User reviews

This is a small but intelligent film that will stay with you for a long time after the final credits. It is well made in all categories and addresses a number of issues that are current and important today including faith vs law, love vs life, youth vs experience. This is probably the best adaption of one of Ian McEwans novels and benefits from a strong and nuanced performance from Emma Thomson who is hardly off the screen for a minute and excellent support from Jason Watkins as her clerk and newcomer Fionn Whitehead. As one of the characters says .. I could see you listening and thinking.. and this is really the crux of the film.What decision you come to in the end may differ... but at least you have the enjoyment of being challenged!

Judge Maye (Thompson) is a childless wife to her loving husband Jack (Tucci), but is also a workaholic. This is driving the long-term couple to the point of infidelity: a fact the ever-focused Fiona - whose life, to her, probably feels to be in a perfect if selfish equilibrium - is oblivious to. With Fiona's intense but comfortable world about to cave in around her, her increasing stress is not helped by the latest case she is working on: one where Adam ( Fionn Whitehead from "Dunkirk"), a Jehovah's Witness boy and a minor, is refusing on religious grounds the blood transfusion he desperately needs to fight his lukaemia. Fiona's decisions in the months ahead go much further than a simple judgement on the case.

Two acting giants - one born in London; one born in New York - tower over this Ian McEwan adaptation like leviathons. I bandy around the phrase "national treasure" a lot in my reviews, but here Emma Thompson is simply breathtakingly powerful in the lead role of Judge Fiona Maye, exhibiting such extremes of emotion that you would like to think that an Oscar nomination would be assured. (However, before I run out and put a £10 bet on her to win, the film is such a small British film that unfortunately both a nomination and a win seem unlikely! THIS IS A CRIME! Please share and lobby people, lobby! Perhaps at the very least we can hope for some BAFTA recognition).

Sometimes a masterly lead performance can make a co-star performance seem unbalanced, but no such danger here. Stanley Tucci makes a perfect acting foil for Thompson: if he were a wine he would be described as "exasperation, frustration, compassion with strong notes of respect". And he carries it off with perfection.

This is an incredibly intelligent film, working on so many different levels and subject to so much interpretation. Fiona's feelings for the troubled teenager feel more maternal than sexual, but when those feelings become returned and escalate the whole piece develops a queasily oedipal quality. Many films have focused on illicit attractions between teacher and pupil, but here lies a new variation, with Maye fighting against her best professional insticts to 'do the right thing'. "I'm frightened of myself" she eventually wails to a colleague.

In his opening hospital scenes, (not withstanding the comic similarities between the guitar scene here and a certain scene in "Airplane"!), Adam seems completely other-wordly compared to a typical teen and this comes across as utterly false. That is, until you consider the oddness of his family background and Jehovah's Witness upbringing. As such, the film just about gets away with it. Whitehead does a good job with a difficult role.

If you've been in a court, you'll know that there is something regal and magical about a judge in full regalia entering a packed courtroom. So it's unusual to see the view from the other side of the door... a non-descript office corridor and a non-descript door. Helping the judge on this side of the door is her PA Nigel, played by the brilliant Jason Watkins: a TV regular (e.g. "Line of Duty", "W1A") but seen far less at the movies.

As a story of obsessive fixation, it borders on McEwan's disturbing earlier work "Enduring Love". And it has the potential to go in lots of interesting directions as a sort of bonkers platonic love triangle ("He wants to live with US?" splutters Tucci). Where the story does end up going was not particularly to my liking, and a melodramatic concert scene was - for me - a little overdone. However it does give rise to a scene (the 'sopping wet' scene) that shows Thompson at her most brilliant: if she DID get Oscar or BAFTA nominated then this will be her pre-announcement snippet.

It's a great film for showcasing acting talent, but beware: it's short on laughs, not remotely uplifting and takes a while to mentally recover from!

High Court judge Fiona Maye is meticulous, brief and extremely well prepared. Deviances from established protocol or the issue at hand are not tolerated for a moment. Jolts to Fiona's ordered and complex world come in the forms of a restless, bored spouse and a young man, Adam, on the verge of dying because the religious doctrine of his parents will not allow the blood transfusion he desperately needs. Inner turmoil and pent up emotions cause Fiona to act out of character and the consequences are swift and severe both in Adam's case and Fiona's personal life. In darkness and despair Fiona searches for a jewel she can hang onto.

Emma Thompson (Fiona) is amazing. Her riveting and emotional performance carries the film and moved me in ways I didn't imagine. The film title is a bit misleading. Despite reading a review in advance, I still thought the primary theme would be something of a documentary of the development or implementation of the Children Act and therefore something of a snoozeapalooza. It is nothing of the sort. While it does concern the Children Act, it is mostly a character driven drama. Any realistic portrayal of a country's justice system should be accompanied by a snooze alert, but this film is realistic enough without drifting into the realm of dreamland. The film is based on a book by Ian McEwan.

