Things You Can Tell Just By Looking At Her Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
A man only sees what a woman wants him to know.
Seeing is deceiving.
A study of the physical and emotional intricacies affecting the everyday lives of a very diverse group of women, and the strategies they adopt in coping with events - large and small, overt and hidden - which shape the way they live.
| Glenn Close | Dr. Elaine Keener |
| Cameron Diaz | Carol Faber |
| Calista Flockhart | Christine Taylor |
| Kathy Baker | Rose |
| Amy Brenneman | Detective Kathy Faber |
| Valeria Golino | Lilly |
| Holly Hunter | Rebecca Waynon |
| Matt Craven | Walter |
| Gregory Hines | Robert |
| Miguel Sandoval | Sam |
| Noah Fleiss | Jay |
| Danny Woodburn | Albert |
| Penelope Allen | Nancy |
| Roma Maffia | Debbie |
| Mika Boorem | June |
| Rodrigo García |
6.50 out of 10 (3213 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Technically Good but Moderately Unfulfilling
posted on 10 Jul 2009There is a lot good about this movie. The acting is exceptional by all, especially the leading women. The direction is well done. I thought the pace of the film was good. For a character-driven movie, the pace was right on, but perhaps a little slow for the MTV generation.The plot was OK, but the characters didn't have much of an arc. We got to see a slice of their lives, but we didn't see a lot of evolution in the characters. I had expected some sort of climax where we got to see an intersection in these people's lives that was more profound than the superficial interactions that we got to see.While I found it to be an OK movie, I was a little disappointed and unfulfilled. There was a potential here for a substantially better film.
Terrible, boring, depressing film
posted on 16 Jun 2009Unfortunately for this rather illustrious cast of women, the film's direction gets lost in the first few seconds of its beginning. From the first long, boring, and utterly useless scenes to the quick and painless ending, this is a movie about women with deep emotional problems and how they supposedly work them out. Unfortunately, the audience is shown sufferingly long slow scenes with plenty of tears and depressive dialogue and then a 5-second hint on how it all ended all right. This repeats itself over and over in all of the 'short stories' that make up this movie, and in the end you are left with no sense of significance, no answer to all the pointless sadness you have just witnessed. I am sure the director thinks this is all very deep, and I am sure the Cannes jury agrees (as it won a prize there), but this monologue is for art film aficionados only and for the rest of us it is so boring that we regret having spent that money on the ticket. Not even worth seeing on cable.
Women: love, solitude, suffering.
posted on 31 May 2009This is a wonderful film. A surprise that I found in a corner of the video shop. Is is well acted and directed, with good rythm, and with characters that are very well sketched. It shows how difficult it is to love, to show love, to keep it going, for women that live in the present world. Responsible, intelligent, working women, that try to find an answer to their crave for love and understanding.
Modern and different
posted on 19 May 2009An intelligent and open-ended examination into the emotions of about 6 different women, vignetted and ultimately interwoven. There's no high drama, but quiet, studied and subtle plays and conversation, and a superb soundtrack to heighten the tension of each vignette.This is a cold, clinical examination of the female heart. I'm a man who likes Steven Seagal films, and the film touched me. It does not attempt much, but what it does attempt it succeeds very well. A bank manager, a divorced mother, an OBGYN, a blind woman, her detective sister, a tarot card reader and her dying female lover...are all examined in a cold modern light, and it is left to the viewer to judge if these women are happy or not. Some vignettes are more compelling than others, such as the bank manager (Holly Hunter), and the divorced mom.8 points.
Holly Hunter is truly a great actress.
posted on 12 Mar 2009The rest of the movie was a little too self-consciously "arty' for me, but Holly Hunter's performance made it all worthwhile. Her scene on the street was absolutely heart-stopping in its truth. The depth of her emotion is almost an embarrassment to watch. Wonderful stuff, Holly...
Sort of a spoiler, if you consider this movie of any importance.
posted on 22 Feb 2009The movie is horrible. Yesterday I saw Hitch and today, when my friend wanted to see Things... I said, "Well at least it can't be worse than Hitch". I was very wrong. The situations are life-like but played too over-dramatic. The relationship between, umm, Rose and Jay I think (I was falling asleep through some of it) was completely disturbing. Me being a 15 year old I KNOW that the sort of experience he was talking about was very far off--it have made more sense if he was at least 2 years older. And the whole son-mother relationship was just plain creepy, I mean even if he did have sex with a girl, there is no way that he would be that open and happy about it with his mom! These are just simple principals of teen-hood, and I suggest that if the writer has a kid he/she will be pretty disappointed to find that his/her son or daughter will most likely not be as "open" as they tried to make Jay be. And whats with the smelling of the breath....come on! At least play the part with the age! Do you want him to be 17 or 2? The part where Rebecca is walking and crying is just plain weird....I wouldn't know as I have never gotten an abortion seeing as how most sensible 15 year olds haven't had sex!!! I didn't get past the Dwarf part, since I was so bored and disgusted that I gladly pushed the off button and did some fist pumps in triumph. I would seriously recommend not to watch this movie, since it has scarred me for life and taken away an hour of my time that i will never get back. The only good part in the movie was in the beginning with that lady that committed suicide. I can understand why--if I was in a movie that was as bad as this, I would try to get out in any way i could too.
