Most IMDB reviews about this film having been written the same year or so after its release, I have the luxury of a 22 years distance to appreciate it. And so, I am not as enthusiastic. The acting is competent, although Karine Vanasse's, 16 at the time and with little experience, is not flawless in tone. The father is a caricature of an impotent dead-ender and an insensitive figure with his children, while the mother is over her head in work to provide for the family as her husband is unreliable, and thus, with problems of her own, she is unavailable for her maturing daughter. Hannah (Karine Vanasse) is growing up in that context, like millions of teens of any nationality did before her and millions more will, trying to anchor herself to some delusion while it lasts. As such, nothing is new under the sun and a film has to be remarkable to make us believe otherwise.
That said, I agree with MarioB's review. The society depicted in the film is a modern one by all means. Quebec society in 1963 was much more dogmatic. I don't know what school Hannah went to, but at the time, people were very conformist and the norms were Catholics. A Jew (they killed Christ, didn't they?) living unmarried with a Catholic woman = bad, the children were the product of sin and they had to be made aware of that in no polite terms in school by schoolmates and teachers alike. In addition the mother was probably working at 60 % a man's salary as it was usual since she didn't need so much income as she had a husband. He was not working? Then he was a lazy bum and the family got what it deserved. I know all this because I was there and I remember. That is one of the reasons why the Catholic Church has been having a bad rap in Quebec since the 60s; those who remember are still mad about it as I am.
To answer imdb1's and grand_schuttz's reviews: for the reasons said above, it is not a typical French portrait of a Quebec family. Indeed, it is very atypical.
Conclusion: the story is unremarkable and the historical context is wrong. It's a fine film for a dull Sunday afternoon.
That said, I agree with MarioB's review. The society depicted in the film is a modern one by all means. Quebec society in 1963 was much more dogmatic. I don't know what school Hannah went to, but at the time, people were very conformist and the norms were Catholics. A Jew (they killed Christ, didn't they?) living unmarried with a Catholic woman = bad, the children were the product of sin and they had to be made aware of that in no polite terms in school by schoolmates and teachers alike. In addition the mother was probably working at 60 % a man's salary as it was usual since she didn't need so much income as she had a husband. He was not working? Then he was a lazy bum and the family got what it deserved. I know all this because I was there and I remember. That is one of the reasons why the Catholic Church has been having a bad rap in Quebec since the 60s; those who remember are still mad about it as I am.
To answer imdb1's and grand_schuttz's reviews: for the reasons said above, it is not a typical French portrait of a Quebec family. Indeed, it is very atypical.
Conclusion: the story is unremarkable and the historical context is wrong. It's a fine film for a dull Sunday afternoon.