Kudos to all hands involved in making "The Children Act", a chamber drama about a family court Justice in London failing to achieve balance between her job and her private life. The legal issues involved are clearcut, but star Emma Thompson's acting brings out the profound emotional and pyschological issues underneath.

Stanley Tucci is perfect in understated support as her neglected husband, and a true discovery here is Fionn Whitehead as the teenage protagonist, a Jehovah's Witness whose life hangs in the balance as his parents, Church elders and he himself refuse the blood transfusions necessary to give his treatment for leukemia a chance to save his life. Fionn Whitehead, previously in a lead role in "Dunkirk", struck me as a powerhouse at the level of a young Tom Courtenay, and would be perfectly cast as either Billy Liar or the Long Distance Runner.

Greetings again from the darkness. There are some actors who are so talented that they elevate most any material to a watchable status. Emma Thompson is one of the few. She is an Oscar winner for Best Adapted Screenplay (SENSE AND SENSIBILITY) and for Best Actress (HOWARD'S END), and her career is comprised of interesting characters ... many made so because of her performance. The film is directed by Richard Eyre, who has two terrific films in NOTES ON A SCANDAL (2006) and IRIS (2001), and adapted from his own novel by Ian McEwan (ATONEMENT, ON CHESIL BEACH).

We are introduced to British High Court Judge Fiona Maye as she announces her opinion on a case involving conjoined twins. As an expert in family law cases, Judge Maye is respected for fairness and decisiveness. Just as the reality of her crumbling marriage to Jack (Stanley Tucci) hits, she is drawn into yet another case where emotions (and media) are running high. Adam (Fionn Whitehead, DUNKIRK) is in dire need of a blood transfusion, which his Jehovah's Witness religion and parents will not allow.

It's at this point that we believe we are in for a stressful courtroom drama facing religious intricacies. However, there is very little to the court case - only the highly unusual step of the judge visiting the sick minor in the hospital. The highly anticipated moral dilemma never unfolds, and instead we get an oddball friendship, ever-creepier stalking sequence, and emotional unmasking. It's a bit of a letdown. Are we to believe that Judge Fiona Maye is conflicted about anything? She doesn't appear to be. She made up her mind to focus on work, and only seemed to have forgotten to mention this to her husband, whose wants push him towards infidelity.

Jason Watkins has a terrific turn as Nigel, the judge's meticulous assistant who is there in good times and bad. The story could be viewed from a woman's perspective on how the dedication to career comes with a cost, but that same cost would likely be paid by a man in this situation as well. The title of the film is specific to a British law in dealing with aspects of minors, making the court case even less suspenseful than we might think. It's not a courtroom drama per se, and it doesn't dive deep enough to be a look at a dysfunctional marriage, and it's simply too bland to be the study of a workaholic carrying guilt over never having kids - shouldn't this issue have been resolved by now, given the age of this couple? It's a crazy "R" rating over one line of dialogue, and it's really Ms. Thompson's performance that provides the only reason to see the film.

The trailer really wets the appetite and if like me, you were expecting a lengthy legal battle with a dose of moral dilemma and lashings of emotion, you will be disappointed. The JW blood element is short and fleeting as the film concentrated more on the marriage problems between ET & ST, who perform fantastically as ever btw, and the wild infatuations of a confused boy. There was some misrepresentation of JW's, the Kingdom Hall didn't look like any I had ever set foot in, it painted a biased picture of people's interpretation of faith and there language and terminology felt archaic and old testamenty. There are few a divisive topics as refusing blood transfusions for minors based on religious faith and this particular showing didn't leave me or my party much to deliberate on after the credits. Overall, a missed opportunity and a waste of a fine cast.

Have a love for Emma Thompson and Stanley Tucci, and both have done great work in many films worthy of their talent. Also have liked quite a fair bit of Richard Eyre's work and the writing of Ian McEwan, particularly 'Atonement' and 'On Chesil Beach'.

Seeing 'The Children Act', having really been compelled by the advertising, liking the book and having heard a lot of good things about it, it may not be one of Eyre's best or McEwan's, though adaptation-wise it does acquit itself well. It's also not one of the best overall films of Thompson or of Tucci (films, not performances). 'The Children Act' is an uneven film, but it is on the most part interesting and well done and its best parts and good things are absolutely wonderful. Not one of my favourite films of the year but not one of the worst either.

