96 of 108 people found the following review helpful
on November 30, 2012
Someone seems to say "life is between boredom and anxiety". People feel bored for what they already have and feel anxiety for what they don't. The process of knowing a new person or getting a new thing stirs the excitement. The excitement makes people feel delighted, happy and bold, which could lead to make a wrong decision and regret later. After a while, the excitement dies down, the new becomes the old, the boredom strikes again... I think the movie captures the idea very well. People who have the similar experience will find this movie is interesting and worth to watch. Otherwise, the movie might seems boring and slow.
The important thing in the life is to figure out what is really important and hold on to them. Rather than chasing the "mirage" created by the excitement, it is better to ride out the boredom by discovering new trait from old people or things, include ourself. So when you feel you will give in to the temptation, you can watch this movie and see whether you still want to do it or not.
58 of 64 people found the following review helpful
Take This Waltz is a slow moving quirky movie. There was something unique about this film, something that caught my attention from the first moment.
The film opens with a beautiful song, light quirky words, slightly on the folk side. The opening montage is a set of close ups of Margot making cup cakes. One of the last shots is of her sitting in front of the oven, a man in shorts walks past and the montage ends with an out of focus shot of the man standing in front of a bright window. I describe this very carefully because the film closes with exactly this same series of shots. They are identical, except for one small detail; the man is wearing long pants.
The film then moves to a town on the east coast of Canada where Margot writes the new brochure copy for a Colonial town. A man taunts her to participate in a mock flogging. He ends up sitting next to her on the plane home. Turns out he lives across the street and they share a cab home, as they part ways she says under her breath, "I'm married." Margot is married to Lou, a chef writing a chicken cookbook.
This next paragraph has spoilers in it. If you would rather not know some details, skip this paragraph.
Ultimately, Margot ends up having an affair with Daniel. The literal interpretation of this affair is that she is a horrible person, doing what so many people do. She should be in love with her funny schlub of a husband. Her life is fabulous and she should be happy. Instead she falls for this handsome sexy guy across the street. I contend that there is another way to look at this film. Lou wore shorts a lot in this film. Daniel never wore shorts once, in fact the director made sure we got to see his Capri pants, they were always long pants; even at the beach. Margot never cooks in the whole film; in fact she hates the kitchen. The opening and closing montage style is completely different from the rest of the film. It is an intimate dance with Margot, the close ups of her bare feet moving gracefully. Throughout the film she wears funky sneakers, rarely barefoot. The opening and closing montage say that the affair was a fantasy. If I look back on the film with the idea that the affair was completely in Margot's head, the film takes on a completely different amazing turn. It all makes sense and is powerful.
The film is beautifully made. The interiors are full of stuff, bright colored stuff. Margot wears some of the funkiest unusual clothes. The exteriors portray a Toronto neighborhood so perfectly, open and green. The trips into the city are tight shots with all kinds of activity everywhere. Michelle Williams is absolutely radiant. She is bohemian, wears those unusual clothes perfectly. She as well as Sarah Silverman are never afraid to take off her clothes. They are both beautiful women comfortable with their bodies. Seth Rogan and Luke Kirby are also confident, but both stand to the side to let the women shine. This is a strong cast. I do have one complaint about the Montreal airport, it is not Dorval - the chairs, halls, and doors are all wrong. Given the attention to detail in this film, I'm surprised that slipped in.
The film is almost two hours long. It does move along at about the same slow pace throughout. Frankly, I liked this pace. This isn't an action picture; it is a sort of romance or a slow slide into a fantasy world. I would guess it was too slow for a lot of viewers. This is an R rated film. There are several scenes with full frontal and rear female nudity. There is a scene in the middle of the film where Daniel describes what he wants to do to Margot. It is one of the most sensual scenes I have ever watched where nobody ever took off their clothes or even touched. There is an artistic scene of two people having sex, reasonably well covered. There is some strong language. The film is intended for mature audiences.
This film was less about betrayal and more about what boredom and fantasy will lead people to think. I loved the quirkiness of this film. The soundtrack was perfection. Sarah Silverman and Michelle Williams were amazing. Although slow moving, I was moved by this film.
20 of 20 people found the following review helpful
on May 26, 2013
The film is beautiful, its landscapes, décor, colour...
There's a shower scene at a swimming pool that juxtaposes the young bodies of the main characters with those of older women. The scene has been described as "ugly," perhaps deemed so because it was frank and not a male gaze POV. The younger women daintily shower; the older women truly wash themselves. The younger women gab about wanting to escape the humdrum of their lives, to which an older woman interjects: "New things get old." The younger women turn and gaze at the older women. We are left to imagine their thoughts. Watching the scene was uncomfortable, but it was a refreshing display of female nudity.
