80
Flowers is an emotionally precise, subtle and quietly gripping exploration of the romance and remembrance that they evoke.
What are people saying?
What are critics saying?
60
Pulled in too many directions, the film's subtle mood-building starts to feel intentionally oblique, the force of its characters and symbols lessened by a frustrating circuitousness.
60
The New York Times by Andy Webster
To its benefit, it has rich roles for, and splendid performances by, its three principal actresses. To its detriment, their characters are each in their own way pining for the same man, whose simple actions in life seem undeserving of their considerable exertions after his demise.
67
Entertainment Weekly by Chris Nashawaty
The film is undercut by long metaphorical stretches that dampen their impact.
63
Everyone heals, or doesn't heal, on cue, and the initial pathos of the narrative is dulled by the architecture of its through lines.
75
Letting such a film slip into the melodramatic could have been very easy. But Garaño and Goenaga tactfully navigate the delicacies of death and the difficulties (and guilt) of life with a quiet poise that make for a film that is as enriching as it is disheartening.
50
RogerEbert.com by Godfrey Cheshire
It contains nothing to offend, but nothing to surprise or inspire, either.
70
The three lead actresses, beautifully cast, form just enough of a contrast to each other to create extratextual tension while maintaining a high degree of sympathy.
75
Washington Post by Michael O'Sullivan
The movie, for all its uneventfulness, is intensely memorable.
50
Los Angeles Times by Robert Abele
Flowers is too exquisitely formalist — symmetric framings followed by willfully asymmetric shots — to ever feel flushed with real feeling.