I didn't know much about "A Quiet Passion", but I am somewhat familiar with the poetry of Emily Dickinson, and it was the film showing at the theater where I volunteer. Honestly, I am not sure what most critics saw in this film.
I thought that the writing of this film was absolutely terrible. The dialogue was horribly unnatural. It seemed like the writer wanted to be eloquent, but just didn't know how. The result is an awkward, jumbled mess. The humor in the script is also very awkward, as it is derived from lines that are horribly delivered. This meant that the film was just boring. What I hated even more than the writing in this film was its acting. The actors felt like they were impersonating a historical impersonator. The performances of the actors were so impersonal and distanced that they felt horribly fake. It may not be the full fault of the actors, though, as they didn't have much to work with.
Visually, the film is fine. There are some impressive shots, and the costuming and set design really draws you into that period. The problem is that the clunky writing and awful performances draw you right back out and make the viewing experience altogether tedious.
Overall, I cannot say that I was pleased with "A Quiet Passion". I usually like films of the genre, but despite my distaste towards the film, the target audience seems to enjoy it. Even though it didn't work for me, it may work for you.
A Quiet Passion
Big Tuna's Rating: F
How Did I Watch It?: In theaters.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Please no.
I am a huge movie fan that wants to tell people about my very varying taste and opinion of film.