R. Leeper)
Date: 18 Jul 91 14:40:26 GMT

[Followups directed to rec.arts.movies.]

			     TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY
		       A film review by Mark R. Leeper
			Copyright 1991 Mark R. Leeper

	  Capsule review:  Nina is slowly disintegrating after the
     death of her lover.  Then he returns as a ghost, and she must
     decide what her new relationship will be with him.  Slow and
     overly drawn-out at times but watchable.  Rating: 0 (-4 to
     +4).

     (Contains minor spoilers important to explaining the premise.)

     A perennial fantasy film subject is that of ghosts coming back to
affect the lives of the living.  I don't mean the horrific approach of THE
UNINVITED, THE HAUNTING, or THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE.  The films I am
talking about have spirits walking among us relatively benignly.  TOPPER is
a good example; so is BEETLEJUICE and DONA FLOR'S TWO HUSBANDS.  The success
of GHOST will probably spawn several more examples in the next year or two.
However, because of timing it seems likely we can ascribe to coincidence the
similarities between GHOST and the BBC film TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY, though in
some ways the two are quite similar.

     Jamie (played by Alan Rickman) has been dead for a while now, but Nina
(played by Juliet Stevenson) refuses to close that chapter in her life and
get on with the business of living.  She imagines Jamie is still around
giving her advice.  Nina sleepwalks through a life that is shattered and
crumbles more day by day.  Then a spectral Jamie does return and takes up
residence as Nina's secret live-in (if "live" is the right word) lover.  He
explains his presence by quoting Dylan Thomas saying, "And death shall have
no dominion."

     If the plot of TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY resembles that of GHOST, in style
the two are very different.  There is a lot that GHOST tries to do that
TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY does not.  The British film is far more sad, slow, and
introspective.  GHOST throws in a major sub-plot of a crime story; it has a
comedy sub-plot with Whoopi Goldberg; it stops and closely examines just
what powers a ghost would and would not have.  It also has its sad and
introspective moments, but they do not last too long.  To pack so much into
a film may be of dubious value, but it is all there.  TRULY, MADLY, DEEPLY
clearly has different priorities and very different pacing.  It takes its
time to build Nina's character, but it glosses over the metaphysics and
there seem to be notable inconsistencies in the nature of ghosts (e.g., at
times the ghosts seem to take care that they cannot be overheard; at other
times it does not seem to bother them).  There is some whimsy, some warm
comedy, and one character who is well-observed, but overall this is a rather
slight film and a disappointment.  I would give it a 0 on the -4 to +4
scale.

					Mark R. Leeper
					att!mtgzy!leeper
					[email-masked]