1) You would need to make the movie 24 hours or more long if you're going to include everything from the book (calling Erich von Stroheim! Or Andy Warhol!)
2) You really should "get over the acting style of the era." It's a creature of the silent screen era it had recently displaced; and the silent film acting style, in turn, was based on the acting style of stage players in which actors gesticulated and otherwise strained to make themselves heard and understood by the patrons sitting all the way in the back rows.
3) People in real life in the 18th, 19th and early 20th Centuries affected a manner in their behavior and written and oral communications that you, apparently, aren't able to abide today; doubtless, future generations will look back at you, me, and all our contempories today as being "quaint" and "dated" -- or do you really think that OUR generation has reached the everlasting pinacle of human evolution and achievement? And yet, doesn't an attitude like that ooze of misplaced and inappropriate smugness, snobbery and arrogance? As for me, I'll take Shakesperian or Dickensian dialogue over modern gutter / street lingo and behavior, ANY day!
And the acting is quite good anyway. Ronald Colman, Edna May Oliver, Blanche Yurka, et al, did just fine in their deliveries and with the script they were given to act out; so, please, DO "get over it."
Okay folks, show's over, nothing to see here!
Exactly, vinidici. Coleman's performance could by no one's calculation be considered 'Quaint" or "dated". It was simply magnificent, imo. And, I can't imagine Blanche Yurka's impassioned appeal to the assembly presented in the monotonic, self-conscious, lazy performance style of many of today's acting notables. Yurka's performance is a director's dream come true.