IMDb user comments for
Women in Love (1969) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 4:

[1] [2] [3] [4]

Index

38 comments in total

---

29 out of 33 people found the following comment useful :-
You'll love Women in Love!, 21 January 2005

Author: Ezekiel Steiner from Los Angeles

One of the best literary adaptations ever to grace the screen this wonderful movie does justice to Lawrence's novel but more importantly to his vision. The cast is magical bringing to life Lawrence's characters at perfect pitch. Alan Bates IS D. H. Lawrence/ Rupert Birkin and Oliver Reed, Jennie Linden and Glenda Jackson, who won an Oscar for her role, are superb. The script is excellent and draws on Lawrence's writings in addition to titled novel. For instance the scene where they are having lunch in the garden and Rupert (Bates) expounds on the fig fruit is actually taken from a poem by Lawrence called The Fig. It is little touches like this that really show the research and respect that went in to the adaptation. I don't know of a braver writer of relationships then Lawrence and this film is unflinching in its portrayal of every kind.

---

25 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
Time Has No Power Over Women In Love, 16 March 2005

Author: Galina from Virginia, USA

Ken Russell's adaptation of D. H. Lawrence's novel Women in Love is one of my favorite films. It explores the hearts and minds, personalities, and philosophies of four intelligent and educated young people in the beginning of 20-th century and their romantic relationships (heterosexual and homosexual, friendship, love and desire). They are played by Alan Bates, Oliver Reed, Glenda Jackson, and Jennie Linden.

Glenda Jackson who was relatively unknown at the time won her first Oscar for a magnificent performance in a most difficult role: her Gudrun is not a likable character, she is an self-centered predator, but she is honest and very interesting. I read some comments that she was not beautiful. Well, she may not have been pretty but I believe there is more than prettiness to make a woman loved, and admired otherwise a lot of women in this world would never be able to learn the feeling. Gudrun's intelligence, strong character, and self-confidence make her very attractive and desirable.

The film has many unforgettable scenes with two that stand alone after all these years. First of them is one of the most provocative and delightful sexual scenes ever filmed. It takes place during a picnic. Alan Bates dressed in a light white suite describes to the others how to eat a fig. He carefully holds it, and then pulls it open while he compares the process to a woman and looks teasingly at shy Ursula, Gudrun's sister (Jennie Linden). This little scene is as powerful as a famous wrestling scene, even though everybody who saw the film would recall the wrestling scene as a most memorable in "Women in Love".

The wrestling in the nude was Lawrence's (and Russell's ) solution to allow two men to relieve the horror and dreadfulness of the drowning tragedy that occurred shortly before. The scene takes place for long time, 5-10 minutes, with the fire from fireplace highlighting Reed's and Bate's bodies as each struggles against the other. The scene is extremely sensual but whether they engaged in sex or not we don't know…

This is a very special film that has not lost its beauty and appeal now even though it was made over 35 years ago. Extraordinarily striking and highly sensual, it is a must see for anyone truly interested in film.

---

21 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :-
Sometimes lush, sometimes stark, always visually striking., 13 September 1998
Author: Futura-2 from Here

Ken Russell's film (based on the novel of the same name by D.H. Lawrence) is an interesting piece in that he is able to use his camera to help the audience see one situation from two extremely diverse points-of-view, from that of the loving schoolmarm Ursula (Jennie Linden in a brilliant performance), to the manipulative Gudrun (Glenda Jackson.)

Russell has quite a knack of using his camera to create the emotions he wishes to extract from his audience. Russell's technique of turning his camera sideways as Ursula and Rupert (Alan Bates) run nude through the fields has been dismissed by some, but it is quite effective in creating the unreal state in which their romance seems to find them, one quite different from the hardness and madness that surrounds them. This too is achieved to stunning effect as the two lovers are seen twisted together in the mud in the same position that two deceased lovers had been found only hours before. The colors surrounding these two are always bright and warm, in stark contrast to the way the other pair of lovers, Gudrun and Gerald (Oliver Reed) are photographed.

Gudrun and Gerald's initial sexual encounter is harshly lit and edited, emphasizing the brutality of their situation. Their love is shown to be more of an addiction, rather than true love.

It would take more than 1,000 words to paint an accurate work picture of the films' creative genius and incredible cinematography. One scene in particular, a nude wrestling match between Rupert and Gerald quite defies description, and I urge you to see the film and experience it's mastery yourself.

---

23 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
Just as Powerful, Just as Profound, 12 March 2001

Author: films42 from Chicago, IL

This faithful adaptation by Ken Russell of one of D.H. Lawrence's best works is just as powerful & just as profound now, over 30 years after its initial release. The story is set in England a few years after World War I, at a time when many women of marriageable age were forced to examine their assumptions about relationships. When the Brangwen sisters complain about the lack of men, it's true. Many of the men who should have been available to them were lost in the war.

The film was made @ the dawn of the women's movement, once again a time when many women of a certain age were driven to examine their own assumptions about relationships, and looked to Lawrence (& then to Russell) for answers to questions beyond words.

