MovieChat Forums > Madame Bovary (2015) Discussion > What a stupid lead character!!!

What a stupid lead character!!!


Bored unemployed young woman overspends and cheats on her husband to overcome frustration

I have not read the novel, and I can see why this story is still relevant nowadays, but I couldn't imagine this being anyone's favorite book or literary character.

Film was well-made, apart from casting Ezra as Leon.

reply

It's a great, great novel and I think Emma Bovary is one of literature's most significant characters. Of course, she doesn't demonstrate the traits that you may be looking for in a friend, she's very flawed, but so is King Lear and Hamlet - that's what makes them extremely human, having a dark, irrational, frustrating side, and what allows the writer to open things up to many ways of interpreting the story, many possibilities. Someday maybe you'll read the novel - I hope so. It's often been said that "Madame Bovary" is one of those books that seems to change when a person rereads it - I think it changes as you mature in life - I've read it multiple times, and I get different things from it each time, including how I see and respond to Emma Bovary.

reply

Dude, you can get your point across fine without posting everything in bold.


You four-eyed psycho.

reply

[deleted]

The most religious parts of the US have the highest teen pregnancy rates. However, overall, teen pregnancy rates are at their lowest in 50-60 years, maybe longer.

This is also one of the safest times in human history--if you live in a developed, first world country. However, the US does have one of the highest gun fatality rates of any developed country. It's much higher than the more secular countries.

We also hear about things because we have instantaneous news from across the country and around the world. Overall, those events that have you shaking in fear, railing about the downfall of man, are pretty rare. You're much more likely to die of an accident or disease than a violent act.

Fortunately, humans can be much better, more moral than what religion wants of its followers. We know its wrong to kill all the women who've known men and keep the girl virgins to be raped later. We know its wrong to dash babies against rocks or for a god to send bears to kill 40 kids because they made fun of a bald guy. We know its wrong to stone disobedient children or women who marry when they're not virgins. We're much more moral than your fictional god, and that's a great thing.

reply

Well, I would not let this film version influence you. It is my favorite novel, beautifully written, a masterpiece.

reply

Yes. She was an unsympathetic and self-focused 19th century diva who melodramatically commits suicide instead of facing the music in order to make amends, learn from her mistakes, and find happiness in a realistic way without victimizing or using others. For that time period, Emma would be considered VERY fortunate to have been handed a kind and well-respected husband with a steady income as a doctor, a large home with land, some spending money, and a helpful servant. Yet it was not enough to satisfy her idealism of selfish fantasies, unrealistic desires, and expensive taste beyond their means.

While many novels don't translate well to screen, I don't think reading about this "flawed" character would be of much interest, especially if she's similar to the boring woman-child portrayed in this film. There is no redeeming character development or meaningful redemption by the end. However, I found her death quite satisfying. Darwinism!



"Don't get chumpatized!" - The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters (2007)

reply

I agree the lead character is spoiled, shallow, self-absorbed and entitled - the embodiment of "if I want it I'm entitled to it."

But some scorn should be reserved for the merchant who knowingly keeps extending her credit he knows is far beyond her husband's ability to pay and to her husband who is clueless about where all the luxurious clothes and household furnishings are coming from.

reply

[deleted]

yes Emma is definitely not the smartest person... The author was critizing and denouncing the society of his time...

reply