Short Cuts #2
posted on 20 Dec 2008Heavily influenced by "Short Cuts", this movie tells five different but connected
stories about people in an American city. The main difference from SC is that all
the main characters are female. The script is well written, although some characters are under-developed. Lots
of good acting: Glenn Close and Holly Hunter are excellent, Cameron Diaz ismuch better than I expected, Kathy Baker (whom I never heard of before) is areal delight in her role as a lonely but warm-hearted single mother. Callista Flockhart, however, is unconvincing. She seems to have a hard timeplaying anything else than Ally McBeal.
Visually uninteresting, strangely cold
posted on 21 Jul 2008While the film tells some more or less interesting stories about some more or less interesting people, it fails to capture its audience. Despite the cast of excellent actresses and the good performances, the viewer remains at a distance and you cannot help feeling like the scientist who views a bunch of ants under the looking glass...In addition, the Director, who also wrote the script, does not develop an interesting visual style for the film - it seems as if the dialog and the performances were enough in the Director's view to make a good movie - well, they are not. I have seen this as a German DVD edition and I'm not sure whether the transfer was very bad or whether the film was intended to look the way it did - quite often the top part of the frame is darker than the rest, usually in a way so that the actors' faces are lit normally, while the background fades away horizontally (not vertically, though). Quite irritating, in my view.Overall, stays well behind its potential. (3/10)
MISS IT! plodding sensationalism
posted on 18 Apr 2008Last month (Sep, 2001) the Atlantic Monthly ran an article addressing the new trend of slow and hyper-stylized novels masquerading as self-proclaimed "literary novels." If the article had instead focused on plotless movies that aspire to be "films" this would have been a prime example. The only thing that kept me from voting this a 1 was the uniformly excellent cast and a the wonderful character of a zesty blind woman (played by Cameron Diaz) and a charming dwarf (an actor I'm not familiar with). The problem with this self-consciously styled "women's art movie" is that it is neither particularly artistic nor particularly insightful about women (although there have been many insightful films done about women by male directors, this is not one of them). The film flirts with a trendy collage format that flickers between different points in time and threads them together by the forced conceit of a suicidal brunette who acts as a time marker.
The compelling idea of interlaced stories is here made merely distracting--there are at least 5 main characters (I'm probably missing somebody), its just too hard to keep track of their relationships let alone figure out how their stories are interrelated.The connections are hardly meaningful anyways-- example-- Cameron Diaz is the blind pianist alluded to in a brief anecdote of Calista Flockheart's to her dying lover in one story of the movie. Cameron Diaz is also tutoring the daughter of the man who was a one night stand for Holly Hunter in yet another story.The movies main offense is in trying so hard to be "smart" that it is forgets to be entertaining. The editing is AWFUL. Apparently whoever was doing the final cut was taught that focusing on a character spacing out for minutes at a time would prod viewers to imagine what the characters were really thinking. I found myself wondering what the DIRECTOR was thinking. This is truly the stuff bad literature is made of. Skip it.
If you enjoy the idea of overlapping stories I suggest the Blue, White and Red series (Blue with Juliette Binoche is especially fine and Red is thought provoking). For a B-grade shmaltzy movie that is still infinately more enjoyable than "things you can tell by looking at her" try Playing By Heart. At least the Angelina Jolie vignette is consistently interesting. For a more sincere "womens movie" try steel magnolias, "fried green tomatos," or "Angelina's Line."
Why did they make this movie??
posted on 21 Jan 2008SPOILERS - I saw it, I rated it, I reviewed it. But just this week I realized the "review" was never posted on the IMDB. Now, 2 weeks later, I don't remember much about the film. That probably says more than anything. I suppose there is a small minority of the viewing audience that can identify with it, but for me "Things You Can Tell Just By Looking At Her" is only notable for its long title. And a good shot of an almost nude Holly Hunter in bed while Gregory Hines rubs her back, about to go home to his wife.