A recently sober character talks about the inevitability of their relapse. We weigh the inevitability of the main character's adultery. The character later says, "Life has a gap in it. It just does. You don't go crazy trying to fill it like some lunatic," which is funny and strains belief given the scene. Maybe that's heavy-handed, but the two quotations given seem to be the only saving grace of this film for reviewers who gave it 1 star, so maybe spelling things out is needed.
The scenes set at the Video killed the Radio Star (new supersedes old) ride were more telling than the quotations. In one scene, the young woman takes this ride alone. We can assume this is a ride that she has taken with her husband a long time ago. In the other scene, she takes her neighbour there and they share a few minutes of exhilaration in the darkness, flashing lights and loud music. The music stops and the lights come on: the ride is ended. They, and we, are surprised and disoriented. We know a ride always ends, yet we are surprised, resentful or seek another (which will also end).
The film is what its trailer, score, synopsis and rating suggest. You have been warned. Strange dialogue? It fits the film. Boring? Well, you see the minutiae of a couple's life. Boredom is the setting for discontent.
38 of 43 people found the following review helpful
on November 26, 2012
This is not a light Hollywood RomCom. This story explores the chemistry of relationships. Margot is happily married to a good guy, a chef named Lou. They have fun and a nice life where their friends and family love them as a couple. Five years into a marriage, they do not have a deep connection, but a superficial one where they are content with the companionship that grows over time. There is a lot of nurture & familiarity in their relationship but no spark.
The two are different from each other. Margot feels the space between them but does not want to explore what is happening on a deeper level until she meets a carefree urban hobo / artist by chance when visiting a local landmark. She later realizes that he lives across the street from her. Daniel, the artist seems to see past her normal facade and made up excuses and stories. He calls it for what it is and makes her realize that she does not want everyday security but a raw deep connection with someone who feels her being deeply and allows her to be an individual.
The film is shot in beautiful urban Toronto. The backdrop and streets are full of color and life. The main characters of Margot and Daniel are played by the talented and adaptable Michelle Williams and hunky, deep and slightly mysterious Luke Kirby. Michelle gives a great performance of a young woman who is not sure what is lacking in her life. She tries to hold on to the things that others say are good for her and struggles with being pursued by a slightly obsessive suitor. The cerebral and sexual tension between the two actors heightens as the film progresses. One of the best non sex, erotic scenes happens in a cafe where Daniel tells Margot what he will do with her (this happens about 45 minutes into the movie). Luke Kirby looks at Michelle Williams as if he can see deep into her soul and Michelle looks increasingly like she has been carried away on a cloud when she looks at him. The acting is superb. Excellent performances are also seen by Sarah Silverman and Seth Rogen.
This is now one of my all time favorite movies. I hope to see more from Sarah Polley who wrote and directed this movie.
21 of 25 people found the following review helpful
on August 14, 2012
This film does a wonderful job portraying real-life relationships. Lots of people won't like it, but that's because the "typical" love story doesn't end this way. In reality, situations arise similar to this more times than one can count. It's battle between what others feel is right for you, and what you actually know to be right for your happiness. Michelle Williams did another fantastic job, and I feel the casting for Daniel (Luke Kirby) was spot-on. Luke Kirby plays such a great character, innocent, real, sexy, sweet, and honest. He's a good guy and knows what he wants, but is willing to wait for it. I look forward to seeing Luke Kirby in more films. I recommend this film!
15 of 18 people found the following review helpful
on October 24, 2012
Before I decide to rent a DVD, I tend to read the 1-star reviews to see if there might be some valid reasons for not renting it. I admit that I almost didn't rent this one because of some of the things said in the one-star ratings.
However, I took a chance, and I'm glad I did. It is definitely not one of your run of the mill "cheat on your spouse" movies. I found it lyrical, understated and subtle, with a haunting soundtrack that definitely added to the mood.
It was a two-hour movie. In my experience, most two-hour movies could have been condensed into 90 minutes, but I didn't find any "wasted time" in this movie. It kept my interest from start to finish.
Unlike some one-star reviewers who found the characters dull and uninteresting, I found them quite captivating. The movie provided some neat character studies.
Admittedly, some of the dialogue, particularly near the beginning, was a bit artificial and seemingly contrived. However, it overcame that after awhile.
And I felt the ending (the last 10 to 15 minutes) was a bit strange and disjointed, which detracted from the seamless flow that had been developed through the first 105 minutes.
Other than that, though, I thought it was an excellent movie.
Certainly, I wouldn't recommend it to everyone, because not everyone would like this kind of movie. However, if you feel like relaxing for a couple of hours and experiencing how some people try to make sense of their relationships, this might be worth a look.