Commencing with the good things, 'The Children Act' is very well made. Particularly striking is the cinematography, both haunting and beautiful and enhancing the evocative period detail perfectly. Also haunting is the music, which does get embedded in the brain and takes a while to leave it. The script is mostly very literate and nuanced and Eyre directs impeccably.

The first half is wonderful. It's intelligently done, always absorbing and with some genuinely moving moments. Pace-wise, 'The Children Act' is deliberate but most of the time in film this is not a bad thing and this is not an exception for the first half. The characters are compelling in their realism, though Adam is more empathetic in the book. What is especially good throughout is the acting with possible career-best work from Thompson, who is just sensational, and affecting support from Tucci. Jason Watkins brings some levity and Fionn Whitehead has a bright future ahead if continuing down this path.

It is unfortunate however that the second half isn't as good. Again it is poignant, it has some nuances and it is beautifully shot, scored and acted. It just gets too melodramatic with some vague plot points that are under(or un) explored and the pacing slackens.

Writing loses its way a little too, the nuances aren't as frequent and corn creeps in. The outcome is easy to figure out too early.

Overall though, well done with many fine moments. Just wish it was more consistent. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Emma Thompson was great in this. The film itself just felt like it went through the motions though.

It was never boring, but something prevented it from rising to truly great levels. It sometimes reminded me of a play adapted for the screen, instead of a novel adaptation.

It tried hard to be thought provoking, but ultimately just ended up quite depressing and somewhat forgettable. It felt like a lot was left unresolved, or not explored properly. It tried to do so much, and as a result, the film suffered as a whole.

It will still please most Emma Thompson fans, but beyond that, I will have forgotten about this by tomorrow.

Based on excellent writer Ian McEwan novel, this film managed to balance very nicely two themes, a troubled marriage and exploration of religious freedom in life and death health decisions. Issues of sexuality dying in middle age couples, overwork's effects on intimacy quietly and maturely looked at. No easy answers given. What to decide when a religious family refuses to permit a medically needed blood transfusion for religious reasons. A really remarkable acting tour de force by Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci very good as beloved but sexually frustrated spouse, and very amusing spot on character acting by the "clark". Interesting peeks into England's legal system, and some very good cinematography of English countryside.. Slightly flawed by some melodramatic and poorly explained plot turns, the movie is still a must see, very smart and entertaining.

A rare and unusual film, not fishing for commercial success, but a spectacular illustration of the anxiety and pressures that accompany a judicial calling, of mechanically issuing decisions in disputes without sparing many thoughts for the lives, liberties, properties, or happiness of the litigants upturned thereby, and the grave and painful personal cost it carries.

Not going to reiterate the plot here, others have done it better already. Tugs at nearly almost all heartstrings along the way, though the second half fails to live up to its premise, leaving one with a profound feeling of incompleteness, of unexplored possibilities and unanswered questions, of might-have-beens, but one knows not what.

This is a very deep and thought provoking movie, relying on a supurb cast performance with Emma Thompson heading the list. Be careful reading the synopsis as it contains a few significant errors, might be based on the novel. I can't explain the errors without adding spoilers, and I don't do these.

The basic point of this movie is a confrontation between a woman striving to be as rational as possible, being a judge, and facing the limitations of pure rationalism when she has to rule on a question of faith. While faith also struggles to come out from this confrontation unscathed, as manifest by the young boy who has to live with the ruling of the judge. Very cleverly the story doesn't end with the judges ruling but with both sides of the debate having to live with the consequences of the ruling. The story is told with very English reserve that suits it very well. That's all one needs to know, before seeing it. If you get the chance do see it.

This film starts off engaging, as the judge is presented with a dilemma that would spark a controversy whichever way she decides to do. The courtroom drama is interesting and makes me want to find out what is next. However, the second half of the film is just really strange and uninteresting. It is far fetched, overly sentimental and plainly unbelievable. The second half spoils the experience for me.

'The Children Act (2018)' is much more about its central character than you'd perhaps think, with the apparent 'plot' - or, rather, most obvious conflict - finishing around the midway point. This doesn't so much detriment the movie as it does turn it into something altogether more methodical, a slow character-piece that uses its 'log-line' narrative to comment and reflect on the protagonist's two-handed mental state, while also giving us an insight into a profession not often portrayed on screen. The result is an interesting if strangely paced experience that often resonates, is usually entertaining and is sometimes quite upsetting, especially with its descriptions of its focal illness, but only to the extent that you understand the dilemma that its lead is in. It's a dilemma that feels a lot more legitimate than you'd perhaps expect, as it's rendered with a realism and an empathetic impartiality that allows you to understand both sides and maybe even walk away with a better understanding of the wider debate (one which seems to grace our real-life papers more often than you'd expect). The piece promotes empathy on the whole, ironically asking us not to judge and to allow all parties to express their sides, and this makes it feel wonderfully inclusive. It dabbles in pretty deep character work, too, which is bolstered by universally good performances. It's not thunderously enjoyable but it's never boring and, though it can sometimes feel a little bit 'TV-movie' (in the modern sense of 'TV'), there are intriguing things going on in terms of its narrative and themes. 6/10

