It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Blistering performances.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Willem was totally wasted here, as were quite a few of the cast. I think that's why he wasn't up to his usual mark, I suspect he was aware of the 'we're gonna dumb down to rock bottom levels on this one!' attitude that prevailed in this production.I suspect he really needed to pay some bills.The musical score was woeful, really hideous.It was filmed beautifully, all wasted.What was with the voices? It seemed like Mr Wu and friends were badly dubbed with crassly exaggerated US accents.I accepted that it wasn't going to be as poignant as the book. Whenever an American movie of this type puts 'adapted from' on anything, it always means 'light years away from', and you know it's going to be an immature travesty. Yup, it was.It could still have been great, even with the story changes, but it was so clumsily executed, with such a heavy hand on everything. The characters were made into caricatures, and the ending was a very strange thing. It was like a bad outfit, where you just say, ''what were they thinking?''.I thoroughly enjoyed all the costumes, and would give a kidney to live in that house with that garden. All the stone and stunted pine had me drooling. Just goes to show how much you can enjoy a good set, when the movie is immature pap, being spoon fed to the mob.Even, so, if it had been treated properly, it could have been a much better film, even as it was. If Merchant-Ivory had done this, it would have been a stunner.

Having read Pearl Buck's book and being unaware of the screen adaptation, I was pleasantly surprised to see this on the shelf. That pleasant surprised was quickly converted to disappointment and embarrassment. The film's conversion of the husband into a hateful character was evidence that the studio believed its audience could not appreciate the subtlety of the novel's character. More absurd is the delay of the priest's death. In the book, he dies at least in the first half of the book, if not the first quarter. The novel explores her romanticizing of her relationship with the priest, imagining him to be a witness to many of her personal events. In the movie version, instead he saves orphans! I half expected a Gary Coleman cameo.Read the book. This film is a discredit to Pearl Buck's masterpiece.

I just watched this movie for the first time, August 2006, and was left wanting more. I found Willem Defoe charming and real. I will watch it again and again. I am glad it was "Americanized". I think showing the true characters of the far east would have made it boring and too callous in some situations. I prefer an idealized version for a "Romantic MOVIE", I'm tired of all the Realism in real life and this is a wonderful escape with just enough reality to snap you back. I can get all the reality I want with the news. The scenery was spectacular. The way of life for women showed to some degree how men treat women China. Made me feel that if I were a man, that is where I would want to be living. To be pampered all the time and not have to answer to anyone except mother. I was however, surprised how much respect was shown the the mother. Guess the father was dead? Definitely see this movie if you can appreciate a romantic movie. Excellent chick flick.Thank you for reading my review. A romantic at heart.

Mix a traditional Chinese society, a Christian priest/doctor, and World War 2, and what do you get? A beautifully done movie with elaborate sets, superb acting, and a heartfelt message about the nature of love. Starring Willem Dafoe as an endearing priest who runs an orphanage, and Yan Luo, who plays the first wife of a weak and dominating husband, the Pavilon of Women is like a reverse 'Anna and the King'.For 3 years, Father Andre (Dafoe), an American, has helped orphaned children in China. Lady Wu (Luo) is getting older, as well as her husband; in accordance to a trend in their society, the husband reluctantly agrees to marry a younger woman who could 'serve him better'. This 'younger woman' is a poor country girl who's mother wanted her married off early because of World War 2, and is barely the age of one of Wu's sons, Fangmo.When Andre saves the life of the oldest and most prominent woman of the Wu family, it is her daughter, Lady Wu, who shows her gratitude. It is decided that the next Wu son to be married, Fangmo, should have some additional education before he is wed. Lady Wu asks Andre to be his teacher.What ensues is both a harsh and wonderful tale of life in a society in which women are often pawns, and love is a concept that is not entertained when they are married. But through the actions and wisdom of Father Andre, the Wu family discovers that love can overcome anything.The Pavilon of Women will make you laugh, cry, cringe, and smile as you watch the characters confront what they have been taught, and find a place for themselves in a changing world.I give it a 10 out of 10.