Till Human Voices Wake Us (2003)

That was an excellent one.

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

I am a big fan of both Guy Pearce and Australian cinema so I was pleased to chance upon this film recently. Pearce plays a psychologist Dr Sam Franks who is haunted by a tragic past. A chance meeting with a stranger changes his life. This a slow moving but engrossing story which flits back and forth from Sams childhood to the current day as we get to know what shaped him into a lonely and tortured soul. The film works equally well in both time periods as the pieces are put in place as it builds to an emotional ending. The acting is excellent from all parties. I'm not Helena Bonham Carters biggest fan but she does a good job in this. Also impressive are the younger actors especially Lindley Joiner as the young Sam. Till Human Voices Wake Us is a tragic tale of lost love and how this can deeply affect all of us. It won't appeal to everyone but for people who like well written drama this is well worth watching.

seductive. for the art to determine yo believe that it is part of your experiences. delicate. like a spider web or ash of an old letter. beautiful. for music and acting. strange. for the charm without clear source. fragile. for the nuances of Guy Pearce performance. personal. because, in little/more aspects, it is our story. a silhouette from past. an accident. and a meeting as magic second chance. so, it is a kind of song. broken words but same music. same feelings. and the emotion to discover parts of you in a mirror with fragile frame. a poem ? may be. because poetry, in different way, it is its axis. but , in essence, it is only game. with words. with memories accuracy. with crumbs of fear. with desire to transform past in present continuous.

This film was so slow that I kept getting up to look at the clock to see how much longer I had to endure it, as I had already worked out the ending in the first 15 minutes or less. It was very much a first time effort by a woman director just out of film school, or at least it seemed that way. What used to be called a woman's weepie. I kept picturing the film in soft focus black and white, awash with lush music, with 40's matinée idols playing the leads. Better editing to speed the action a little would have helped. The cameraman must have been infatuated with Helena Bonham Carter judging by the long close ups of her soulful dark eyes, and wet hair hanging over them; however, at 42 she was somewhat old for the part - by say 20 years. Guy Pierce was unemotional as a block of wood, as was his character]s father. The only other father figure spoke a lot of rather spiritual wisdom. Had he been in America he would have had his own church.The childhood scenes were what made the film worth watching. I loved the nighttime jaunts on the bicycle. The main false note in the film was the lack of dust covering everything in Silvi's old home. The bed had covers on them which had not worm to tatters like the curtains, and apparently did not smell musty. The book of poems was a clean as it it had been laid down less than a minute ago. In the Australian countryside thick red dust covers everything, especially in an building abandoned with the windows open.

Tiring, difficult to follow, arduous, unappealing. OK, so I missed the first few minutes but I think that was quite a good idea. It tries hard to be a somewhat arty presentation, but ends up being a collection of some nice cinematographic moments, spoiled by what I can best describe as unusual and overcooked acting and a laboured script in parts. In short, I'd give it a miss unless you want to bore yourself for an hour or two.Tiring, difficult to follow, arduous, unappealing. OK, so I missed the first few minutes but I think that was quite a good idea. It tries hard to be a somewhat arty presentation, but ends up being a collection of some nice cinematographic moments, spoiled by what I can best describe as unusual and overcooked acting and a laboured script in parts. In short, I'd give it a miss unless you want to bore yourself for an hour or two.