This is not to deny the importance of the men in this story. Both Rupert & Gerald are drawn to the kind of women who ask these questions. Both of them have a myriad of other choices, but they're not satified by less.

So Russell finds a visual way to tell this story, & much of it would seem to be "over the top" were it not so obviously sincere & courageous. Glenda Jackson, a relative unknown at the time, won her first Oscar. We agree. She gives an extraordinary performance in a most difficult role: Gudrun is not likeable, but she IS honest.

---

14 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
Habit Forming, 6 February 2004
Author: J. Wellington Peevis from Malltown

Adaptation of the D.H. Lawrence classic concening the loves of two 'modern' sisters in Yorkshire during the 1920s.

At first glance this film is rather hard to take in. The story is difficult to follow and at times, barely visible. Almost as if its asumed we are all so familiar with the book, that a strict narrative is unnecessary. You are likely to finish watching and ask yourself wtf? The acting is rather remarkable however and Ken Russell puts up the usual visual wonderland, so its easily rewatched. As I did, I realized the plot isn't whats important to this film at all. I'm sure the book too leaves that very same impression. You are meant more to study the characters, listen to their musings, and if possible relate to them, rather than follow a traditional storyline with a beginning middle and end. Art imititating life for a change. A different sort of experience, sensually cerebral, if thats possible, but well made and worth a look. Jackson, Bates and Reed, three would be hams, each giving understated and marvelous performances.

---

13 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
arresting, breathtakingly beautiful. Ten out of Ten., 6 December 2004
Author: savieri from Australia

This film is a masterpiece.

DH Lawrence has provided a wonderful story world for Ken Russell

to explore modern notions of romance, monogamy -- sex and the beast. Only the recent Thai film "Tropical Malady" has managed to grapple with these themes with such playful and erotic sensitivity. The sort of film which confronts the very notion of a moral fabric -- dangerous -- yet vital if audiences are willing to challenge their own notions of fairytale love, expectations for companionship and ultimately happiness.

The mismatched performance style (Glenda J's unusual mix of naturalism and

Brechtian facade -- is delightful when juxtaposed with Oliver Reeds hammy

closetted representational queer). Like "cAT ON A HOT TIN roof" this

performance contrast only serves to strengthen the academic rigour of the film's politics -- and ultimately serves as an emotional beacon to enlighten an

audience with an elusive mind.

Like "The Day of the Locust" -- this film is breathtakingly modern -- and before it's time.

---

15 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
absorbingly brilliant, 27 September 2000
Author: didi-5 from United Kingdom

This film seems to get better the more I go back to it. Close to the source novel for the most part (the one big divergence being in the Water Party section but in the sense of the film the change is acceptable and gives a disturbing gloss to the story) and with sequence after sequence of powerful images, it has been much misunderstood and often dismissed but I would hope in time it is given the credit it deserves. 8/10

---

12 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
The embodiment of the Avant-Garde style., 9 August 1999
Author: Autonome (autonome@olywa.net) from Portland, Oregon

By it's mere cinemagraphic style and on screen personalities, this film introduced me to the idea of the avant-garde, existential and 'esoteric ritual' perspective of ordinary events. Their true mystery. For me, the style of the film went far beyond its content or dialogue. This film taught me the idea of an intelligent stylishness, and how erotic Glenda Jackson's character could be sheerly by virtue of her brilliant and cunning personal style. Pretty surprising, but then, seducing his audience in great new ways has been one of Russell's great talents. His films always seemed at the cutting edge, and I was seeing them 12 years later!

---

10 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
The model for film adaptation of literature, 26 October 1998

Author: Alan Badger from San Francisco, Ca.

Film versions of great books are expected to be lesser beings than their inspirations, but Ken Russell's adaptation of D. H. Lawrence's masterpiece refuses to obey any rules. It's smaller than the book, of course, but compensates by working on multiple levels to create a striking density. The gaudy, almost baroque cinematography actually compliments the sincere and subtle performances (even Oliver Reed!) to create a web of cross-references; every moment connects with every other. Kudos especially to the fine cast, not least Eleanor Bron, who forever cemented her cult status here, and is no mean hand with a paperweight, either.

---

6 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Interesting but hard to like, 29 June 2005

Author: Enoch Sneed from United Kingdom

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Ken Russell films are not to everyone's taste. They are often smothered in visual metaphors that distract from what is actually happening on screen.

This, one of his earliest projects, is reasonably straightforward visually and has some very striking moments, such as a cut from the bodies of a drowned young couple to those of another young couple exhausted after sex.

The trouble is we have to listen to the chattering classes of the 1920's discussing the true nature of love and relationships - over and over and over again. You feel like telling them just to shut up and get on with life instead of analysing it to death.

Good acting all round but for me the most memorable performance comes from Oliver Reed who brings a real sense of turmoil to Gerald Crich. The first time I saw the film and the action moved to Switzerland I somehow *knew* Gerald was doomed. It is a performance that really stays with the viewer long after the Lawrence philosophising is forgotten.

---

---

Page 1 of 4:

[1] [2] [3] [4]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	External reviews	Parents Guide
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user comments
Your vote history