Good concept, poorly executed.

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

The first must-see film of the year.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Saoirse Ronan shines in the film with her strong acting. This movie deals with several important issues such as homesickness, love, family, and country love. One of the main theme of the film was choices, sometimes in our life we have two options to choose. It's all depends on our minds to choose the right path.

Honestly, can't get my head around this one. Standing ovations at Sundance? Really? For this? So Saorse Ronan plays an emotionally blank young woman with a perpetual look of slightly pained superfluity, who emigrates to New York from a picture-postcard Ireland, depicted as a pursed, gossipy village of church-on-Sunday piousness and coded snobbery. Once in the Big Apple she drifts meekly through a succession of not-very-interesting adventures, with the blandest supporting cast of cardboard cutouts assembled in any film since the 1950s. Eventually she ends up back for a stretch, works as an accountant (the drama!) and walks on the beach a couple of times with Donal Gleeson, before having a teacup spat with the old cow that she used to work for and deciding, almost reluctantly, to return to her husband in the 'States. And that's it.While it's basically inoffensive fluff, the sheer volume and intensity of critical praise heaped on this picture completely beggars belief. Ronan, while watchable, is entirely one-note from start to finish. The entire supporting cast are pasted in from kiddult romances from the 1950s, with cheerful stereotypes taking the place of any meaningful character development. Slavishly constructed around Ronan's mooney presence, the film floats aimlessly across the screen, providing neither insight into its lead character's emotional life or throwing up any truly troubling obstacles for her to overcome. In the end, so little happens, and all the characters are so thinly drawn that the viewer (or this one anyway) finds themself asking, "what did I just watch, and was I supposed to care? If so, why did they make the lead character so dismally, relentlessly uninteresting? Why did she ditch the quirky, outspoken girl in her boarding house for the shallow, mean-spirited bimbos she works with? Was she actually into the young bloke she was romancing back home, or was he just a pleasing distraction? Would she really have left her husband just like that? Why wasn't he more angry with her for not writing or calling?" Ultimately, with stakes this low, such an empty lead character and a story so devoid of dramatic incident it's almost astonishing that this even garnered a theatrical release, let alone the fulsome admiration of critics worldwide.

In all honesty I did like this movie. Saoirse Ronan's acting was beautiful as always but the movie ended too quickly for me. Suddenly there was 10 minutes left and not enough has happened for me. But I give this film 7/10 because this film is sweet, not a masterpiece but enjoyable to watch.

The main weakness with this rather tame film is the male lead.His uncharismatic character does not impose itself on the film and Ronan's character.So the film is unbalanced with Ronan a strong performer,helped by the close-ups on her pale eyes and enigmatic expression. I didn't buy the attraction other than availability,nor the speed of blossoming love.Then a toe-curling dinner scene with the family including a bizarre younger sibling(well singposted).The giggling girls at the boarding house got a little repetitive .Only when she returned to Ireland did the film open up and although it was predictable she would fall for someone else and dither it was too much to hope she would stay behind. In a William Trevor story she may have.