Delicate Passion
posted on 26 Dec 2007Spoilers herein.The holy grail of acting is the multidimensional performance, but this is almost impossible to pull off. Many conditions must coalesce, and only a few actors can rise to the challenge: Penn is the current master with PS Hoffman coming up.This film takes another, more elegant and though novel, more satisfying approach. Many good actresses are involved. The dimensions are separated into five threads which we are helped to rebraid through the careful efforts of those actresses.What we have is one prototypical character portrayed five different ways, by actresses that have radically different acting styles. Each focuses entirely on her own weaving, but it is clear that they are aware of the others. Hunter's mouth during the baglady's harangue deliberately quotes Close's during the tarot session. Hunter's stagger after the abortion has a couple steps in there from Close's demented mother. Flockhart's dying lover has some literally copied breaths taken from Hunter's abortion...No medium is quite like film. All art is a conversation between the artist and the recipient. But only in film is there an explicit party interjected -- the actor -- who can represent either the viewer, or the artist, or neither, or both (or themselves). In addition to the multidimensionality of the actors' roles, the writing here places the actors in shifting stances, shifting through all the choices listed. There is no self-reference; that would distract. everything is focused on me and Garcia, and the connection is manifold.And what focus! How close to the bones of womanhood can one get? How deeply into the mysteries of connection can one go? Connections between lovers of course, but the feminine nature of the connection that film can afford us between writer and our inner selves. Not since Polanski have I seen such sculptural direction with women. I wish we could see just what was the dialog between director and actress to coax such bare, clean performances.The writing too. Screen writing is the hardest thing to do when you want to be true. You've got to be fake in just the right way to appear true. Flat truth always is fake. Only the most deft artifice can be true. Only the truly delicate writer can be deft with a woman's heart, which after all is the nexus of truth. Only the writer who knows all the tricks of the film stage can remove the wires and let that honesty fly.We have here a new talent. You really must see this film.(Whatever Ms Flockhart is doing on TeeVee is certainly a waste.)
Things you can shove up your......
posted on 18 Aug 2007This movie was the most depressing, creepy, and boring movie I have everseen! Where did they conjure these characters from? Did the gates of "movie hell" open and release all the self-pitying ninnies into one annoying project? Despite the wide array of talented actresses, the script and poor construction bogged down this movie. The jumping from story to story left you with a feeling of emptiness. The drama was way, way, way to heavy! A good storyteller knows that even the most intense drama must be balanced with subtle touches of humor. And, the ambiguous ending which with skill and craft can help a project. Was like the rest of the movie.... pathetic.If you want a good "cry" movie, watch "Come Back, Little Sheba" or "Beaches." They may be sad, but at least you get a well established product!This is a slap in the face for woman kind!
not many movies can make me cry, but this did.
posted on 26 May 2007this movie starts off slow but it pulled me through one of the best movies that i have ever sat through. The acting provided by the cast proved to be commendable and it proved better than the TV series that they usually appear in.All in all, it was a heart wrenching film as you see the women having to deal with very real and common issues among women in everyday life and also, the story brought out the best and worst of us on the big screen.I thought it was rather similar to the movie 'playing by heart' which also featured several plots which sumhow intertwined the different characters in the film.The story that touched me most (and i have to admit crying through the entire scene) was the one starring Flockhart and her lesbian lover. The way it was narrated and her lines just gave depth to the otherwise conventional sob stories of lesbians because it dabbled on the pretty but rather morbid side of lesbian relationships instead of the usual ostracisation and problems faced by them.Hunter also gave a star performance in her potrayal of a working woman who seemed to have her life spelled out by a poor woman on the streets. She makes a hard-to-sympathise-with woman(she was having an affair) be worthy of symphathy and her life seems to be the best sob story ever about affairs.Diaz provides the best remedy for solutions to mysteries faced by women caused by men. And although she plays probably the most jaded women, she still very much wants to believe in love but is still constantly not reaping the rewards she should (ain't we all?)This is a must-see for all women because im sure you can identify with at least one of the characters. A 8/10 for me
Bad preview, bad title, great movie...
posted on 23 Nov 2006After seeing the preview, I was a little confused as to what the film was actually about, so I was left with a little curiosity.I was exceptionally pleased with the results. It's not just any chick flick. It's a chick flick with life and a very interesting story and creative twist to it.The acting was very good, but nothing special. Cameron Diaz cries genuinely in the movie, but I wouldn't give her a standing ovation for her performance. Holly Hunter was probably the gem in the whole film. Even after all these years as an actress, she's still very, very talented.The movie is about the lives of six women, who's lives all find each other in different ways. It's very interesting, entertaining, shocking and well-written.I found it very enjoyable, and if you're into the more artsy pieces, you'll certainly enjoy this one.I would recommend it to all women. Yes, it is a chick flick, be warned, but a good one, and not a romantic one, either. A well-written and well-directed piece.
