Amy Winehouse

1
Not Your Kind of Person said:
I’m watching it now and the dialogue is so clunky, it’s making me cringe. I do think Marisa Abela does a decent job as Amy, but it’s a shame she didn’t have a better script to work with.
Click to expand...

A better script and better director. Sam Taylor Johnson is a crap director with only 'one' success and there is even questions whether that was down to her. There were plently of directors, women included who could have done a decent job even with a crappy script. It also didn't help they only got one side of the story and went to two of the people who weren't exactly helpful when she was alive...Blake and her dad and ignored friends who knew the true story.
 
Just watched the film and… wow. Just wow… what a load of crap! It actually felt really weird. It was a bit all over the place, some things not in the right order, some things glossed over, a lot of important things left out entirely. I actually don’t even believe that most of these scenes or conversations happened - I know there will be creative license, but Amy’s legacy should be protected more than that. The whole scene where she met Blake for the first time… 🙄 the scene in the shop where she says to the child “I wish I was your mummy” 😐…

Some of the untruths in it are very annoying and unfair. Like Amy using crack for the first time of her own volition, when we all know that she first tried it when Blake introduced her to it after they returned from America, married. And the way he said that everyone blames him for her drug problems like it’s so unfair, I felt that was an attempt to absolve him in the eyes of the viewer. And he was divorcing her because her addictions and bulimia are too much for him to deal with, suggesting that she is the bad influence on him! Oh and him introducing her to the Shangri-Las and that she’d never heard of them before he told her… oh please!

Even silly things like the Fred Perry gingham playsuit that she wore early on in the film, when it wouldn’t have even existed until years later 😂 and her Star of David necklace was left to her by her grandmother, Amy only started to wear this after her grandmother had passed away, but in the film she has it on the whole time. I know I’m being a bit picky but why get these simple details wrong? And Amy did the beehive hair for the first time on her own hair, it wasn’t by her grandmother as the film wants it to seem.

Annoying how Blake was portrayed as this playful and fun cheeky chappy, also full of sense and wisdom - he is shown in much too kind a light. I don’t understand why. And Mitch was the only person in the world who was there for her, her only friend in the world. Her poor real friends shafted again. Even her mum didn’t get a look in!

It was also strange to me that one song used was the original Amy version, but the rest were all the actress’s versions. Why just one? Why not have all Amy, or all Marisa? I felt it should have been Amy’s vocals used. Marisa was very good - great voice and nailed a lot of the mannerisms - but as others have rightly said, she didn’t have a good script to work with, and I just found the whole film very odd.
 
clueless said:
Just watched the film and… wow. Just wow… what a load of crap! It actually felt really weird. It was a bit all over the place, some things not in the right order, some things glossed over, a lot of important things left out entirely. I actually don’t even believe that most of these scenes or conversations happened - I know there will be creative license, but Amy’s legacy should be protected more than that. The whole scene where she met Blake for the first time… 🙄 the scene in the shop where she says to the child “I wish I was your mummy” 😐…

Some of the untruths in it are very annoying and unfair. Like Amy using crack for the first time of her own volition, when we all know that she first tried it when Blake introduced her to it after they returned from America, married. And the way he said that everyone blames him for her drug problems like it’s so unfair, I felt that was an attempt to absolve him in the eyes of the viewer. And he was divorcing her because her addictions and bulimia are too much for him to deal with, suggesting that she is the bad influence on him! Oh and him introducing her to the Shangri-Las and that she’d never heard of them before he told her… oh please!

Even silly things like the Fred Perry gingham playsuit that she wore early on in the film, when it wouldn’t have even existed until years later 😂 and her Star of David necklace was left to her by her grandmother, Amy only started to wear this after her grandmother had passed away, but in the film she has it on the whole time. I know I’m being a bit picky but why get these simple details wrong? And Amy did the beehive hair for the first time on her own hair, it wasn’t by her grandmother as the film wants it to seem.

Annoying how Blake was portrayed as this playful and fun cheeky chappy, also full of sense and wisdom - he is shown in much too kind a light. I don’t understand why. And Mitch was the only person in the world who was there for her, her only friend in the world. Her poor real friends shafted again. Even her mum didn’t get a look in!

