MovieChat Forums > The Golden Bowl (2001) Discussion > The Movie is Flawed...

The Movie is Flawed...

posted 18 years ago by ownerbluesky
23 replies | jump to latest

any idea?

[–] tmo1909 18 years ago

Worst Merchant Ivory film ever. Slow, boring, etc...

[–] bittermilk 18 years ago

But the story is something that could always happen ...

www.greekmeds.gr

[–] kraciak 17 years ago

I don't agree at all! It's very interesting and beautifull movie! I don't understand you, people.

[–] ownerbluesky 17 years ago

don't get me wrong. I actually liked this movie a lot; but i lament some little problems in it, that makes it "flawed"... i think it could be better, without some...... jerky scenes!

[–] twilliams76 16 years ago

... so it is flawed just like the bowl itself. And again, just like the bowl, it is still beautiful to look at. How fitting.

[–] derekbd1966 16 years ago

... so it is flawed just like the bowl itself. And again, just like the bowl, it is still beautiful to look at. How fitting.

Until Angelica Houston drops the dvd and it breaks into 3 or 4 pieces.
Damn her. ;-)

I thought the movie would have been better had there been more shots of Jeremy shirtless. Oh well.

[–] Keely 16 years ago

I like a lot about the movie, too, but I think its biggest flaw was casting Nick Nolte, who was way too attractive as Adam Verver. Everything would have made more sense if he had been an uglier character. In the film he's too sympathetic. With someone as appealing as Nick Nolte, it's hard to sympathize with Charlotte for having the affair with the Prince in the first place, and I kept thinking, "What's so horrible about going off to America all alone with him??" I think the character of Verver was supposed to represent everything vulgar, ugly, and selfish about America -- like when Charlotte was describing the portrait of Henry VIII as the worst of masculine ego and hardness. Sorry, but Nick Nolte just isn't repulsive or vulgar enough! (although he did a pretty good job of it in "Affliction")

[–] charmed_babe64 16 years ago

I found the movie tedious and it did not have a proper climax.. I kept waiting for something dramatic to happen.. I sat through the 2 hours waiting and then when the credits rolled I was like "that's it?". The acting was excellent and if they didn't drag it out so much I'm sure it would have been better.

[–] Dscully100 15 years ago

Actually, I agree with this review very much. This film was more about Charlotte (a lot of people were upset about that) but it did a great job of portraying just how lonely she was both before and after her marriage. Nolte is a great actor who really did play up the big-egoed American ready to put his ostentatious new wealth up for show for a bunch of people wouldn't care. HOWEVER, he WAS too attractive, and he treated Charlotte (to my mind) much more decently and with more kindness than he did in the book.

[–] mazlowe 14 years ago

>>Nolte is a great actor who really did play up the big-egoed American ready to put his ostentatious new wealth up for show for a bunch of people wouldn't care. HOWEVER, he WAS too attractive...

...but quite old and staid compared to Amerigo. I've never found Nolte very attractive, even in his younger days. Well, maybe in his much younger Rich Man/Poor Man days. I thought he did a fine job here.

[–] ambrosia-apples 14 years ago

I've always found Nick Nolte extremely unattractive, and I've never understood his appeal. But I think that he's aging well. In this movie, he was quite attractive and appealing. I wouldn't have a hard time going with him to America. :-p

[–] Sibyla01 8 years ago

Me too. He seems to me like an old woman.

[–] dan.adams 10 years ago

A truly turgid tale of worthless useless inadequate people.M/I should have steered clear of James's stuff. Stick with Forster,I say!

[–] gabriela_zayas 9 years ago

I agree: is absolutely boooringgggg zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[–] coco-su 12 years ago

Terrible acting, bad directing.. the sad truth is even when the story is great it can turn out to be a bad movie if you don't get all the ingredients right. I was very disappointed because I LOVE period movies.

[–] Joannakathryn 12 years ago

I had to read several of James' books in college, and I had trouble staying awake during most of them. I had the same problem with this movie.

Camera adds 10lbs;internet subtracts 50.

[–] chas437 12 years ago

I'm with you, I had to drop an English Lit class because I couldn't make through a Henry James' novel.

[–] Joannakathryn 12 years ago

Thankfully, that's not all we read. I did like "Portrait of a Lady," but "The Ambassadors" was a major snoozefest.

We also read Huckleberry Finn, McTeague, and several others that I enjoyed.

Camera adds 10lbs;internet subtracts 50.

[–] maveltre-566-900040 11 years ago

Ah, how different. James is the author I choose when I want to be drawn in. I've reread several of his novels more than once. But I admit I'm on the fringe...

[–] holchie 11 years ago

I think if other actors were cast in the parts of Amerigo and Charlotte it would have made the movie better. I didn't feel any sexual tension between them, and Jeremy Northam was too short for Uma Thurman. Between the two of them, I think Jeremy Northam was just not enough of a "romantic" type to carry off this role: Not very handsome (my opinion), not sensual, cold.

[–] LetheL 11 years ago

The casting of this movie is horrendous. Nick Nolte sounds like he's reading lines, all the while thinking "Seriously? You want ME to play this role? ME??" Jeremy Northram's Italian accent lends itself to farce. Uma Thurman? No. Just...no. But - it's Merchant Ivory. The characters are always secondary to the setting, which is sumptuous perfection. One watches Merchant Ivory to immerse oneself in the environment. Not to watch the characters. They are just an excuse to re-create a lost world.

Lethe

[–] LetheL 11 years ago

The casting of this movie is horrendous. Nick Nolte sounds like he's reading lines, all the while thinking "What the hell am I doing in this movie?" Jeremy Northram's Italian accent, are you kidding me? Uma Thurman? No. Just...no. But - it's Merchant Ivory. The characters are always secondary to the setting, which is sumptuous perfection. One watches Merchant Ivory to immerse oneself in the environment. Not to watch the characters. They are just an excuse to re-create a lost world.

Lethe

[–] Noboru_Wataya 10 years ago

It's got a crack in it.