ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Executscan Expected more

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Lancoor A very feeble attempt at affirmatie action

VimalaNowlis It seems that all western literature have the same theme. All tragedies are due to the stupidity of men and all comedies are due to the cleverness of women. As this movie is based on a Thomas Hardy story, it is naturally a tragedy. True to form, the stupidity of men, was the primary cause of the tragedy. Of course, a woman must be blamed especially if the woman is not content to be an obedient and docile wife to a selfish and blind husband. Clym, as a spoiled only son, only ever thought of himself. What he wants was all he cared. It never mattered what his mother wanted or what his wife wanted. He must have his way. When his wish was challenged, he blamed his mother. When his dream was shattered, he blamed his wife. Yet, he was considered the good son, the good man, the good husband, and the hero. That's the real tragedy. Eustasia, as a girl with a dream beyond the small backwards village in a harsh landscape, only dreamed of a better life in the shinny world. But the ignorant villagers shunned her as a witch. No matter what she does, she was the evil one. Her stupid selfish husband never understood because he only thought of himself and what he wants. In the end, she could only escape from her jail was to die. That's the real tragedy. That was the bleak rural life of Thomas Hardy's England. I gave the movie 7 stars because it was well staged, well acted, and focused.

hendrixst2000 This is what happens when you try to turn a richly detailed 400 page book into a 100 minute made-for-TV Hallmark Hall of Fame movie. Needless to say, much is lost. The script ignores Hardy's lush narrative and substitutes expedient blather. Characters aren't developed so they come across as shallow and one-dimensional. Wildeve's passion for Eustacia is portrayed (to cite one example) as simple lust. In the book, his feelings are more complex."As for Wildeve, his feelings are easy to guess. Obstacles were a ripening sun to his love, and he was at this moment in a delirium of exquisite misery. To clasp as his for five minutes what was another man's through all the rest of the year was a kind of thing he of all men could appreciate."Because of time constraints, events are compressed, condensed and in some cases simply deleted. The subject of Thomasin's and Clym's inheritance (and an associated lengthy and amusing gambling sequence) is completely ignored. Worse yet, Mrs. Yeobright's attempted reconciliation with her daughter-in-law, her long, torturous and dramatic journey to her son's house and back, and the subsequent repercussions, are given absurdly brief and unconscionably unfaithful treatments. Thus, the arguably most important episode in the novel, the one that precipitates all of the ensuing tragedy, is glossed over in the movie. The (strangely well-lit) climactic storm sequence was also botched.As for the acting, I thought that Catherine Zeta-Jones as Eustacia Wye and Clive Owen as Damon Wildeve were actually pretty good given what they had to work with. Of course I might not have been so charitable with CZJ if she looked more like, say, Roseanne Barr. Steven Mackintosh succeeds in capturing the quiet dignity of the Diggory Venn character. Everyone else was pretty much forgettable except for Ray Stevenson who was awful as Clym Yeobright.Another positive – good scenery, reasonably faithful to Hardy's (extensive) description of Egdon Heath.

jlowman99 I only wish it were possible to see this movie on the big screen. The scenery was magnificent. Hardy loved the English countryside and this production made me feel as though I was there and at that place in time. I loved "Far From the Madding Crowd" also, but I think Catherine Zeta-Jones is better cast as Eustacia than Julie Christy was as Bathsheba. As a matter-of-fact I think Catherine Zeta-Jones would have made a perfect Bathsheba in a "Far From the Madding Crowd" film if she could have played the part at the same age she was when she acted in "Return of the Native." (she was about 25). After all, Thomas Hardy's Bathsheba was dark-haired and beautiful. Not to say that Julie Christy was not good in the role, but she didn't have dark hair and her hair style seemed from the sixties. I would love to see an Ang Lee ("Sense and Sensability", "Brokeback Mountain", and many more films) version of either one of these movies in the future.

jesscat88 This film is an almost complete waste of time. I am studying the book for my English A level, and the film only contributes in one way, and that's getting across that the whole scenario is set in a rural idyll. The acting is wooden, the filmography is laughable, and the so called dramatic scenes in the film had the majority of my class (including me) snickering into their texts. The book, although not my favourite literary choice, is miles better than the film is, and the sound track is just plain irritating. Don't watch this film unless you are looking for a timeless, quality storyline transformed into mindless, media waste.