What it seems has been missed by so many who reviewed this movie as; slow, dull, 'a snooze-fest', etc, is the slow, dull pace of the film portrays exactly what life was like for this young woman.

The one scene in which her husband actually asked what she was thinking, she replied, '. . . A great many things' turns out to be the key to her liberation in the end.

The vast majority of individuals on the planet cannot imagine abiding Effie's circumstances with any level of resignation, acceptance, dignity, depression, scant verbal responses - and those in low key tones barely above a whisper.

The acting & overcast days effectively put you in her position, and regardless of whether you can identify with her actions & reactions, you remain entranced by sheer curiosity of what must possible be going thru her mind - until we see by the end, she still has retained hope in the possibility of change, and taken Herculean steps to accomplish her freedom.

A beautiful movie. Well done.

I thought it was excellent. Beautifully filmed, great acting and a fascinating story.

Many reviews criticize Dakota's acting but I thought she portrayed the quiet desperation of a woman trapped in a terrible marriage.

Odd to me that every silly comic book based movie gets raves and a truly great movie like this gets panned.

The eponymous heroine was the only wife of John Ruskin (1819-1900), who was to art criticism and various writings on a variety of social issues as Charles Dickens was as novelist, i.e., of very high stature. Effie Gray (Dakota Fanning) was 20 years old at the time of their marriage and there's an early scene where she lets the remaning garment fall on the floor while standing in the middle of the room on her wedding night. He leaves the room, disgusted, and never gets over it. And so the story is of a neglected wife.

It seems unlikely that a young bride would exhibit that type behavior in an high-born household during Victorian times but history shows that something did actually happen on their wedding night, though exactly what is unknown. There is a clear impression that there is more going on with Ruskin's sexuality and attitudes toward women than a single incident on a wedding night (though there are no overtones of homosexuality).

Emma Thompson has a minor role but she wrote the screenplay, which may be a first with her. But I hesitate to put the blame on her for a film that I thought was at times dull. The teleplay seems lacking at the end and I don't know whether there were errors in judgement or whether it was just showing an admirable restraint. Those who like this better than me would probably see this as quietly rewarding (to coin a phrase). For me, perhaps too quiet.