What a waste of my time!!!

brilliant actors, brilliant editing

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

When I discovered that David E. Kelley wrote the script for Gillian, it's flaws seem to have made a bit more sense for while I've rarely been privy to such notable TV shows like The Practice, Boston Legal, and Chicago Hope, it became clear that writing dramas that don't pertain to law or medicine isn't his forte and the result is a film in which no elements really work.Of the seven primary characters in Gillian, only three really matter: David (Peter Gallagher), a man who, after two years, still isn't over the death of his wife Gillian (Michelle Pfieffer); Rachel (Clare Danes), his daughter, whose relationship with her father isn't too estranged; and Esther (Kathy Baker), David's sister-in-law, who's determined to remove Rachel from David's care for fear it is unhealthy for the girl. The remaining characters bring little substance to the film. Paul (Bruce Altman), Esther's husband, is aware of his wife's intentions and quietly tolerates his them despite objections while simultaneously voicing his sexual frustrations in the presence of young beautiful women such as Cindy (Laurie Fortier), Rachel's friend, who's equally frustrated and so bored that she uses her sex appeal to taunt men for fun. Kevin (Wendy Crewson), is an acquaintance of Esther and Paul's who was brought by them (unbeknownst to her and David) to the family's gathering for no other reason than to take David's mind off Gillian. Upon this realization, Kevin learns that her presence is unneeded despite being amiably tolerated (at best) by everyone else, especially Esther, who spends much of the first half of the film using Kevin as her pawn to convince David to get over Gillian. Fortunately, Kevin's knowledge that she's unneeded dissuades her from doing anything more than just being present throughout the film. Finally, there's Gillian who appears as an apparition just to remind us of how un-over her David really is and that "Rachel comes first,".The basic conflict of the story lies in Esther's belief that David's perpetual grief has made him an unsuitable parent for Rachel, which she bases solely on a slip in Rachel's grades. Rachel doesn't think so, which is why she defends her father. But the conflict for viewers revolves around Esther, who cannot sympathize at all with David's grief which pertains entirely to the death of her sister! What is wrong with this woman that she's adamant about about speeding up his grief process by threatening to take his daughter away from him despite proclaiming to care for him and not sparing a moment of heartache for the loss of her sister? We never find out and after a night during which Rachel goes to bed drunk and has a nightmare featuring Gillian, the conflict is resolved when Rachel decides to go live with Esther and Paul and "let her mother be dead,". Further (and most predictable) resolution occurs during the final 10 minutes when David decides to get over Gillian, move in the Paul and Esther, and start putting Rachel first. It's far too little too late.Since Gillian does contain a good cast with a notable performance from Danes, I gave it four out of ten stars but the talents of these people are ultimately lost in this poorly written melodrama that might elicit some tears and sighs from the audience, but is mostly a film about a rivalry between in-laws that is devoid of the compassion usually felt after the death of a loved one.P.S. By the way, David E. Kelley, stick to televised legal and medical dramas. Your talents and know-how as a writer and producer are most obvious and bankable in those fields.

Michael Brady wrote this play, and David Kelley wrote the script for the movie. The original poster of comments went on and on about David Kelley's "weak writing" but we must remember that it is a play, Broadway Play Publishers owns the rights. What is a wonderful play does not trancend to the screen with all the warm fuzziness the script calls for. While you are able to put in on Nantucket and you get the scene feel, it needs to be seen live. The casting is marvelous, and worth it to see Peter Gallagher play someone very lost, and the music could have been more haunting. All in all if you want to see it, do. It's a good story and an ok movie, but if a local theatre is doing Gillian, do go see it. It's better as a play.

This is one of the worst play-to-film adaptations I've ever seen. Of course, that's because it's a terrible hack job of one of my favorite stage plays, so I'm biased.It does my heart good to see David E. Kelley completely bombing out every time he tries to make a feature film. The guy is so overrated (in my opinion.) And he really, REALLY blew it with this movie, considering how excellent, how genuinely moving the source material is.When I went to see the film (with well-founded trepidation), I noticed that the only laughs generated out of the dialogue were for jokes that are found in the original play. Unfortunately, Kelley has done great violence to the original story in his filmic massacre...I mean "adaptation"...and the movie falls flat, flat, flat. It utterly misses the deeper points of the stage drama.In fact, except for the basics of plot, it barely resembles the award-winning play at all. Esther, instead of being a professional psychologist, becomes in the movie version a busybody nag who has taken a couple of psychology classes, which somehow qualifies her to analyze the main character David. Pretty lame.David E. Kelley (not the main character, thank God), in his infinite wisdom, turns Cindy into a horny little slut who tries to seduce Paul, instead of keeping her the teenage girl next door who has the sweet, and somehow sad, schoolgirl crush on David. Gillian's depth and complexity of character completely disappears. In the film she's merely an ethereal beauty who hangs around to inanely chat with David. The point of the play is that she's both saint and sinner -- something Esther wants David to remember, before he idealizes her into a fantasy that drives him literally crazy.Ugh! I could go on, but it will simply make me angrier and angrier. This movie stinks. Read the play. It's only a hundred thousand times better than the movie, that's all.

This is one of the movies I'd buy to keep in my collection. Not only does it have a strong cast that meshes well together, but the story lingers on the emotional moments long enough for you to savor them and to enjoy the effect of transporting you into their world.It's not a sappy movie that's cliched, but rather one that deals with the emotions of letting go of the past and those left behind.Claire does play this movie well, and if it were another actress in her shoes, it would have a much different flavor and feel. I'd say it's one of her better movies she's starred in after My So Called Life, and worth buying just for her alone. (I'd rate it above Claire's others like Polish Wedding, I Love You, I Love You Not, and Brokedown Palace.)Overall, it's a well-balanced movie that delivers a surprise that's not expected by the bland title alone, and while not an awesome movie of the highest caliber, it is certainly a movie that deserves a viewing.