Terrible movie.
-
lotsofwordz — 18 years ago(December 19, 2007 06:39 AM)
The book isn't that good??? ROFL. Only one of the greatest books ever written, by one of the greatest novellists who ever lived.
As to the film: what a waste of film stock. To have the whiney GP as Estella is bad enough, a piece of spectacular miscasting, but to move the setting to NY is just plain dumb. The Kent and London settings are essential to the atmosphere of the story. Only an idiot would move the setting across the pond.
And frankly, anyone who sets out to modernise the story has lost the plot.
This film was done. It was done by a genius called Lean. Redoing it is nonsense. It's the modern disease that is destroying modern cinema: redo all the great films of the past, only make sure the new versions are 5th-rate (from King Kong to Great Expectations and everything inbetween). It betrays the lack of imagination and creativity of today's film-makers: they are no more than cows chewing the cud. -
-
againo — 18 years ago(December 31, 2007 10:10 AM)
Thank you for citing my error in spelling, and showing me the meaning of the word CHILDLIKE in doing so. In any case, you have a right to your opinion, but that's not what annoys me. What annoys me is people laughing at other people's opinions. Looked in the mirror lately?
-
casey-133 — 18 years ago(December 21, 2007 12:31 PM)
Wow, I can't believe how many people in this thread don't realize this is an attempt to make a MODERN adaptation of the basic story.
Sounds like a lot of you are just ticked you had to read this book for school and wanted to watch Gwen and Ethan read it to you word for word instead. The book is a classic and this film is quite good. They are separate and individual works of art. -
lotsofwordz — 18 years ago(December 30, 2007 02:24 PM)
The basic story is that there are particular rigid class divisions. Anyone who doesn't understand that hasn't understood the basic story. Clearly, the producer and director of this waste of film stock have not.
-
f-main — 18 years ago(February 01, 2008 11:31 PM)
I'm a huge Alfonso fan but I felt the pacing in this film was terrible and the narration felt to intrusive. I wanted to rate it higher, but I just couldn't. I hardly have elitist taste, some of the films I like are shunned by the movie going majority, but this movie lacked emotion and substance. I don't think it was a problem of an adaptation, it just lacked power.
I like the David Lean version better, far more entertaining. -
Johnny_cake — 18 years ago(March 20, 2008 10:13 AM)
The main flaw of the movie is that Pip makes his way with his art, whereas in the book, it is of utmost importance to the entire arc of the story that he does NOT provide his own way while still having "great expectations."
-
Unknownian — 14 years ago(January 10, 2012 07:00 PM)
I never read the book. I've heard it was a great book. I don't read many books; however, I watch a whole lot of movies. This is one of my all time favorites and perhaps one of the best motion pictures ever made.
End of Story. -
axstarxlitxsky — 12 years ago(December 16, 2013 03:50 PM)
Well said! Great expectations is one of my favourite books. I fell in love with it as a child and read at least once a year.
I realise that when you watch adaptations, you expect some changes and some artistic licence, but this film is awful. Everything is changed except the bare bones of the story. And the scenes with the young Estella and Finn (by the way, why change his name?!) are creepy. I get that Finn would be mesmerised by her, but we don't need to sexualise a little girl to understand that Finn is drawn to her.
A sad adaptation of a brilliant book. Everyone needs to read the book. You're missing so much if you don't.