Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Bea Swanson This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

fshepinc As an actor, I've worked with many of these characters over the years. Kenneth Branagh's screenplay truly captures the craziness of life backstage, and the formation of a new, temporary family during a production. I am so pleased it's available on DVD at long last -now more people can get to know this wonderful film. There are so many wonderful lines it would take far too much space to list them - But rest assured you'll write down a few to remember and use on your friends.Virtually the entire cast is marvelous. The late, great Richard Briers was never better. Julia Sawalha's Ophelia was totally affective. Gerard Horan's dipsomaniacal character was very moving -He really should be given larger roles. If only Jennifer Saunders had not tried that terrible American accent... Hers is the only performance in the film that doesn't ring true.

mike-hanlon Am I the only person in the Universe who hated this grim clichefest of a movie? Full of gangrenous, decaying ham, tiresomely twee, this horror ends up celebrating the ghastliest form of luvviedom that it should be sending up. The real mystery is how come so many people liked it. Is it the case that there are a lots of Americans out there who are taken in by this poor-man's Ealing-comedy as something terribly, authentically, 'English'? Could it be that having Kenneth Branagh in it is enough? No idea why this should be - the man is a booming, ghastly luvvie who can't act and can't direct. It was billed I seem to remember as a 'gentle comedy', two of the most terrifying words in the English language. Terrible terrible terrible. No more needs to be said.

Michael Morrison Rating this movie, I gave it a 10 only because there wasn't a higher number allowed.Never having previously heard of this, I decided to take a chance on it one afternoon, though I generally avoid HBO, partly out of the lack of anything else important to do and partly because I saw Kenneth Branagh's name.How serendipitous.This almost perfect cinema experience moved me to tears, made me laugh, brought me to my feet applauding and cheering -- right here, perhaps foolishly, in my living room.Branagh is further evidence that God is no socialist: Branagh has looks, talent, and now deservedly has money and probably all the romance he wants to handle. In other words, he has everything, while so many of us have nothing. Proving, as I said, God is no socialist, equitably sharing the wealth.The cast of "In the Bleak Midwinter" is just simply magnificent. I can accept a quibble that some performances are a bit stereotyped (and one director wrote in this forum that anyone believing that just needs to accompany a troupe), but even if true, so what? I love theater people.I love theater people and that is perhaps the main reason I loved "In the Bleak Midwinter." As much as any film and more than most it shows stage actors in all their quirks and foibles, and in all their inherent humanity; it shows how the love for their craft, for their heritage and traditions, motivates them far more than does money or the chance of it, more than fame or the lack of it, and much, much more than does security.Actors portraying actors often can be seen shifting into another gear, but that doesn't happen here. Director Branagh and the excellent cast of superb performers provide a nearly seamless, nearly perfect production, beautifully written by Branagh.If there were room, each and every cast member should get a glowing tribute. Each and every one was great (even Joan Collins was great, though I can't help wondering: Is she EVER going to show any age on her?), and each and every one was a standout -- which might seem to be a contradiction, a paradox, but watch "In the Bleak Midwinter." You'll see what I mean.Bravo, bravo, bravo. "In the Bleak Midwinter" is simply magnificent.

RadicalTintin Kenneth Branagh tries hard to shift the essence of a theatricalproduction onto film, and succeeds in some parts but fails inothers. The film concerns the lives of several dysfunctional luvviesbrought together by unemployed actor Joe, played by MichaelMaloney. Producing a Christmas-time Hamlet seems a labour oflove for Harper, and the pragmatic approach to the broadening ofShakespeare brings together quite a mixed-bag of personalities.Briers and Sessions stand out as the unlikely 'bedfellows', with theemphasis on theatrical camp. Briers has the best lines, andSessions overacts with apparent glee, but several of thesupporting characters seem lightweight in comparison. There isthe usual mix of tragedy and comedy, but at times it does all ratherseem cliched. Basically, they are all good at heart, but strugglewith personal issues that somewhat sidetrack from the plot. Inplaces it is highly amusing, but some of the gags fall flat on film,better suited to the extravagance of a stage production. There is apantomime quality to the production, and the black and whitepresentation is perhaps an attempt to tone down the charactersand the unreality of the situation. All in all though, the film is aboutsacrifice and the unravelling of egos. It will certainly help brightenthe odd gloomy evening, but realistically the film lacks bite andcredibility.