Reviews of the Immorrtal Life of Hennritta Lauks
Not quite what I'd hoped....but still worth seeing.
Dorsum in 2011, Rebeccas Skloot published "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" and I read this excellent book. The thrust of the book was 3-fold: about the contribution of Henrietta'due south cells to medical research, nearly the life of Henrietta that Skloot was able to piece together with the help of her family and about her relationship with Henrietta's family unit. This new moving picture essentially breezes through the offset ii plot lines and focuses almost exclusively with the human relationship between Skloot (Rose Byrne) and Henrietta'southward mentally ill daughter, Deborah (Oprah Winfrey). Winfrey was amazingly good in her role...simply this plot line seemed to exist THE film at times and if y'all want to learn more about Henrietta as well equally what made her cancer cells so important, I suggest you but read the book. Overall, well done but far, far from perfect.
15 out of 17 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
For me, the family became real
I'yard a scientist who had used HeLa cells in my work in the past. I remember that proposal in Scientific discipline about the cells deserving some other species designation--and being dismayed by that myself. And watching the daughter character react to that provided a new perspective for me.
The volume was very well done and informative. Information technology provided important awareness for those of us in scientific discipline about the data we are using and about who provided it. Of course, there were many more details that can't be conveyed in a such a brusque retelling on film, just I thought it captured the primal points very well. And it brought the family unit to vivid reality in a way the book text cannot. I am actually glad to accept been able to witness the portrayal of their feelings and reactions to this state of affairs.
It's a worthwhile film on an of import topic that people should encounter and think about. And you should call up about information technology before you lot submit your DNA to merely any inquiry or company that comes along. In that location may be times when that's the right thing to do--but practice consider the implications.
11 out of xi plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Movie was practiced, but volume was meliorate (as always)
Alert: Spoilers
I watched the movie over the weekend, and while I LOVE the sheer fact that they even fabricated a movie most Henrietta and her family unit's life, I have to say the movie didn't take as much of an emotional bear on as the volume did. To me the movie is more than of a big long commercial for the book. A way to accomplish a broader audience and get more people interested in who this women was and her role in modern science. Also, to know how her family unit had to bargain with the hoopla about her cells and being taken reward of every step of the style.
First, the movie was bully. I liked Oprah as Deborah (love it even more knowing that Deborah was a huge Oprah fan, and would've been ecstatic to meet Oprah, let lone have her portray her in a picture show). The actors portraying the family did very well with what they had, and the picture show covers a lot of the key points from the volume. I also loved the flashbacks of Henrietta before she was sick, and seeing her with young Deborah was very touching.
However, the biggest problem I had with the movie is that it felt information technology was very rushed, almost incoherent. Now I understand that could take been deliberate, with especially with the jazz infused intro and Deborah's cluttered personality at times, but I don't recall it helped give the audience much time to really feel empathy for the characters. Thank God I read the book and know how all of this effected them in detail, because in the motion picture, you experience almost zilch for them because nothing's explained very well, and you barely had fourth dimension to process who each were, and what their mother meant to them. Each scene rushed you lot to one point of the story to the side by side. We spent the nearly time with Deborah, who obviously was the main family unit member who wanted to know the near about her mother. It was her and Rebecca who did all of the pes work in terms of researching what happened to her mother and her older sister, Elsie. Only, in the moving picture they barely bear upon on why she was and so paranoid. For almost of the movie, you're simply wondering what the hell is wrong with this woman? There's hardly any empathy for her. Then at that place'southward the climatic scene at her cousin's house. This was such an intense emotional scene in the book, particularly finding out that after that moment, Deborah was on the verge of a stroke. Knowing this further explained her erratic beliefs and the emotional roller coaster she'd been on with her mother's cells. But in the moving picture, they only rushed through it without giving whatever context equally to why this particular moment was and so crucial to her story. Plus, the scene was lackluster at all-time, goose egg emotional payoff, did it no justice, and my biggest disappointment from the movie.
