Life is too short to watch "Holland."
I can't believe I spent 110 minutes on this thing - pausing for dogs, dinner, dogs, a baseball game, and dogs. It was absolutely, irredeemably DREADFUL!!
I'd have given due props to Nicole Kidman for her constant work (fabulous agents, magical plastic surgeons) but she needs to learn to turn down scripts. There are some actors whose names signify that a movie is 90% sure to be good, because they're choosy about what they accept -- Meryl Streep of course, but also Jessica Chastain, Kate Winslet, ymmv but you get the idea.
Why on earth is Kidman overworking at this point in her career and accepting horrible projects like "Holland?"
(For that matter, Matthew Macfayden was wasted here, as well. He is far, FAR too good for this.)
Just my opinion! 
= new reply since forum marked as read
Thanks - I'll check it out! 
The acting was amazing. The construction in single-shots was a challenge. I have to say though, that I did not find much else to appreciate about it, whether because of my own life experiences and perspectives or something about the director's insistence in continuity, such that we had to follow car rides from one place to another to keep events in one shot. I awaited some plot turn, point to be made, reason for the whole exercise that never materialized.
As Stinky the Clown says, "That's why God made chocolate and vanilla."
It's late here, but I'll try to think of something I DID enjoy and post about that soon, so as not to be a 'negative Nancy!'
