The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988)

You won't be disappointed!

SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

In 1968, a Czech doctor (Daniel Day-Lewis) with an active sex life meets a woman who wants monogamy, and then the Soviet invasion further disrupts their lives.As someone who loves Milan Kundera, and considers him the greatest living novelist (as of 2015), this is a strange adaptation. While it has been several years since I read "Unbearable Lightness", I do not recall the preoccupation with sexuality. The Czech-Russian interaction is heavier in my mind. Of course, this could just be my memory and the aspects that stood out for me.In a note to the Czech edition of the book, Kundera himself remarks that the movie had very little to do with the spirit either of the novel or the characters in it. And that seems right to me, as the film completely removes the philosophy and reflections on Nietzsche. Jean-Claude Carrière and Philip Kaufman were nominated at the Academy Awards for Best Adapted Screenplay, which is interesting: should adaptations be literal or merely inspirational?

The best thing about the novel was that the events were more meaningful because along with each event came a piece of the author's philosophy which made not only the plot seem whole but the author's main philosophical argument materialize more and more as we read on.The movie was only a documentation of the plot and because it was a movie I guess it could only "lightly" touch upon the author's philosophy. Maybe a narrator in the background could have filled us in? I watched the movie not because I enjoyed the plot but because I enjoyed reading the author's ideas about life. They weren't as evident in the movie, but I gave a 6 because the acting and cinematography were good.

I actually saw the movie with a lot of expectation. The title itself was very catchy at the same time mysterious. But i have never before been this disappointed by a movie. It started out with the story of a young doctor with numerous sexual partners who falls for a meek, typical "good girl" who expects a monogamous relationship. throughout the movie what i searched for is some level of ingenuity, spontaneity or even a beautiful romance. Sorry but i didn't find any. the film itself makes no sense, mainly because there is no naturality at all, especially how he falls in love with the lady. He saw her, next moment they talk for a second, he leaves, reaches home, she shows up that night, they make out and they get married. All this in a span of 2 days or so. this applies to the whole of the movie. To conclude it was a mistake to watch this movie for me.

Maybe it's because I'm not old enough to have witnessed life in the sixties myself, but nothing in this movie made any sense to me.The dialogs were strange and often nonsensical. People's behavior was often strange and the movie never gave any real insight into their motivations. And if there was any character development, it certainly was lost on me. I found it pretty impossible to connect with any of the main characters at all, and for a movie like this it seems pretty essential to be able to connect with at least its main characters.I hoped the movie would start making sense by the end, but unfortunately it never did. It was a total waste of almost 3 hours of my life...