It was also strange to me that one song used was the original Amy version, but the rest were all the actress’s versions. Why just one? Why not have all Amy, or all Marisa? I felt it should have been Amy’s vocals used. Marisa was very good - great voice and nailed a lot of the mannerisms - but as others have rightly said, she didn’t have a good script to work with, and I just found the whole film very odd.
Click to expand...
All of this! I couldn't agree with you more. Amy was so talented, it really took me out of the film hearing Marisa sing. I did like her vulnerability and nativity. I felt like the film was a lovely letter to Blake and made him seem all fluffy and a catch.
I wish the film was more gritty and had more depth
 
clueless said:
Just watched the film and… wow. Just wow… what a load of crap! It actually felt really weird. It was a bit all over the place, some things not in the right order, some things glossed over, a lot of important things left out entirely. I actually don’t even believe that most of these scenes or conversations happened - I know there will be creative license, but Amy’s legacy should be protected more than that. The whole scene where she met Blake for the first time… 🙄 the scene in the shop where she says to the child “I wish I was your mummy” 😐…

Some of the untruths in it are very annoying and unfair. Like Amy using crack for the first time of her own volition, when we all know that she first tried it when Blake introduced her to it after they returned from America, married. And the way he said that everyone blames him for her drug problems like it’s so unfair, I felt that was an attempt to absolve him in the eyes of the viewer. And he was divorcing her because her addictions and bulimia are too much for him to deal with, suggesting that she is the bad influence on him! Oh and him introducing her to the Shangri-Las and that she’d never heard of them before he told her… oh please!

Even silly things like the Fred Perry gingham playsuit that she wore early on in the film, when it wouldn’t have even existed until years later 😂 and her Star of David necklace was left to her by her grandmother, Amy only started to wear this after her grandmother had passed away, but in the film she has it on the whole time. I know I’m being a bit picky but why get these simple details wrong? And Amy did the beehive hair for the first time on her own hair, it wasn’t by her grandmother as the film wants it to seem.

Annoying how Blake was portrayed as this playful and fun cheeky chappy, also full of sense and wisdom - he is shown in much too kind a light. I don’t understand why. And Mitch was the only person in the world who was there for her, her only friend in the world. Her poor real friends shafted again. Even her mum didn’t get a look in!

It was also strange to me that one song used was the original Amy version, but the rest were all the actress’s versions. Why just one? Why not have all Amy, or all Marisa? I felt it should have been Amy’s vocals used. Marisa was very good - great voice and nailed a lot of the mannerisms - but as others have rightly said, she didn’t have a good script to work with, and I just found the whole film very odd.
Click to expand...
Spot on, I couldn’t see the point of this film. The documentary, Amy (2015), is so much better. Fair dos to Marisa though, for her singing and acting, she did well with what she had to work with.
 
clueless said:
Just watched the film and… wow. Just wow… what a load of crap! It actually felt really weird. It was a bit all over the place, some things not in the right order, some things glossed over, a lot of important things left out entirely. I actually don’t even believe that most of these scenes or conversations happened - I know there will be creative license, but Amy’s legacy should be protected more than that. The whole scene where she met Blake for the first time… 🙄 the scene in the shop where she says to the child “I wish I was your mummy” 😐…

Some of the untruths in it are very annoying and unfair. Like Amy using crack for the first time of her own volition, when we all know that she first tried it when Blake introduced her to it after they returned from America, married. And the way he said that everyone blames him for her drug problems like it’s so unfair, I felt that was an attempt to absolve him in the eyes of the viewer. And he was divorcing her because her addictions and bulimia are too much for him to deal with, suggesting that she is the bad influence on him! Oh and him introducing her to the Shangri-Las and that she’d never heard of them before he told her… oh please!

Even silly things like the Fred Perry gingham playsuit that she wore early on in the film, when it wouldn’t have even existed until years later 😂 and her Star of David necklace was left to her by her grandmother, Amy only started to wear this after her grandmother had passed away, but in the film she has it on the whole time. I know I’m being a bit picky but why get these simple details wrong? And Amy did the beehive hair for the first time on her own hair, it wasn’t by her grandmother as the film wants it to seem.

Annoying how Blake was portrayed as this playful and fun cheeky chappy, also full of sense and wisdom - he is shown in much too kind a light. I don’t understand why. And Mitch was the only person in the world who was there for her, her only friend in the world. Her poor real friends shafted again. Even her mum didn’t get a look in!

It was also strange to me that one song used was the original Amy version, but the rest were all the actress’s versions. Why just one? Why not have all Amy, or all Marisa? I felt it should have been Amy’s vocals used. Marisa was very good - great voice and nailed a lot of the mannerisms - but as others have rightly said, she didn’t have a good script to work with, and I just found the whole film very odd.
Click to expand...

From what I remember reading Sam Taylor Johnson more or less admitted while doing press was she didn't want to make Blake or Mitch villains because they weren't villains to Amy. The problem is she also said she wanted it to be an honest movie and anyone who has even a little knowledge of Amy would say they might not be outright villains but they did more to harm than help her. As you say it also didn't help that she never talked to any other family and friends about her because there is a lot that went down that Mitch didn't know about but Sam seemed to think he was the ultimate font of knowledge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top