A brilliant film that helped define a genre

A Brilliant Conflict

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

One can not help but be overwhelmed by the power, the stunning brilliance, and incredibly amazing performance by Ms. Emily Watson that assuredly deserved an Academy Award and which shames the Oscars forever because a Paltrow, Berry, or other flunky has received a statue and Watson has been brutally robbed. This is acting at its absolute finest and a role so perfectly realized by Watson that it can never be forgotten by anyone who has seen it. Never in the history of cinema has any actress so completely captured the very soul of a character and transferred it so expertly to film. It is indeed a film for the ages because of what Watson brings to it, the fire and passion she ignites the screen with, and the unbridled superbness of craft she puts forth. One is almost blinded by such brilliance and I was not the only member of the audience to stagger from the theatre upon first viewing of this film, breathless with astonishment and trembling with emotion as I tried to find words to express the depth of my feelings to my evening's companion. I could barely speak the word "Emily" and could see from my companion's eyes she was equally affected by what she had just witnessed and we shared the awe in silence as the dazed audience around us wandered as if numbed into the night. Rarely has a performance touched me in this way and yet with Emily Watson it is par for the course due to an unequaled talent that few if any other actor can begin to approach. I felt pummeled by her work, bruised by her electric might, and singed by her passion. That night was one I will never forget. I have never seen an audience literally struck dumb by a performance in a cinema. Since seeing this film I have found Watson routinely splendid and spectacularly superb in role after role. There is no doubt she is the single greatest living actor working in the English language today and this film serves as a perfect showcase for her magnificent genius.

"Hilary and Jackie" gets off to a weak start, but by the end of the film it has become quite engaging. In fact, the last hour or so of the film is good enough to almost warrant a recommendation, but the first 30 minutes are too rough for me to do so with a good conscience, and the middle hour simply isn't engaging enough.The film tells the story of two sisters, Hilary and Jacqueline DuPre. Hilary is a flautist, while Jackie is a cellist. The film chronicles their lives as children, where they were torn between being best friends and competing with each other, and their adult lives where jealousy and alienation both tore their relationship apart and also made it stronger.The problem with the film is not the actors, but the director. "Hilary and Jackie" is a very multi-layered drama, but director Anand Tucker has a hard time keeping it all straight. The result is a film that wants to tell a story, but lacks the focus to tell it in an effective manner. The result is a poorly-focused film that struggles to get its point across.The acting, however, is magnificent. Emily Watson is terrific as Jackie. She has a love/hate relationship with her cello-playing. One one hand, playing the cello is something that she's good at, but on the other hand, it alienates her from what she wants in life. Although Watson has the more showy part, Griffiths is by no means a lesser performer here. Griffiths is torn between helping her sister, and living the life she wants with her husband and family. Based on his reputation and his stiff performance in "The Water Horse" (ironically also starring Emily Watson), I didn't think that David Morrissey had the capacity to act. Fortunately, I was wrong. Morrrissey gives an energetic performance as Hilary's husband Kiffer. He loves his wife, but sometimes that comes at a price. Likewise, James Frains is a far cry from his performance as the villain in "Into the Blue." He's also a musician, and his relationship with Jackie is an example of who romances between artists can be very difficult.There's some good stuff here; the music is beautiful, and the scenes where Jackie plays are effectively executed. But it's just put together quite well enough to warrant more than a "see it if you must" verdict.

Does anyone know the title of the small piece of music which the young actress playing Jacqueline du Pre at about age 10 plays at what is apparently a regional, or perhaps a national, recital in Great Britain -- about 15 minutes into the film? As shown, Ms. du Pre just knocks their socks off (as she must have done in real life at that age - my own reaction while watching the film was stunned amazement), and (somewhat to her astonishment, and to her sister's chagrin) she receives a more-than-well-deserved standing ovation.I had thought it was from the Elgar Concerto, but can't find it there (don't mind, though, since listening to the real Ms. du Pre play that entire concerto is simply breathtaking). Thought it might be from one of the Bach pieces excerpted for the film, but it's not. Now, it may be in there (the Elgar, the Bach, one of the others), and I'm just missing it, but I sure haven't found it anywhere I've listened, and would love to obtain the original piece.Thought the film was great (not sure about all the "who's sleeping with whom" stuff later on, and yes, perhaps the telling of Ms. du Pre's life story - condensed - is not totally accurate; yeah, I get that), but all of the actresses portraying Hilary and Jackie over the years were great, and I'd watch Emily Watson read the Manhattan phone directory verbatim for four hours straight, she's that incredible -- if for some reason (you're a hermit, etc.) you haven't seen "Breaking the Waves," I envy you your first time watching her in that film; also check out "The Boxer," where Ms. Watson plays opposite Daniel Day-Lewis (although Brian Cox does pretty much steal that movie).Thanks for any assistance anyone might have on that little bit of music from "Hilary and Jackie."

