Hi.. i just closed the movie, didn't even watch half of it. It's like completly different from the book. No character build up what so ever. Are they even going to change towns? I closed it when the merchand walked in because that was to much. And why is it that only the main characters speak english and the rest french? I don't think i will watch the rest of it. Unless it get better, does it though?
shareIt gets WORSE. Don't waste your time.
I was never so happy to see a main protagonist drop dead.
In the film, Madame Bovary instantly became (or revealed herself to be) a selfish woman-child and drama queen. She shops a lot on credit to the financial ruin of her husband, runs to both of her lovers who want nothing to do with her emotional breakdown (or paying her bills for that matter), then she heads for the poison in Dr. Hubby's medicinal spice rack to ultimately reveal her cowardice.
Takes her least breath on the ground, as we saw in the beginning. (Me: YAY!!!)
Then there's a quick final shot of Dr. Hubby and villagers holding lanterns in the distance, as darkness descends, calling out half-heartedly, "Emma... Emma?" Cut to black. Credits roll.
The weird casting decisions, boring script, wooden acting, sluggish dialogue, poor character development, mundane music/score, and uneven direction all contributed to my disappointment.
How big budget productions like this get the green-light is beyond me. Perhaps someone knew somebody, owed somebody a favor, or "wooed" somebody?
"Don't get chumpatized!" - The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters (2007)
thank you for the summary. i was quite excited when they anounced this movie because i liked the bbc version and though this to be better.. never have i been so wrong
no comparison with frances o'connor
I thought it was beautifully mounted and didn't have a problem with Emma's looks, to reference another thread ... she was young and perfect so I could see how men might fall at her feet, although perhaps not on first glance. But I kept wondering: when is she going to start being overly ambitious? She seemed quite sympathetic at first. Maybe, as I was doing other things while watching, I missed something.
Then, boom, she comes back from the horseback invite and begins throwing her weight around a little bit. I had to stop watching, just as I was not able to get very far with The Other Boleyn Girl, that is, the recent dramatization, which had the perfect casting for the female leads but bore little resemblance to the book as well. I read Madame Bovary in high school, I believe, and it may have been something of a chore. I don't think Flaubert liked her very much.
"In the film, Madame Bovary instantly became (or revealed herself to be) a selfish woman-child and drama queen"
You can't blame the movie for that. That is how she was created in the book. You hate the character, and you should. But it's not like she was an angel in the book and this particular film made her into a fiend.
That's a shame because I liked the movie.
shareI'm a half hour into it, and I'm not sure I can watch the rest. They've deviated too much from the original story. They're making too much happen too soon, and they're not building the depth of character that was such an important part of what made the novel a masterpiece.
I know that sometimes compromises must be made in translating a piece of literature the movie format, but really: if you can't even come close, just don't undertake the project.
I know that sometimes compromises must be made in translating a piece of literature the movie format, but really: if you can't even come close, just don't undertake the project.
the essay below on Sophie Barthe's "Madame Bovary", written by James Smith Allen, ... http://h-france.net/fffh/classics/sophie-barthess-madame-bovary/
I agree, almost every person's interpretation that I encounter is, IMO, simplistic, when compared to the complexity of the book, which reflects Flaubert's inner tension (romanticism/realism) and complex, contradictory nature. This film doesn't really take the heroic woman rebelling against an oppressive society angle, so much as it focuses on the story from Emma's perspective (from inside her head) rather than from the lofty view of Flaubert's ironic detachment - this film is irony-free, which is probably the biggest difference from the book. If you do have the opportunity to read the article I linked, I would be interested in your feedback. And as one "Madame Bovary" fan to another, I highly recommend Mario Vargas Llosa's "The Perpetual Orgy".
Personally, I don't expect any movie to even come close to capturing the essence of "Madame Bovary, which really isn't the external plot, at least to my mind. "Bovary" is something we ponder over the course of a lifetime, something that changes focus as we personally evolve - maybe there isn't one valid take on the book, and this is a major source of its greatness.
I'll try to remember to reply when I read the essay you linked. I'll also make a note of The Perpetual Orgy. I have some of Llosa's short stories and critical essays from a 'Latino writers' binge a while back, but I checked and I don't have that title.
To be fair to this film, I don't know how anyone could take a literary work of this significance and magnitude and hope to even begin to do it any justice in 2 hours of screen dialogue. I know that there is a 1950s version of The Brothers Karamazov with Yul Brynner and William Shatner. I'm scared to look.
I know that there is a 1950s version of The Brothers Karamazov with Yul Brynner and William Shatner. I'm scared to look.
Yes, both Bovary and Brothers should be mini-series rather than single movies. There's a good Russian version with subtitles of the Brothers than is better than the Brynner and Shatner version.
share