Showing posts with label literary movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literary movies. Show all posts

2/18/2012

The Jewel in the Crown (1984) Review

The Jewel in the Crown (1984)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This DVD set is a real heartbreaker!
The Jewel in the Crown is absolutely one of historic the highlights of "quality" television. An absolutely arresting story. Wonderful script, wonderful acting, etc. I can't add anything on that count to the reviews already here.
That makes the TERRIBLE quality of the DVD transfer all the more disappointing. This set has literally the WORST video quality I have ever seen on a DVD! Murky, muddy picture with visible scratches and dirt on the film. The soundtrack is a little better. On my home theater setup it sounds like its coming over a half-decent clock radio. Seriously, the picture looks like they took an old VHS tape of the show and just ran it through a disc burner.
No, I don't expect blockbuster quality from an 30-year old BBC film, but I would have expected something more like the recent DVD set of Elizabeth R, which is quite watchable.
Sadly, this is almost surely the only DVD we'll ever see of this marvelous series. I'm going to rent the old tapes of this. They might easily be better. If not, I guess this is what we're all stuck with.

Click Here to see more reviews about: The Jewel in the Crown (1984)

Studio: A&e Home VideoRelease Date: 03/27/2001Run time: 750 minutesRating: Nr

Buy NowGet 19% OFF

Click here for more information about The Jewel in the Crown (1984)

1/23/2012

Great Expectations (Masterpiece Theatre, 1999) (1999) Review

Great Expectations (Masterpiece Theatre, 1999) (1999)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This movie is excellent. I stumbled onto it on the Net accidentally because of the leading actor (Ioan Gruffudd) and his earlier portrayal of another classic character--Hornblower. Great Expectations is by far my favorite of Dickens and of all other classic literature, and this movie portrays the book wonderfully! Every scene--nearly every WORD can be found in some form in the book, from the younger Pip's nervous recital of Old Clem, to Orlick's reappearance and attempted revenge. As with all adaptations, there are a few drawbacks (and for this reason I would HIGHLY reccomend reading the book itself!). But I've seen very few movies adapted as accurately as this. Very very fine!

Click Here to see more reviews about: Great Expectations (Masterpiece Theatre, 1999) (1999)

Ioan Gruffudd, Justine Waddell and Charlotte Rampling star in this adaptation of Charles Dickens' enduring classic Great Expectations, the story of a young orphan named Pip who lives with his sister and her blacksmith husband, Joe.One day Pip is sent to play at the residence of Miss Havisham, a frightening, elderly woman who seems locked in the past. She wears ancient bridal attire and never moves from the dusty upper rooms of her home. Miss Havisham's beautiful but contemptuous ward, Estella, makes Pip feel appallingly inferior, creating in him a desire to better himself-changing his life forever. But despite his efforts to improve himself, the frustrated Pip seems destined to remain Joe's apprentice. Until one day a lawyer calls to inform Pip that he has "great expectations:" Pip is to be released form his apprenticeship and educated in London as a gentleman! The benefactor who has made this life transformation possible, however, wishes to remain anonymous.

Buy Now

Click here for more information about Great Expectations (Masterpiece Theatre, 1999) (1999)

