oOoBarracuda From the same mind that brought audiences the Godfather trilogy, Apocalypse Now, and Tucker: The Man and His Dream, comes the stylistically similar Francis Ford Coppola film, Peggy Sue Got Married. Telling the story of a woman on the edge, Peggy Sue, and her high school reunion, Peggy Sue Got Married proves a nice time portal for all of us to walk through and meet our former selves. Not many things bring back such pure unrelenting nostalgia like one's senior year of high school. The transformative stage in which we are discovering who we are and who we want to become is purely illustrated in this Coppola film.Dreading going to her 25th reunion occurring in the midst of her separation from her high school sweetheart due to infidelity, Peggy Sue (Kathleen Turner) dons a dress reminiscent of the type of dress she would have worn all those years ago. Returning to the reunion as only half of the class couple proved daunting for Peggy. After wading through the subtleties, a few of her former friends asked outright about her absent husband, Charlie Bodell (Nicolas Cage). Depressed, and somewhat longing, Peggy goes through the proceedings of the reunion. After catching up with her well-intentioned former best friends, Catherine Hicks (Carol Heath) and Rosalie Testa (Lucinda Jenney), Peggy remains disconnected and starts to question all that didn't happen in her life. After being named class queen; Peggy succumbs to her doubts, faints, and awakes in her senior year in 1960, with the chance to do differently everything she wished she could.Peggy Sue Got Married proved to be a much more emotionally raw film than I ever expected. The nostalgia presented hits on a level any audience member can relate to and feel deeply. Coppola does an exceptional job shooting scenes in which Peggy stands out in her high school days, as she well should having the mentality of a 42- year- old woman. I felt that was this film's greatest strength. Not much was done to Kathleen Turner to make her look more like a teenager when she went back in time. The point of the film, however, is that Peggy goes back to a time in life in which we live in the moment only, with the feeling that what is going on at that point is the most important thing in the world and will shape the rest of our lives. Peggy, however, comes to this time with an extra 25 years of experience and foresight. She noticeably sticks out in the crowd because she is different from the crowd. She learns the lesson, which even she needed to learn, the choices you make in high school do not have to define your life.

kezzabou Peggy Sue Bodell attends her 25 year high school reunion, only to collapse and be transported back to 1960, her senior year. The more she wants to change things, the more she discovers that she makes the same choices as she did before, with a few adjustments. Although she starts by wishing she was a free spirit, and the desire to run away with the local bad boy, she discovers he wants to be a polygamist writer whose wives would take care of chickens for their income. This is at odds with her personal values and she realizes that she is not what she thought she was. There is more self-discovery in this movie than there is learning about those around her, but she does pick up some lessons from them along the way.A side note: I noticed on one review that I read someone was using the scene with Peggy's mother having her jewelry appraised to indicate that she was becoming an independent woman in the early days of the women's movement. I interpreted it that Peggy's parents were dealing with the same problem that led to Peggy and Charlie's problems, which she says herself - "house payments"! Her father owns a hat shop, a business which is surely on the decline at this time, foreshadowing family financial catastrophe in the years ahead. Did anyone else think this, or was there something else going on in your opinion?

MovieGuy109 Francis Ford Coppola has been one of my favorites. He has crafted a number of spectacular movies, but this is not one of them. Turner is dull in the lead performance and the story has nothing new to do or say. It does not even find a way to recycle the clichés. It ends up uncreative and dull. The supporting performances are just as bad, lots of campy acting. Never has a Coppola movie ever been so boring or so stale in its conveying of plot elements. It tries to be likable but ultimately falls flat on its face. do yourself a favor and watch any other Coppola movie- even Jack over this one. Sofia Coppola is just as miscast as she would later be in The Godfather: Part III.

Ayal Oren I can't understand how this amazing film is rated so low. Yes the plot seems insignificant, it's almost as if Coppola is doing a Spielberg film here, some even dared calling it Coppola's back to the future - it's not. It does take place in a small town, and has some weird fantastic plot twist at its base but that's just the superficial skin deep external features of the film. Coppola was never so masterful in his command over cinema. Have a look at the opening scene see how the camera moves - the camera movement speaks, it tells you every thing about this movie in the opening sequence with plain camera movement, it doesn't shove it down your throats but lets you see it and get it on your own. I never loved Coppola as much as I did with his three "smallish" movies - Rumble Fish,The Outsiders and this one which for me is the cherry on top of the icing. It's acted superbly see if you notice Helen Hunt and Jim Carrey without looking them up at the credit list. Summing it all up: it's a small story of a woman unhappy about the way her life turned out - but it's done so well and it's such an example of pure cinema, every movie lover should have a look at this masterpiece -just do it with an open mind.