Search - She's So Lovely on DVD

K. K. (GAMER)
Reviewed on 6/26/2021...

A really weird plotline with an all-star cast of characters!

Disparity of response

David Grim | Pittsburgh, PA United States | 07/22/2002

(5 out of 5 stars)

"If you read the various reviews of this movie, you will find an amazing array of responses to it. I think this is largely a function of the horrid marketing of this movie. When my friend recmmended that I watch it, I did a once-over of its packaging and decided I wasn't interested. He insisted, and so I reluctantly agreed to watch it. Despite it's packaging, this is not a sentimental romantic comedy in the "Pretty Woman" or "Look Who's Talking" vein. If this is the sort of movie you like, you should move on and not waste your time with this.The movie is divided into two parts. The first focuses on the troubled relationship of derelict couple Eddie and Moe (played by real-life spouses Sean and Robin Wright Penn). Penn's character is dissolute, and puts Moe in the bad position of being vulnerable to the sleazy advances of a neighbor (played well by The Sopranos' James Gandolfini). When Eddie finds out what happens as a result, he becomes steadily unhinged. His performance in a barroom scene is one of the most convincing portrayals of drunken progressive madness I have seen on film.The second part of the film benefits mainly from the introduction of John Travolta in a role that mercifully pulls back from stretching his limited acting range. This IS the Travolta we guiltily derived pleasure from before he decided he was a mega-action flick star. What follows is a somewhat unlikely but morally and emotionally challenged dilemma for Moe (Robin Penn Wright). While viewers who tend to view life in rather black-and-white terms will be horrified by this portion of the movie, open-minded viewers will have the opportunity to analyze the various components of the ensuing relationships and positions of the players. It is troublesome and problematic and so avoids easy answers or judgements. What's great about the film, unlike other indie films that revel in their dispassion, is that it is not afraid to allow you to feel for these characters deeply, despite their many flaws. The performances are great, and the movie stands up to repeated viewings, so I highly recommend the film. Besides, it's probably your only opportunity to find out how to make a "Siberian Mist"."

In defence of She's So Lovely

Stephen Doig | New Zealand | 06/30/2000

(5 out of 5 stars)

"What is it about a down and out romance like 'She's So Lovely' that seems to polarise an audience into those who see it as a trashy, confusing and unrealistic ride, and those of us that find it endearing, amusing and utterly, utterly charming. Perhaps we find a grain of truth within She's So Lovely that identifies with our own lives. Husband + wife team Sean + Robin Wright Penn deliver sterling performances and an unmistakable on-screen chemistry as they come to terms with their roller coaster relationship, and their sense of belonging in a changing society. Nobody plays the down on his luck,loveable loser quite like Penn, and Robin Wright Penn is a revelation as his ideal companion. This is the perfect antidote to all the high budget - low chemistry romance/dramas on the racks, combining superb acting and great dialogue, with an engrossing and uplifting story."

They Put The Mad In 'Madly In Love'

Stephen Doig | 12/09/2001

(4 out of 5 stars)

"I've read interviews with Sean Penn wherin he laments the fact that this film was overlooked. But somehow I believe that they WANT this film to be 'underground'. Otherwise, how could they do such a poor job marketing it? For starters, the title is completely misleading. "She's So Lovely" absolutely screams Romantic Chick Flick but this movie couldn't be further from that. Mabey the script's original title, "She's De Lovely," would have seemed clever once you'd seen the film, but they went with "She's So Lovely," which, frankly, (...). It makes no sense, has absolutely no relevance and misrepresents the movie.Huge marketing error #2 is the packaging. One word: Horrible. My copy says "Demo Tape - Box Art May Vary", and I said to my friend "God, I sure hope so!". However, I see they stuck with the exact same blurry photos of the stars with a brown line over their faces...it looks like a preliminary effort for the screener box they never got around to finishing up.I think all that served to keep a great film underground! Penn won Best Actor at Cannes for his roll. This intense character study reminded me of 'Barfly' in its unflinching look at alcoholism. We get a glimpse of the surreal worldview of someone who would smash the top off a wine bottle on the curb and chug the entire thing from the jagged edge. Like 'Barfly', this film examines these lives for their normalcy, pointing out how these motives exist in us all. The film understands that the true weirdness that exists on skid row is the same weirdness that exists in suburbia; only the surroundings have changed. One reviewer felt "that out-of-control, crazed, alcoholic, destructive criminals and deadbeats are not suitable subjects for syrupy, violin-playing comedic romances." I demand to know why they are not suitable? These are universal themes. Certainly these characters are alcoholic and they do seem touched with madness. None of them is exactly likeable. So the audience is able to watch the characters' actions from a somewhat detached perspective. This film is not 'syrupy' at all.In fact it's brutal in it's bluntness. Travolta's character tells his 9 year old daughter to 'Shut up and drink your beer'. Many things in this movie seem shocking simply thru their easy acceptance as if they were just part of another bad day. 'Nobody brought a piece-it's not that kind of an evening.' is a surprising (and funny) response to having a gun pulled on you, but the little girl's reaction is even more revealing. Even the romance is blunt. Being 'madly in love' is well depicted by Sean Penn and Robin Wright. But unthinkable choices are made in the name of love. And isn't true love just another form of madness?"