Sargasso Sea - Im Meer der Leidenschaft

A young woman (Karina Lombard) marries an Englishman (Nathaniel Parker) in mid-1800s' Jamaica to save her plantation. Rachel Ward plays her mother, Michael York her stepfather and Martine Beswick her aunt, all three being small roles.

"Wide Sargasso Sea" (1993) is an adult-oriented historical drama that's a quasi-prequel to "Jane Eyre." I say "quasi" because the 1966 novel the movie was based on was written by Jean Rhys 119 years after the release of Charlotte Bronte's "Jane Eyre" in 1847. In other words, "Wide Sargasso Sea" is Rhys' proposed prequel of that famous story, not the official one.

The movie works better if you are familiar with "Jane Eyre," but it's not absolutely necessary. Naturally, "Wide Sargasso Sea" gives you a better understanding of what's happening in "Jane Eyre," which has been made into several movies, e.g. the 1970 version with George C. Scott & Susannah York, which is the only version I've seen.

The best thing about this movie is the setting, cast and style. It successfully takes you back in time to Jamaica circa early 1850s. The two protagonists are thoroughly convincing, as are Claudia Robinson as Antoinette's nurse, an obeah (voodoo) witch, and Rowena King as Amelie, an island girl who thinks she's hotter than she is. Really, the whole cast rises to the challenge.

There's a revolt by ex-slaves in the first act that's both realistic and harrowing. The story gets brighter with Antoinette & Edward's honeymoon, but takes a dark turn in the second half. I didn't feel there was enough cause to justify Edward's metamorphosis. The filmmakers' should've made this clearer. There's a measure of ugliness with the last half being downbeat. If you can handle that, it's worth checking out. It basically mixes Brando's "Burn!" (1969) with "The Piano" (1993) and "Sirens" (1994), the latter two debuting within a year after this one.

The film runs 1 hour and 38 minutes and was shot in Jamaica with a small bit in England.

GRADE: B-

Anyone who has ever read Jane Eyre, Charlotte Bronte's brooding masterpiece, knows the adult, world-weary Edward Rochester. They also know about the secret locked in the tower room of Thornfield Hall. What Charlotte never fully explains is how Mr. Rochester came to be the aloof, stony man he is and how is wife came to be mad.

Well, The Wide Sargasso Sea attempts to answer those questions. In my opinion The Wide Sargasso Sea does an excellent job.

This is a vivid and sensual film, and depending on the version you see, VERY explicit. But in this case I think the nudity and sexual activity is justified and not gratuitous.

Nathaniel Parker gives a stunning performance as Rochester. I recommend this one.

I like to watch The Wide Sargasso Sea first and then put on my VHS of the splendid A&E production of Jane Eyre with Ciarn Hinds as Rochester. The two follow each other beautifully and seen together, the puzzle of Edward Rochester is solved, at least to my satisfaction.

The Wide Sargasso Sea is one of the most beautiful books ever written. Following a string of only mildly successful novels and short stories, Rhys disappeared off the radar, and many believed her dead. She was discovered years later living in seclusion on the south of England. Throughout her house were numerous manuscripts forming what became The Wide Sargasso Sea. The novel was a labour of love for Rhys in a sense, but despite the critical acclaim it received she described the success as (I paraphrase) too little too late.

Rhys' novel details the relationship between the Rochester of Jane Eyre and Antoinette, his first wife. The novel, however, is not truly about this. The true importance of the story is the oppression of Antoinette by her husband and society as a whole. She is a Creole: inherently hot blooded and passionate. Rochester cannot handle this aspect of her nature, and attempts to remove it from her but cannot; it is inherent.

The film suggests that Anotinette descends into madness. This is not what Rhys wished to demonstrate. Antoinette never went insane, but rather the anger if her treatment at the hands of Rochester drove her to an act of rashness, but not madness. In her actions at the end of the film, Antoinette is not losing control, but rather regaining it.

This is lost in the film. The beautiful story is diminished considerably. The first two sections of the novel are reduced to 10 minutes, making the whole plot seem rushed. This was, it would appear, to make was for as much gratuitous nudity as possible.

All that redeems the film (and the only reason I rated it a 3 and not a 1) is the beautiful depiction of the scenery. I suggest people who have read the book avoid the film, and those interested in both stick to the novel and stay well away from this.

This movie takes a great, rich, wonderful novel and reduces it to the level of near soft porn. So much time is spent on silly, pointless nude scenes that the plot has to be severely condensed. Major plot points seem to happen suddenly, without context or explanation and characters are poorly developed And the nude scenes aren't even very good, they were just cheesy - after the second or third time Rochester and Antoinette stripped, I was laughing out loud.

The film has some great Jamaican locations, but that's about the only good thing I can say for it.

Sumptuous-looking, beautifully photographed, meticulously produced....this movie seems to do everything right visually. But its story, very engaging in the first half, runs out of steam in the second. Story points and character motivations are often muddled, and I never got a complete and clear idea of where and when exactly the passionate love affair between the two basic characters started to go wrong. And yes, it is sometimes erotic (mostly thanks to the very beautiful Karina Lombard), but it never becomes as steamy as you may have heard. (**1/2)