Overall, I HIGHLY suggest reading the volume. I also, suggest listening to the RadioLab podcast episode about the book as well. Non just does it become into more detail about the impact of HELA cells, at that place'south audio footage of Deborah, Rebecca, and that night at her cousin's, which gives that scene even more emotional weight listening to actual footage. The book goes into so much detail on non only Henrietta'south life, but the trials and tribulations of her children and what they went through all those years dealing with all the excitement about her cells. Furthermore, it gives more than particular as to WHY John Hopkins and other scientific entities never gave bounty to the Lacks family. The "why" function is just as complicated and important equally the story itself. Whether you agree with information technology or not, it's still very fascinating story.
Regardless of how practiced or bad the movie is, I'g happy Henrietta, Deborah, and the Lacks' family unit story is being told and they are getting the recognition they deserve. I call up information technology'southward of import to at least know who this adult female is and to honor her. As the moving picture and book pointed out, there's not one person on this planet that hasn't benefited from HELA cells in some way. I know I have, so I say give thanks you Mrs. Henrietta Lacks.
26 out of 29 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Interesting topic - but too much Oprah
I watched this evidence for the smiling and lovely Rose Byrne. Plus the subject is interesting. Unfortunately the focus is a fleck off. More needed to be shown on the effects and use of her cells on medical science autonomously from a brief blast at the beginning. The focus of this movie was on the author'southward difficulties with the children of Henrietta Lacks and their various mental and emotional bug. It seemed more similar a showcase for Oprah to testify her acting skills which are pretty good.
It's like half a good pic missing the main part.
xix out of 26 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wow!
Oprah sure can bring the crazy ugly is an amazing fierce manner. Now, is that good or bad - I'm not quite sure, merely definitely entertaining.
The story of Henrietta Lacks biological cells being taken for medical purposes without her family unit'southward knowledge or permission has lasting repercussions on her family unit's mental wellness and relationships.
I accept non read the book, but later on viewing this I program on it.
v out of v found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Skip the motion-picture show and read the book.
If I hadn't read the well-written book, I would know less about the Lacks family, Henrietta in particular. In this motion-picture show, Henrietta the woman doesn't seem to be the central graphic symbol.The movie introduces the family unit and concerns itself mostly with their intense anger at Johns Hopkins for existence kept completely in the dark near the research. Thank goodness for HeLa cells, even though no permission was granted considering, at the time, it wasn't the norm to inquire.The movie'southward resolution was unsatisfactory for me, just Oprah gives an intensely personal functioning as Henrietta's girl Deborah and will probably be nominated for an Emmy. I had never seen Rose Byrne in a movie or TV show, but I thought she did well as Rebecca Skloot.
25 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disappointing
The book is fascinating - educates about science, and develops respect for the family and their mother'southward legacy. it prompts discussions about the ethical issue of the cells. The move, on the other hand, is a family drama with the cells as a prop. Makes the family unit look crazy - not the indicate of the book at all. Characters seem stereotypical, poor, uneducated. If you liked the book, the moving-picture show is certain to disappoint. The all-time part of the picture is the credits in the begnining - edgy, informative chop-chop telling the history of the cells.
nineteen out of 23 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not very Good
Subsequently having read the book and suggested this book to a lot of my friends. I was happy to run into it get an HBO film. I just finished watching it and I all I can say is read the book. The story line does not even break the surface of what her cells did to assist create cures for. It seemed to exist more focused on Oprah's character then Henrietta's story. Non surprising since Oprah was behind the making of this film. I was really hoping this was going to be a good show but sadly information technology turned out to be really bad
34 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Read the volume instead
Rarely has an excellent book been so poorly transferred to the screen. You can definitely see Oprah'due south influence on what was going to exist in the screenplay. Gone is almost every scene that would show united states Henrietta and HER life, so that Oprah, every bit her daughter, could monopolize the film. Sad. My advice, read the volume instead.
xx out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I had high expectations merely was so disappointed
I had high expectations for this movie but was and then disappointed with the "Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks". I expected a moving picture more in the vein of "And The Ring Played On" (HBO 1993).
