Best movie of this year hands down!

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

The first must-see film of the year.

It's an odd movie that my TV Guide gave too low a rating in my opinion. But the low rating is understandable because the movie IS so odd. Some may take it for a failed comedy. Others may see it as a murder story gone haywire.Mostly, it resembles Lina Wertmuller's "Seven Beauties" in that it's most serious moments are treated lightly, backed up by a score of period music that tells us not to take the events seriously. It's as if someone had tried to turn "Streetcar Named Desire" into a funny movie. And it partially succeeds.Dorothy is Susan Lynch, who comes to the aid of Petula (Rachel Weisz). Weisz's drunken boyfriend is beating the hell out of her -- don't worry, no blood -- and after downing him, Weisz and Lynch take him to Weisz's flat where they leave him in the bath tub, puking. He accidentally falls and dies. For various reasons, all of them specious, the two strangers don't want to go to the police, so they stash the body out on the balcony while they deliberate. Pluto, the sizable dog, acts genuinely in love with Lynch, and has a pivotal role in the story. No, kidding; either that dog is a damned good actor or Susan Lynch's pheromones are inordinately powerful.I won't bother going through the rather complicated plot except to say that everyone winds up mincemeat except for Lynch and Weisz, who run off with a couple of million pounds, plus Pluto who is minus an ear.The acting is fine on everyone's part. Weisz is all gussied up like a blond tart but she looks striking, with her black eyebrows, dark gypsy eyes, and flattish nose in that wan environment.Nobody acts quite the way you'd expect them to, and if they try, the trick often fails. There's the dispassionate Detective Inspector, Alex Norton, for instance. Suspecting that the disappearance of Weisz's boy friend is part of a kidnapping plot he visits her at home while she has only a bath towel wrapped around her. She bends over and most of her breasts are exposed for a moment. Norton notices it but pays no attention. A cold-blooded cop, right? Except that he sneaks into her flat one night leans over her bed and while whispering about the vile things he'll do to her, he slips a shotgun under the covers between her knees. Gulp. Where did THIS guy come from? It's rather like that, all the way through, so I can understand TV Guide's not quite knowing how to handle the movie. I, for one, enjoyed it despite it's occasional sluggish moments.

Dorothy and Petula's lives are inextricably thrown together, bonded by a common flaw. Dorothy's on the run from her boyfriend and Petula should be doing the same. Evasion, blackmail, murder, betrayal, revenge, and a suitcase full of money. it's all there....and then some....Back in 2000, these films were ten a penny. Still riding high on the Guy Ritchie bandwagon, this falls into the same category as Circus, Rancid Aluminium, Love Honour and Obey, and Hard Men.These were all films with major flaws, but for some reason, apart from Hard Men, they were all highly watchable, with some very kooky elements to them.You really had to be around at the time of the films releases to appreciate this particular sub genre, and this one is no different, having been critically panned on initial release, there was something screaming in the film stating 'I am a very good idea, but poorly executed'.And while the film has a very poor narrative and so many clichés, it's hard not to enjoy it.Basically Thelma and Louise for generation X, Lynch and Weisz are really very good in their roles, but the writers have made a fatal error in making all the male characters rogues, and all the females victims, right up until the third act.There's red herrings galore come the final act, but it's just too bonkers to be a bad movie, its never boring, but makes very little sense.Luckily for me, I loved this sub genre, looking forward to all the wannabe crime dramas with style us Brits churned out.a great companion piece with High heels and Low Lifes, basically a carbon copy of this movie.

If only the baddies had more awful endings in this, I would have smiled more broadly. That's my only complaint. My wife and I have very different tastes in movies-- she's into fantasy, I prefer realism, but occasionally we find a show which we enjoy equally. This is one. It's refreshingly different, and I find the suggestion that it's a Thelma & Louise wannabe quite ridiculous. So it's two women against everybody else...but by comparison, T & L was a quite forgettable movie for me. This one doesn't try to milk laughter out of its audience; indeed, it almost dares one to laugh, which makes it special and probably explains why it didn't do well at the box office. An imaginative little movie, far more entertaining than most of the stuff served up to us.

Part of what makes a movie good is that the viewer can follow the plot. Alas, "Beautiful Creatures" failed in this respect. This story of two women who accidentally kill one of them's hubby does not make itself comprehensible. Rachel Weisz has starred in much better movies ("Sunshine", "The Constant Gardener"), so why would you want to focus on this? I expect England to make really good flicks ("The Man in the White Suit", "The Italian Job", "Letter to Brezhnev", "The Full Monty", "Billy Elliott"), but even the best don't succeed every time. There's always got to be something better this out there. It's not an awful movie, but not worth your while.