MovieChat Forums > The Making of a Lady (2014) Discussion > How disappointing

How disappointing

posted 10 years ago by gdeser
13 replies | jump to latest

I thought with Linus Roache and Joanna Lumley in the credits, we would be seeing something of quality in this movie. This was so dreadful, I want to scream to get my 90 wasted minutes back! I had already guessed the whole plot up to the point of the two sons at the end (wow, now WHAT a SURPRISE they were...NOT). Acting was almost as bad as the totally unoriginal plot itself. The poor woman who played the "evil" Indian servant reminded me of the bad guy in Indiana Jones, Temple of Doom... Sorry but I wouldn't even give this one star rating. Cannot seriously think of one single good thing to say about this movie.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kdnok 10 years ago

Actually, my family really enjoyed watching this movie. It was nice to see something different than the typical movies that are made nowadays. And the same old stuff on tv is getting really tiresome to watch. We had no issues with the acting. And regarding what you call an unoriginal plot, there's hardly any movies made today that would be considered original. There's so many sequels and remakes of older movies that it's almost ridiculous. This movie is much more original than any of those.

This movie might not be the greatest ever, but we definitely didn't think it was dreadful. And I was watching it with my husband and 17 year old daughter. Amazingly, my daughter even put aside her phone and ipod during the movie.....

We would gladly watch this movie again, and would even recommend it to family and friends that we know like this type of movie.....
My family rates this movie as 8 stars.
Obviously, different taste for different people.

[–] rebekahrox 10 years ago

Agree. It was just a good old fashioned gothic romance. However, Emily should have thrown them out as soon as the evil cousin showed his hand and revealed his true character in the "hovel" that Emily kindly offered to him. Major stupidity on her part making me scream at the TV set. She should have ran for her life after he forced her on the horse against her will.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] WanderingGriz 10 years ago

I'm with you. I was especially irritated by the "I'm-so-weak-that's-why-I-had-to-leave-you-in-my-big-scary-house-alone husband. And I guess we were supposed to feel sorry for the Indian wife at the end, too. Well at least they got their two precious male heirs to carry on. Incredibly uneven from start to finish, and the scary music was rather ridiculous, too.

[–] merryapril 10 years ago

My main disappointment now that I've read the book is that Joanna Lumley was underutilized. As written, her character had more "character" and although in the book she's much older (and Joanna still looks terrific), she's a wry, world-weary curmudgeon that Lumley could've run with.

On the other hand, Lydia Wilson's Emily and Linus Roache's Lord Walderhurst are more soulful and dimensional than their characters were in the book. So that's a plus. I swear, I think if I would've read one more description of Emily as "ingenuous" I would've thrown the *beep* book across the room.

All in all I appreciated the adapted screenplay even though it was predictable. I guess I don't have the highest expectations when it comes to Victorian romance! Having said that, it's hard to top Henry James' excellent Wings of the Dove, as well as the film version, which also starred Linus Roache.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] merryapril 10 years ago

Emily was even more obtuse in the book, and it went on chapter after chapter! She literally had to be told before she got the message. First they tried to cause her to trip and fall down a long staircase, then they hoped to drown her by loosening a bridge railing she was known to regularly lean against while watching the sunset (her maid Jane foiled both of those attempts) and then they tried to poison her. It took Hester's face-to-face confession to her that a plot existed, and that a glass of milk in her hand was poisoned, before Emily realized the extent of her peril. What she didn't know was that a fourth means to harm her had been plotted, as Osborn was training her docile horse to balk at the sight of piles of rocks in the hope it would rear up and throw her during riding lessons. Fortunately, she didn't follow through on the riding lessons because in the meantime she found out she was pregnant.

She was one daft damsel in distress.

Even though some who've commented here didn't like the film, at least the screenplay, direction and acting created an Emily who was much more realistic and human than the one in the novel!

[–] guardia-teresa3 10 years ago

Yes, I thought to myself that I should turn to the book first before I complain about the movie because despite the brilliant casting, I was also frustrated when I saw this movie. Secret Garden was my favourite childhood book and now that I only find garbage (reality tv, etc) on I love British or PBS dramas on dvd. but MerryApril is right and I love her addition to this movie: this is one daft damsel in distress. I am still going to put a hold on the book at the library...can't cure an incurable romantic!

[–] merryapril 10 years ago

guardia-teresa3, I hear what you're saying about reality TV and other fare served up these days, and I agree.

Yes, please do go ahead and read the book. It's short and can be finished in one sitting. In some ways it's more romantic, e.g., Emily is absolutely smitten with Walderhurst and regards him as her savior, which is obviously different from the screenplay.

[–] fidgette 9 years ago

Good to know that she was a dummy in the books too (which I have not read) because I was so irritated with her on screen for being so stupid.

Oh here's this couple that I know live in squalor. I also know that if my husband has an heir (which they point out to me) that we get the inheritance and he loses everything. They lie and forge a note from my husband, but they can stay anyways. Then after I offer this house for them to live in, he violently says no and forces me on a horse where I faint. They invite their ayaa to stay, even though they didn't ask me first. She then makes me some milk mixture to drink and be healthy, and she's constantly skulking and eavesdropping, but I drink it anyways. The butler whom my husband tells me to trust tells me the couple need to be told to leave and I then find his body floating in the water. I'm constantly getting weaker but I continue drinking that weird liquid anyways, even though I notice that it "tastes funny".

We could go on and on.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] crlnrgbrght5 10 years ago

Linus Roache and Joanna Lumley were the only two reasons I tuned into it in the first place. But, Lumley had a cameo role and, Roache was out of the picture most of the time. D'Arcy and that Indian woman gave me the creeps, that I stopped watching it when I realized what was going down.