Henrietta Lacks deserved a much stronger depiction of her story. The injustices she received were wrong. Period. Instead, the movie focused more than on her descendant family while only fleetingly brushing the injustices she received into the motion-picture show.
The folks who wrote and directed the movie should be embarrassed. They had a bang-up opportunity but failed to evangelize.
13 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
people differ; I thought the movie was superb!
Yes, I see all the negative reviews, only my experience was different. This movie was wonderful. Admittedly it didn't come shut to roofing the entire volume; what motion picture does? The slice covered is the experience of Henrietta Lacks' children and grandchildren and their reactions every bit adults to the endeavor to write a book about their mother's situation. Rose Byrne did a corking job, as ever, as the author of the book, and Oprah was heartpoundingly proficient equally Lacks' troubled daughter. I love that the daughter wasn't glamorous, nor powerful, just Oprah still breathed life into her and absolutely owned the screen. To me this movie animates many dissimilar ways of dealing with loss, grief, and intense resentment at unfair handling. If y'all're willing to see it as a story of Lacks' personal, non scientific, legacy, I think you'll find the moving-picture show transcendent, as I did.
5 out of 5 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
SUPERBLY acted
Warning: Spoilers
If this is what TV movies are like in 2017, and so nosotros demand more of them. This is a good, nay astonishing if troubling, existent-life story fatigued into George C. Wolfe's film from the book of the same proper noun by Rebecca Skloot - and information technology is the efforts made by Skloot (hither played by Rose Byrne) to put the book together in cooperation with family unit members that characteristic in the picture, albeit aided by (slightly less compelling) flashbacks to the before life of Henrietta Lacks - the adult female whose endlessly-reproducing cancer cell-line (called "HeLa") formed the basis for a whole host of medical studies, first at Johns Hopkins Academy, then around the world. Henrietta is played here by Renee Goldsberry, while her daughter Deborah is brought to life in all her considerable complexity by Oprah Winfrey.
Winfrey is indeed SUPERB, playing a mentally troubled, mentally sick, kind, erratic, caring, needy, wronged character with sympathy and skill. Byrne and Winfrey form the main pairing of contrasts here, and its a fine thing to behold; just sometimes the scenes are too shared by an extremely convincing Reg. E. Cathey as Deborah's blood brother Zakariyya. Other blackness actors also appear as further members of the family, and all do simply TREMENDOUS work.
And if y'all're thinking yous know this film before you see information technology, given that stray white scientists have wronged poor, sick, undereducated black people who just at present accept their rights upheld, you will only be partly right. Lacks and her family were in some means mistreated, they were surely angry and frustrated and confused; merely Deborah was besides bang-up a person to not grasp that her mother'due south cells had done much good in the world, and the film presents u.s. with her visit to Johns Hopkins so many years later. In that location is reconciliation and healing here, if no real happy ending. There is also an electrical mix of scientific and religious philosophising on what this story all means.
Looking at the limited awarding of this film, and many of the comments round here, I'll confess I fail to understand what some people remember moving picture-making is for.
Answer: it is for getting actors to put their hearts and souls into portraying stories like "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks", and it matters non that the topic is difficult or heavy, only also somehow non-spectacular and not quite mainstream. Information technology matters but that a truly wonderful storytelling fine art was put into effect, and we as an audience were taken convincingly to places we need at times to get, even if we do non especially desire to.
3 out of 3 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
"Your cells are going to aid a lot of people and make you immortal."