Note: The following is a condensed version of my Amazon.com review, to fit the word limit:In terms of raw ability and potential, Jacqueline du Pré was arguably the greatest cello talent in modern history. At her height in the 1960s, concerts with her and Barenboim would make the world forget (for a while) Rostropovich and Casals. For listeners of classical music who kept up with her releases and watched her performances, she seemed to be an embodiment of talent -- dynamic, joyous, ethereally gifted, tragically cut short by multiple sclerosis. To those of us who kept Jacqueline's recordings in our psyches, her death was agonizing particularly for the sense of loss -- for what *could have been* (the breadth of her repertoire having been severely limited by MS).This loathsome and abominable film, based on the controversial memoir by du Pré's siblings ("A Genius in the Family"), viciously insults and debases Jacqueline's memory. The errors of omission and commission are too many to name here, but the portrayal of Jacqueline in this film has been condemned by her friends and colleagues (including Rostropovich) as a vicious travesty of her character. Everything about this movie is -- as a previous reviewer stated -- iniquitous, gross and vulgar. Nothing here reminds one of the sensitive, joyous, brilliant musician that is seen in video reels and recalled by her acquaintances. Instead, the depiction is based on an exclusive (but loose) focus on a very dubious memoir, focusing on the gratuitous and doubtful details of her sex life and relationship with her sister, Hilary (who obviously has a chip on her shoulder and happens to be the author of the memoir upon which this is based). Clare Finzi, Hilary's daughter, wrote and contested the film account of events as a "gross misinterpretation, which I cannot let go unchallenged".To add insult to injury, the director doesn't even care about accuracy, stating that "it (truth) doesn't exist" due to divergent viewpoints. (One wonders what he would have made of Holocaust denial.) It's the height of hubris and irresponsibility to popularize sensationalist claims against a person's character without any concern for truth or respect for their memory. A New York Times critic posed the question of whether the film was a "travesty or painful truth", which is not the primary issue at all. W. K. Clifford famously said that if we cannot ascertain the grounds for a belief, we have no business in believing it. I would add that we have even less business in popularizing heterodox and unsubstantiated beliefs to a mass audience -- qualifying this posthumous attack on Jacqueline du Pré's character as a vicious and appalling act.Taken at face value then, this film is worthless, totally worthless. The response may be that biopics have no obligations to factual accuracy -- that this is the exclusive province of documentaries or books. But a film can be both fictional and offensive (for e.g. denying the Holocaust or defaming war veterans). Those who admired Jacqueline du Pré and studied her life and work do not take this film seriously as fact. Nevertheless they will watch it with a sinking feeling, until they can't bear to have their recollections maimed any further by emetic (and completely fictional) scenes that have nothing to do with the cellist they adored. There were several times during the viewing in which I literally wanted to gouge my eyes out -- but even if I did so, the scenes would stay in my mind forever.Then there are those who -- noting this -- will still enjoy the movie. In that case they don't care anything for the real-life Jacqueline du Pré at all (and probably wouldn't have even if they didn't see this movie, so that's no loss). But others would do better to peruse the biographies of her by Carol Easton, Elizabeth Wilson and, yes, the du Pré siblings (if you read between the lines). Or better yet, listen to her music and watch the documentaries of her which contain clips of her life and performances. These were directed by Christopher Nupen who, unlike Tucker, actually knew and cared about his subject matter.Good biopics are done with a serious respect for the subject's memory, concern for truth, and historical substantiation. _Pollock_ is one of them, _My Left Foot_ is another. This one isn't. It would have made a decent _Forrest Gump_ or _Good Will Hunting_, if the director had the integrity to use fictional names and locations. Why on earth did they not just leave it at that and left Jacqueline du Pré's memory in peace? She did nothing to deserve such defacement, nothing at all.