Dancing at Lughnasa (1998)

Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

It is set in Ireland where the Mundy family have a few issues and are a bit short of money. Kate, (Meryl Streep) is the mother-hen to her sisters Christina (Catherine McCormack), who has a child (sometimes he narrates some of the story), then there is Maggie (Kathy Burke), Rose, who is a bit 'simple', and Agnes.Their elder brother comes home after a lifetime as a missionary in darkest Africa. He is a bit strange. Then the father of Michael (Christina's boy) Jerry, (Rhys Ifans) comes to say good-bye and announces that he will soon depart for the Spanish civil war. (it is about 1935)This is one of Ifans better roles. He is likable and pleasant. When he first comes, Kate says "He's not coming inside". But Christina rushes outside to meet him, and one of the other sisters says..."They look so happy together". Indeed they do. There is a touching scene as the couple gaze into each others eyes. Very sweet. Streep and McCormack are as usual, so real, they really become their characters, as does Ifans.Later, Rose is courted by a no-good local, "He loves me", she says, to the others protests.Lughnasa is an ancient festival that involves a lot of dancing, and the sisters join in enthusiastically.All the acting is great, and there is nothing wrong with the production and directing. Also, there are some especially good scenes, with memorable dialogue. I liked it.

Whatever qualities are to be found in Pat O'Connor's film version of Brian Friel's "Dancing at Lughnasa" they are certainly not the qualities that made the play one of the masterpieces of Irish theater. Indeed, if anything, this screen version is something of a travesty. In adapting the play Frank McGuinness has not only abridged it but has virtually rewritten it, taking out passages that were in the original and inserting scenes and characters that are either pure invention or were only spoken of in the stage version.On the plus side, it is well-acted. As the Mundy sisters Kathy Burke, Brid Brennan, Sophie Thompson and Catherine McCormack are excellent. Surprisingly, it's Meryl Streep, in the pivotal role of the oldest sister Kate, who lets the side down. It's almost as if Streep was afraid to outshine her co-stars and was holding back; it's one of her least good performances. On the other hand, both Michael Gambon as the returning brother, (a part blown up from what it was in the play), and Rhys Ifans as the man who has impregnated the youngest sister, are fine. The film, too, isn't bad for what it is; what it isn't is a screen version of the Brian Friel play.

I don't really know what else to say about this. It was dull. Dull, dull, dull.The acting was fine, but with nowhere to go. And I don't think it made much sense to have the boy as the narrator. I'd personally favor the eldest sister, Kate, or the 'simple' sister, Rose in that role.So much more could have been done with this film. The character of Father Jack was interesting, perhaps there could have been more with him, or maybe we could have found out more about Kate whom we get almost no understanding of at all. And why did the boy love that summer? We don't actually see enough of him to figure it out.This movie did not intrigue or entertain. It could have been better, but it wasn't. Try it out if you'd like, but my advice is, 'Don't waste your time.'

I may be alone in this but I see movies for one of two reasons: I'm trying to learn and grow through the experiences of others or I am trying to escape from the real world for a little while and be entertained. 'Dancing at Lughnasa' is a poetic ode to ... well thematically it suggests that life is full of very brief but powerful moments of happiness. Seek out those moments and wring as much joy out of them as you can. Then basically you should enjoy the memories because life, according the film, is a crescendo of misery and tragedy that will destroy every good thing in it. If this sounds like the movie for you, be my guest. It falls quite neatly into the 'glad I saw it; happier never to see it again' category.There are great performances from all of the leads in this film. Meryl Streep turns in yet another great performance as the oldest of five sisters who is trying desperately to keep her family together. Michael Gambon gives an inspired performance as a damaged brother who returns to Ireland after 25 years as a missionary in Uganda. The interplay between all of the characters is wonderful, and from a technical standpoint I thought that the film was very well shot and directed.As depressing and as inevitable as the conclusion is, the story is very engaging and kept me hooked from start to finish. Overall not really my cup of tea but if, to paraphrase Hobbes, you like to be reminded that life is 'nasty, brutish and short' than this is the film for you. probably good to watch if you feel like being reminded of your own little miseries or, on the other hand, if you delight in seeing that others are much worse off than you.