Warning: Spoilers
I'd have to say my viewing of the picture was worthwhile, simply concur with a lot of other reviewers hither that the narrative was more about the legacy of Henrietta Lacks and the result on her family's fortunes following her decease. This was the only fourth dimension I've seen Oprah Winfrey in an acting role, and I thought she was quite effective equally Deborah Lacks, with a nice mix of emotion and gusto whenever she was moved to limited her feelings. Much of the story is really well-nigh Deborah Lacks and the journalist who researched the story, effectively portrayed by Rose Byrne. As Rebecca Sloot, she had to maintain an inquisitive approach while maintaining a sensitive accord with the diverse personalities of the Lacks family unit. My greatest astonishment occurred when it was revealed at the cease of the story that even today, a patient's consent is not required for inquiry on human tissue obtained during medical treatment if the so called 'donor'south' identity is removed. At that place's something non quite right most that to my mind. When I picked up this film at the library, it was sitting correct adjacent to the volume nigh Henrietta Lacks, so I picked the quicker alternative to larn something near the adult female who's cells paved the way for once incommunicable cures for many diseases and medical conditions. At present that I've seen the picture show, I'm inspired to go dorsum and read the book.
ii out of 2 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What a disappointment
I was and then excited to see this moving-picture show, as the volume has been on my listing to read for awhile. I had not gotten around to reading the book prior to seeing the movie & perhaps that would accept helped?
The movie is disjointed & makes footling sense. It is primarily about Henrietta's daughter & her relationship with the book's author. I was okay with that, but characters were never explained & many decisions in the motion picture & dialogue made no sense b/c the story wasn't flushed out plenty to understand the importance of the choices or dialogue. For instance the "talk to the men" theme is made a big deal of in the beginning. It's repeated several times. It's never explained though. Why were they insistent that Skloot could only talk to the men. Information technology came from several characters, but then about of the movie is spent NOT talking to the men. It never made whatever sense. Some graphic symbol's behavior was non explained until almost the stop of the film, which really hurt the viewer's ability to empathize & warm to the characters.
Information technology was such a shame every bit at that place were many great actors who performed well, but ultimately the lack of background info & poor choices, made this movie a mess. I had such loftier hopes :-( I'm still looking fwd to reading the book, maybe that will fill in the huge gaps of the movie. You won't miss much if you skip this one!
12 out of xv establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ameliorate get a snake stick
Warning: Spoilers
In 1951 John Hopkins discovered that Henrietta Lacks had cells that tin can be stored and stay alive. This proved invaluable for medical inquiry and has contributed to most every medical breakthrough since then. Only who was she? The story is briefly most her life, but moreover it is about the hoops author Rebecca Skloot (Rose Byrne) had to jump through to go the story dealing with a dysfunctional family with misconceived ideas. Oprah Winfrey gave a strong performance as the paranoid hypochondriac daughter of Henrietta. Good drama with interesting characters.
Guide: F-word. No sex activity or nudity.
4 out of six found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Literally Pointless
The movie should have been fix in the 1950s because (A.) the moving picture should have been about Henrietta Lacks, and (B.) the flashbacks are the only remotely interesting things almost the movie. Instead, there are meandering discussions among Henrietta'due south very annoying relatives (in the movie; I don't know what they're like in existent life) about random parts of her life. I have absolutely no idea what the picture is supposed to exist about. Henrietta's cells were valuable in scientific research, but that is covered within the opening credits. Ordinarily I beloved Rose Byrne, but this script is so poor that it makes her seem like she has never acted a 24-hour interval in her life. Her character is just allowed to overreact and perpetually accept a deer-in-the-headlights expression. Only. Patently. Awful.
21 out of 39 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I liked this film, but...
Alarm: Spoilers
I liked this film. I don't care about reading the book, every bit several reviewers recommended. Books are one grade of media; film another form. I don't expect them to be the same.
I idea the acting is this film was very good, in some cases excellent. Oprah Winfrey is splendid hither, and although I have long been impressed with her as a media mogul, I haven't always been impressed with her acting. To me, she proves herself hither. Rose Byrne as the White girl researching the story of Lacks is very effective. Courtney B. Vance -- a wonderful role player -- is wasted here. Aforementioned for Leslie Uggams, although I enjoyed seeing her. The remainder of the actors, none of whom I was very familiar with (although I did recognize several), were also quite good.