I didn't understand what the director wanted to say with this movie, because nothing really arrives to an end. The theme and the idea are good, however I didn't like the way in which they had been developed: there isn't a real communication between the characters and they all seem confused, not well delineated. The relationship between Emma Thompson and the boy affected by leukemia is vague and nonsense, as each protagonist's action seems to be. Also her sentimental relation with her husband doesn't really follow a growth or a big change, arriving somewhere. Finally, the rythm of the movie is very slow.

My problem with this movie is that I couldn't muster an ounce of sympathy for Emma Thompson's character. Her husband (Tucci) was SO nice, and she was such a total shit to him - that I really would've been perfectly fine with her getting hit by a very large, very rapidly moving bus. And that prevented me from fully enjoying some other aspects of the movie.

As far as the overall storyline of the movie, it had some great bits and a lot of potential, but I thought it fell short - to me, it felt like it sort of halfway explored several of the major issues. Also, the treatment of some of the religious themes was just kind of juvenile and cliche'.

I will say this: top-notch acting all round, the whole cast.

With Emma Tompson in the lead, there is almost no chance of the film derailing. However, she rarely gets to work with more than semi-profound dialogues, which is a shame when you compare these scenes with those that truly impact you. Stanley Tucci seems a little out of place as the overly rational husband. Meanwhile, Fionn Whitehead also does a good job, but let's wait a few years before we call him a "great actor".

The plot doesn't have half as much to tell as it would like us to believe. Whenever it threatens to become too heavy - or dull - it adds something new to the mix, but none of these subplots compounds the main storyline. The courthouse scenes are blandly filmed, but the arguments are forceful.

Yet, it's not so much the plot that gets in the way of the film excelling, but its overall tone that is momentarily educative - and mostly melodramatic. Add to this the bland score and the decent filmmaking and you get my rating for The Children Act (the film). Enjoyable, but not half as intelligent as it appears.

Never before have I gone to a screening of a film just to see if it was going to be just OK, in fact I nearly didn't go. How wrong I was, I cannot remember a film that has has such an emotional impact on me. It's a very powerful intelligent and moving film with stunning performances from Emma Thompson & Fionn Whitehead and if Emma doesn't receive awards for her performance alone then there's something seriously wrong. If you like intelligent thought provoking films, go and watch this on the big screen, I promise you'll not be disappointed.

For all the Jehovah's witnesses on here writing poor reviews due to some small content of the film - you really are missing the point. The Americanised Organisational cult turns most people into a holier than thou persona meaning they have to attack anything that appears apostate or appears to be attacking the group. But they really don't need to be here with this film as this film really isn't about them.

What the film is about - a female judge whose job is so intense everything and everyone around her is suffering. Her marriage. Her husband and most of all herself. Met with an exceptional work load she's managing cases and a home life daily.

One case alters her life - the case of a boy whose parents are Jehovah's Witnesseses and within line with their cult they're prepared to watch their son die in order to be some martyr of that organisation based on their interpretation of a scripture.

She takes the case to heart and visits the boy in hospital and makes the inevitable decision to force the boy into life saving treatment. This confuses the boy who cannot understand why a stranger can choose his life whilst his parents cannot - despite being brought up in that organisation.

Very well written and very well acted and played by all. The Jehovah's Witness dad is excellent and plays very well someone bumbling through torn between what he's been programmed to believe and the life of his son. It's a very sad and deep story and deals well with the damage caused by controlling relationships and organisations.

As for all the JWs writing reviews saying the scenes within the Kingdom Hall are not accurate or picking apart the behaviour of the parents saying this wouldn't be the way they'd do it - you've missed one huge massive flaw in the research into the Cult - the church yard scene at the end. So as not to contain a spoiler I will leave that there. That scene is most definitely what wouldn't happen in a devout JW household.

The story is just sensational and filled with emotions from start till that unexpected sad ending .

The plot of the movie is so current and relatable ,, probably based on somewhat true stories .. and the script was organized and tight ,, no holes or dull lines ..

As for the cast ,, Emma Thompson and Stanley Tucci did an amazing job power couple ,, and Fionn Whitehead was also very engaging and convincing.

So recommended.

After the first 25 mins the story just disintegrates and at the end you are wondering just what the point of the film was. Some say it was thought provoking, my only thought was why it was made, it certainly did not have a point or any climax.