I've Heard the Mermaids Singing (1987)

Powerful

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

This is an intellectually ambitious film about meta-art: What is the relation between an art object and intense aesthetic experience? What is the value of the art object if it is devoid of the cultural "frame"? How are certain people legitimized to confer value upon art objects?The film deals with big questions. Even so. Its main character is someone who is so endearing that you care very much about what happens next. It counts as an offbeat "warm 'n' fuzzy" flick. The humor is both deft and sweet.As someone who teaches at a college, I think this would be a very *teachable* film. Use it to raise and illustrate these questions in an aesthetics class, or in a class discussing the creation/ propagation of artistic canons.

I usually don't watch movies more than once. But this lovely film is one that I have regular cravings for. It is so smart, unpretentious, and unassuming. It's subtle and multi-layered and such a treat to view.It's a quiet film too, with refreshing insights and ideas about relationships. The contemplative pace of the film gives you time to enjoy the ideas and feelings that come up in the characters and in yourself. On more than one occasion while watching the film my breath was taken away with surprise and delight. I guess another draw for me is the female characters: how refreshing to meet women who are multidimensional, portrayed with authority and authenticity (and having interesting faces I could watch forever).And I love how the story is so simple, a late bloomer's coming of age (or rather coming into her creativity)--a 'bildungsroman' in a film about art. Thanks Patricia Rozema et al! What a treasure.

Wow. There are four rather fine things in this, and one that ruins it all.First the good. The key role is perfectly realized. Though the supporting actors and the way things are staged are mundane, this actress and the writer/directer created someone memorable. This was Napoleon Dynamite before he was cool.While dialog and pacing are uneven, the music isn't. It is uniformly apt. The performance and the music alone are just about enough to sustain the thing until the end.And there's one brilliant piece of stagecraft. Some paintings figure in the plot. These paintings have impressed our heroine who -- it is made explicit -- is our narrator. She describes them as miraculous and when they are shown, they are blank, white glowing rectangles. Until this point, the imaginary and real segments are clearly distinguished, and when we see this clever trick, we move forward on our chair, waiting for what is next.And the final great thing is the way the thing is structured. In several ways, we are told that this is an artwork that is about artwork and the "message" is both in the story and how the story is told: there are matters of authorship and genuineness; a bit about filming and being filmed; other bits about reality and representations of reality. Hey, we see, this is one smart woman behind this. And we lean ever more forward in the chair, ready to leap.And then the end hits us with such a banal notion that we are gobsmacked back. Hey! Is that all? All that energy and cleverness to tell us something Art Linkletter or Reader's Digest could (and does)? Jees.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

This canadian masterpiece staring Sheila McCarthy is one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen. McCarthy's character will touch young starving artists in many ways. The film which is very low key has some amazing scenes that keep your eyes on the screen and your mouth wide open. I feel this movie is very misunderstood by some critics. It cannot be taken too literally. the "daydream sequences" are just that, daydreams. They are there to show you polly's (McCarthy) true inner structure. If you can find this movie, and you like artsy movies that make you think, buy it. Don't bother renting it, because you will just end up buying it anyway.