And yet I give this film only a "6". Why? Very simple (and I know I'm non the first to betoken this out). I didn't go to know much well-nigh Henrietta Lacks!!!!! The story is nigh Oprah Winfrey'southward character. The movie is still skilful, but the title character is nearly secondary to the film. That doesn't make sense to me.
So to me, to use a baseball analogy, the film go a hitting to second base of operations, but there's no home run. Worth watching, but disappointing.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
You will know everything, just Henrietta Lacks!
It's a good biographical drama, just the only problem is its not what exactly the championship says. If you believed to larn near Henrietta Lacks and went to see information technology, y'all might finish disappointingly. Because she was the only topic of the story, non the actual story, except a few glimpses. It is like you lot watched 'Infamous' or 'Capote', instead of 'In Common cold Blood'. That's what like this picture. Yet not a bad film.
A author pursuing the family members of a person who lived in the mid 20th century, because she was a medical phenomenon. Her cells used to treat cancer, despite she had died of cancer, leaving her young kids behind. Her descendants non enlightened of how things work in the medical research, only misguided by others, finally, set to discover the truth themselves virtually all the fuss.
It was nominated for the Emmy, but did not win. Oprah was okay, only Rose Byrne impressed me. Except a misleading championship, it is a good film, but I really wanted/want to know the Henrietta Lacks. That's funny, considering they take told us an unnecessary story. I hope somebody would make a picture show near actual Henrietta Lacks!
5.5/10
4 out of vi plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Great Film Which Took A Different POV
Alert: Spoilers
The low score on IMDb I suspect the trailers gave the wrong impression, I call back people were looking for the wonder Henrietta Lacks cells gave flesh but I took the flick for what it was, a story more than focus on the family than on Henrietta Lacks. And I enjoyed it this mode, learning of the hurting it causes the Lacks family reveals how intelligent society discards the poor and the meek, it's a life lesson of the realities of life. The low score on IMDb might likewise be some can't handle the truth, I pray one twenty-four hour period this family will get the billions they are entitled to.
half dozen out of 9 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
very disappointing
I read the book years ago and idea it was terrific. I was very excited to hear that information technology was going to be fabricated into a movie and waited a long time for its fruition. What a disappointment! I watched information technology to the terminate, but honestly, almost turned information technology off several times. It was null like the book as I remember it. I wish I could un-watch this and go the ane hr,35 minutes I spent watching it back.
11 out of eighteen plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A remarkable story
It tells a remarkable story of family members who retrieve their memories of Henrietta. It is foreign that Henrietta and her family members were kept in the dark about the researches. It is good that the story is finally told.
ane out of ane found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Too long, Too boring. Not worth your time watching
I liked the idea of the story but it connected into nowheres-ville. Oprah just wanted some other large part and she is the executive producer so about of the show is hers. It should b more of Rose Byrne'southward, the writer of the volume about Henrietta Lacks. Not worth your time or efforts to absorb this lousy film.
half dozen out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Human Side of the Story
I read the book and thought i the smartest things the author did was to include the homo side of the story. Watchers who want to run across the scientific side of the story will exist disappointed. Being a native of a place not far from Clover, I thought they did well with the culture of the family. The accent was way off but probably easier for the audience to understand. Also bad they didn't moving picture in that depressed function of Virginia. Again the coin went elsewhere.
Oprah becomes the character in a way that you tin forget almost her other piece of work. Oprah'southward interim is still a wonder to see.
4 out of six found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
They understood that the volume is well-nigh the people
1 of the most authentic to the book movies I've seen. The beauty of the book is that it was about the people. I was born in the next town over in Virginia and know that area well. The culture of the characters in the flick is accurate. The regional accent is not used. The emphasis there still resembles the early colonial period regardless of beginnings of the speaker. The movie audience would non take understood it. If you want to know the science, in that location are scientific discipline documentaries about it.
two out of two establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
armstrongalwastion.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5686132/reviews
Publicar un comentario for "Reviews of the Immorrtal Life of Hennritta Lauks"