Wild Nights With Emily

audience Reviews

60% Audience Score60%
  • 1 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    I normally love movies about famous people told from another angle. I usually love independent films and especially those with historical settings. My question is how they heck did they make a movie about a famous person in a lesbian relationship boring? I don't know how they did it - but wowzah. Snoozefest. Wooden acting and oddly paced. I want those 2 hours of my life back. This one was my husband's choice - so he owes me at least the next two movies.
  • 0.5 of 5 stars
    Half Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    This has to be one of the most awful, poorly-written, poorly-acted cheap-looking excuse for a movie I've ever seen. I want my time back.
  • 4 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconFull Star IconFull Star IconFull Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    really interestingly written and directed
  • 1.5 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconHalf Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    On the whole, godawful. High school drama club performances, a festival of indication -- and poor Austin had to spend the film with what appeared to be a load of potting soil on his head. Some credits for cinematography that avoided the sepia tones of so many period films, for Dana Melanie (young Emily) who captured something of the poet's febrile intensity and Jackie Monahan (Lavinia) in whom an authentic wildness could be glimpsed. But the recitations of the poems completely missed the prosodic impact of those dashes -- that's Emily catching herself in the act of thinking -- and no one who has closely read those astonishing verses will recognize their creator in this movie.
  • 2.5 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconFull Star IconHalf Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    Wild Nights With Emily is a reflection on Emily Dickenson's life with a focus on her poetry and the relationship with her sister-in-law. Even though most of her work was post-humorous, Emily Dickenson's work popularized the love letter poem. The names in her poems were altered after her death to be more masculine, because the nature of a love letter between two women was found to be too controversial at the time. This period piece also has English subtitles for when parts of her poems are influential to or are referenced in the story.
  • 2 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconFull Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    I did not know much about Dickinson going into this movie. During the movie, I often wondered if what was being shown had much connection to the real life of Dickinson, or if much was fabricated. I assumed it was mostly real, or had some connection to reality. I found the film was not especially interesting, and certainly not "wild" as the title implies. It often seems to be trying to be funny, but the humor was often lost on me. I wondered if students and fans of Dickinson might find more of interest in this film than I did. For a low-budget movie, the film does a commendable job of setting the period through sets and costumes. The acting seemed stagey -- like a play, with lots of artificiality. Maybe it was supposed to be farce? Though the film was a disappointment, I do feel like I know a little more about Dickinson, and might even be open to learning more about her life.
  • 1.5 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconHalf Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    I don't really see what everyone loved about this film. Sure, it does quote from Emily's letters and give evidence for her relationship with her sister-in-lay Sue. But the script was poorly written, there is little character develpment, and a lot of the characters seem one dimensional. Plus it wasn't really all that funny.
  • 0.5 of 5 stars
    Half Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    This film made no sense. In addition I had to look up the word”wild” in the dictionary as there were nothing wild in this film. A real yawner.
  • 0.5 of 5 stars
    Half Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    Absolutely horrible and boring one to skip
  • 1.5 of 5 stars
    Full Star IconHalf Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star IconEmpty Star Icon
    It was incredibly boring.