9/11/2011

Pride and Prejudice (BBC, 1980) (1980) Review

Pride and Prejudice (BBC, 1980) (1980)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
I've lost count of how many times I've read Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen - it's one of my very favorite books. Comparing the two miniseries adaptations of it -- the more recent one by A&E/BBC (Pride and Prejudice - The Special Edition (A&E, 1996)) and this one done in the 80s by BBC -- there are definite advantages to each. The one you choose depends on what you want. If you want a really good and fun modern romantic comedy, watch the A&E version. But if you want what is closest to Austen's novel (which I prefer), watch the older BBC version.
POSITIVES OF THE A&E VERSION:
1) It is a visual feast: The costumes, sets and scenery are exquisite and make this version worth watching for that reason alone. They obviously had a larger budget than the 80s version, which is done in the old BBC 'stage play' style.
2) Since this version is 75 minutes longer than the BBC version, you get to enjoy that much more of Austen's incomparable dialogue - the best ever written in the English language besides Shakespeare, in my opinion!
3) In the interplays between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, their emotions are much more pronounced and open than in the BBC version... which makes their relationship more openly romantic even than in the novel. This is developed further by some scenes of them individually that weren't in the novel. In the 80s version and the novel, many of the subtleties of their relationship and feelings are left to the imagination. The A&E version is more in the unsubtle style of a typical modern romantic movie, which gives a wonderful new dimension to the story. The "unexpected proposal" scene is absolutely perfect; I think Austen would have loved it!
4) Casting Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. Although not as strikingly handsome as David Rintoul's Darcy in the 80s version (in the book, Darcy is far handsomer than Bingley), Firth adds the right amount of visible emotion to the character which David R. did not, while also maintaining a very aristocratic, refined air about him.
POSITIVES OF THE 80s BBC VERSION:
1) It is much more faithful to the historical setting of the novel. It captures much more accurately the slow-moving, thoughtful, refined, restrained, purist, obsessed-with-manners (but still quite amusing) aristocratic society of 18th century England. This to me gives not only a needed believability to, but also a much deeper understanding of, the characters and story. Austen's novels were very realistic and true to their time and place, so if you want the genuine Austen feel rather than the 'in-your-face' Hollywood style, see the 80s version (or just stick to the book). The A&E version comes across as being 20th century American, just cloaked in 18th century England costumes and sets. Some people have praised this aspect of it, saying that the 80s version is boring by comparison. But I believe that Austen's intent was that the interest in her novels would lie with her detailed character studies and intricate relational plots. That's what made her books so interesting, without all the action-packed gallivanting around and crassness which Hollywood seems to think is a necessity to entertainment. The 80s version recognizes this and retains a historical elegance and dignity; the A&E version does not. (In the A&E version, Bingley's two supposedly high class sisters slouch around, make faces and giggle audibly behind people's backs. Everyone seems to be constantly running, skipping or galloping somewhere. The less-than-savory characters, like Mary, Lydia, Kitty, and Mr. Wickham, look and act like they are from a much lower social class, in ways that go below what would have been acceptable in their class. A visitor to the Bennett home accidentally sees one of the sisters in her undergarments. When E. visits Pemberley, she sees Mr. D. coming from a dip in a pond with a wet undershirt on, rather than just having arrived in a carriage as in the book.)
2) The casting is better in the BBC version and each actor is completely natural and believable in his or her role. In the A&E version, much of the casting does not seem to fit the characters: Elizabeth comes across as being about twenty years older than she is (with a constantly knowing look as if she's already married with children), Mrs. Bennett seems too intelligent to be so silly, Charlotte seems snobby rather than humble, Miss Bingley seems cold and sharp rather than sweetly slimy, Mr. Collins is like a cartoon and not a believable person, and the five Bennett sisters don't look at all like they could be related to each other. The actors seemed quite competent, just not cast in the right roles, and maybe directed to overplay them.
3) The 80s BBC version gives the same attention to each character that Austen's novel does. In the A&E version, only the principal characters are focused on, with the result that many of the characters who we should have gotten to know better seemed to just be cardboard props, and their relationships with each other don't come across as being as intimate and familiar as they really are in the novel. For example, Elizabeth had a much deeper relationship with both her father and with her Aunt Gardiner than the A&E version portrayed, because it left out some key scenes between those characters. The only ones I could perceive as being really close in the A&E version were Elizabeth and Jane - and in the last half, Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. This is a great loss, because Austen's novels are all about the relationships between people, and each of their interesting personality quirks. They are character studies -- not just of the main characters, but of ALL the characters.
Sorry for the length, but P&P is a special book and I wanted to share my full views on these adaptations for anyone trying to decide between them!
BUT AS ALWAYS, it's a good idea to 1) read the negative reviews as well as the positive, since they are wildly different from each other, and 2) RENT before you buy!

Click Here to see more reviews about: Pride and Prejudice (BBC, 1980) (1980)

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE - DVD Movie

Buy NowGet 43% OFF

Click here for more information about Pride and Prejudice (BBC, 1980) (1980)