52 of 69 people found the following review helpful
on June 23, 2012
Margo (Michelle WIlliams) meets Daniel (Luke Kirby) on a Colonial tour, in which actors are put in stocks and whipped for committing adultery. This bit of foreshadowing (Daniel goads her into administering the lashing) is a clue as to the moral dilemma that involves Margo, Daniel, and ultimately Margo's husband, Lou (Seth Rogan).
The theme of marriage, temptation, boredom and adultery is hardly new fodder for exploration, but it does have an endless fascination. This tale of hipster attraction, lust and flirtation does not add anything particularly intriguing to the mix. Michelle Williams does a good job with the complicated character of Margo, who seems literally lost in her own neuroses and insecurities. She swings from childlike timidity to really bold flirting without much in between, and the instant hot attraction between she and Daniel leaves her understandably emotional and highly charged. Daniel, it turns out, lives right across the street from Margo and Luke (how did they not know this?) and he also veers from boldness - he literally stalks her 24/7 -- to suddenly turning morally righteous just as he's about to get what he wants. These two tease each other in a way that I found infuriating. Of course, they say and do things that real people operating under the conventions of civility would never say or do, but when it comes to pulling the trigger, they both back off.
Most puzzling to me was the character of Luke (Seth Rogan), Margo's husband. A writer of cookbooks involving chicken, he is a charming manchild with a strange distaste for touching his pretty wife. She, clearly in love with him, tries on countless occasions to "seduce" him (her words), only to be spurned with no explanation each and every time. They behave towards each other like kindergarten children with a crush. They "play" with each, tickle each other, he dumps cold water on her in her shower (why???) but he will not sleep with her. Is he gay? Asexual? At one point he mutters something about "not deserving her" which does nothing to clarify the situation.
My favorite performance in the movie was that of Sarah Silverman. She seems natural, is her usual bold, profane self, and adds a dimension of reality to a movie which is so subtle and nuanced it gets in its own way. "Everything new gets old" is hardly a startling new revelation, and unfortunately, this treatment of that theme ultimately fails to satisfy.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on November 24, 2012
The subject matter is nothing new, but I liked the way it was handled in this movie. There's no question that this is Michelle Williams' film; she plays Margot, a 28-year-old woman married for 5 years who has no idea how a 28-year-old woman married for 5 years is supposed to feel or act. Seth Rogen does a decent job portraying Margot's husband, Lou, but despite his hefty amount of screen time, we never learn much about what makes Lou tick. All of the other characters seem to exist for the purpose of fleshing out Margot, while remaining pretty bare bones themselves (through no fault of anyone's acting abilities). This does make the film awkward and uneven at times, but it also keeps it from becoming cliche by turning the movie into more of a character study than a story about a relationship in trouble: Is it the relationship that's problematic, or is it Margot's expectations of the relationship? Stylistically, the movie is lovely. The scenes between Margot and her handsome neighbor and would-be lover, Daniel, are mostly overwritten in the beginning for the purposes of exposition, but the film picks up a nice pace later on. Michelle Williams' acting is so good that that alone gets the film to 3 stars. There are plenty of other reviews that go into detail about this film's flaws, but I think that Williams' performance combined with the film's honesty and original portrayal of the subject matter outweigh those flaws and make it worth a watch.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on May 1, 2013
This movie really allows Michelle, Seth, and Sarah to shine. I never really cared for Michelle Williams, but she was fantastic in this. Her Canadian accent is right on or at least identical to my Canadian friends who live here in the States. It's difficult to describe why I liked her performance, other than I loved and hated her character--which means she played it perfectly. The movie is easy to dismiss as a cheater film, but because all of the characters are emotionally mature, it is impossible to categorize it as such. Seth is excellent as Lou. I really hope he continues to branch out into serious roles. He's adorably human in this. His comedic timing really translates to excellent delivery in the dramatic scenes. But if we're talking biggest leap, it has to be Sarah Silverman. Sure the pool scene was horribly edited. But Sarah's deadpan delivery really works here, she has a magic that steals scenes. And she nailed the monologue. I'm sorry this film has not been recognized for the gem it is. Intimate couples' language and silence shines in this movie. And questions about longevity of relationships and passion and what is ultimately important to you are asked of the viewer in everyday language and events you cant help but relate to.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on April 9, 2013
...there is no masked murderer hiding in the shadows in this movie, but there is something that might be worse, because it might be real. There are no bad people in this movie, at least not inherently. No one does anything to be vindictive or even because they are indifferent. This movie scares me simply because it was all so logical. That could be me. I love movies and good stories and take them for what they are in essence, entertainment, but the ones that stick with me, the ones I tell others about or give as gifts, are the ones that make me think and evoke a deep emotion. This film is a mirror and it will give you the opportunity for great introspection, if you will allow it. Not everyone wants this, in fact the person I bought this for has yet to watch it because it makes her nervous. Life isn't clean and it is good to be reminded of this amongst all of the fairy tales. This film will do just that.