Loneliness and making connections
posted on 08 Sep 2006Things you can tell just by looking at herIn Things you can tell just by looking at her we meet several women who for different reasons seem to be playing bit parts in their own lives. One of them takes care of her mother in a big lonely house, Rebecca stops listening to her own feelings because a baby does not fit into the life of her married lover, Rose discovers that her son is growing up, Calista's girlfriend is dying and ? takes care of her blind sister.After watching the film I thought: what does this film want to tell us about women? Or perhaps people in general. Some of the lines in the film stuck in my mind: The blind girl says about the woman who committed suicide: `I bet you could tell just by looking at her that there was a man involved.' When giving this line some thought I starting seeing the film as a comment on `loneliness' in general. What do people really want? They want to be involved with people. They want other people to see them.The film suggests that when people don't depend on anyone anymore when they have no one `to be' for - they chose to actually become nothing to die. The loneliness at the heart of existence is too hard to bear. I think the film is about the nature of making connections and being involved with other people although it is painful and sometimes lead to self-sacrifice. It shows us the horror which is tied with the fear of being left alone, although the connections which are made does little to remove the feeling of loneliness. It is the horror of a stranger walking into your personal sphere and immediately being able to see through you and see what lies beneath the surface. It is the horror of revealing your interest in other people - looking in on other peoples lives, in a desperate attempt to connect and to become involved. It is the horror of becoming involved with someone who cannot stay, the horror of losing those whom you connect with. When you are involved, and when you connect with someone, you face the danger of being hurt, being dumped - of sacrificing your own life in your care for others. It is the horror also that your sacrifice is not appreciated, the horror that when you are no longer a lover or a mother then you will certainly become nothing that your identity is so intricately tied with the dependence of those who need you that you cannot be `you' if they don't need you anymore. It is ultimately the horror of being defined by relations of interdependence where the people you care for in effect give you identity. It is the horror that you really are nothing without other people to mirror yourself in.Why is this form of `self-sacrifice' then particular to women? We learn from Walter's daughter that when he really gets involved `He dumps them like a hot potato'. Are women victims and easy to exploit? Rose's teenage son confides that people `are always' looking for someone. But is the act of making these connections and becoming involved truly more important to women - truly more essential in their attempt at becoming someone - of gaining an identity. Are women always characterized by either being cared for or being the ones who take care of others? Interestingly, none of these women are wives - they are defined by other types of relationships than those that arise between man and wife.I do not think I can answer these questions and I don't think the film wants to answer them either. But I think the film is a point of departure for discussing the nature of being - and the way we all perhaps depend upon others in order to become.7/10
a minor masterwork
posted on 02 Sep 2006A few comments: the angoras film style of Garcia dwells on the face and lets the scene run. The tracking shot of Holly Hunter simply walking down the street as she breaks down is worthy of an Oscar. Cameron Diaz a lightweight? Her coda to this film is wrenching; get our your handkerchief. Garcia, wow. Can't wait for his next work. One can see why an actor would want to work with this director as he allows the moment to expand and the actor is given all this room. He allows everyone out onto the limb and we see if they've got it. They do. This film is mesmerizing and stylish and moving. Actors must be lining up to work with this guy. Actually they are, if the cast of Nine Lives is any indication. A wonderful touching writer too. Who is that guy?
The slowest movie I have seen in years and I loved it.
posted on 08 Jun 2006In our day and age film making is all about fast editing and special effects. Not so in ‘Things You Can Tell', a little gem about normal women in everyday situations whose lives are delicately interwoven. It is such a relief to undergo a slow film like this one, beautifully filmed and with astonishing performances from all the actresses (and a few actors) involved. Go and see it if you can!
I liked it.
posted on 05 Oct 2005This is a very slow-paced film, with very little going on. I have no problem with that, but I can see why the average moviegoer would probably hate it.Excellent work from all the actors involved, and a script that refrains from the usual tearjerking or moralizing and simply presents four very simple stories.9/10.
The preeminent chick flick.
posted on 23 Aug 2009Though more cerebral than most chick flicks, "Things..." is all about women and women's issues. A plaintive and sometimes quirky look into a handful of female lives, this film is shot as several vignettes connected by one or two cross-over characters. Lacking in substance and story, "Things..." relies heavily on a cadre of fine actors, a script which is a tad surreal, and the voyeuristic inclinations of the audience. A good watch for female couch potatoes.