Remando al viento

After watching this film, I thought to myself that it was an interesting film, and there were individual scenes which were strong. However, the pacing seemed to be a bit off, and somehow the flow of the film didn't feel right. Then, I noticed that the version I saw was 95 minutes long, while the original version was 126 minutes long. That's thirty whole minutes cut! As far as I'm concerned, this is criminal! Obviously, Miramax re-released this film during early 1999 in order to cash in on Hugh Grant and Elizabeth Hurley. In the process, they cut the film to shreds, and perhaps rearranged the scenes around to make it more "coherent."

I've always been fond of Rowing with the Wind. Admittedly, it's flawed: the characters are stiffly presented and excessively iconic, and the dialog is often just a series of aphorisms. It would have benefited from a more naturalistic 'mud on the hem' approach. I also believe the American backers insisted a lot of footage be cut out of the original version so that might account for some of the problems. But, on the plus side, the cinematography is gorgeous, the Fantasia on a Theme music is lovely, and the movie does have an elegant feel. I suspect the director was aiming for a somewhat arthouse, dreamlike approach. It might not quite work but it does have its moments.

The recurring presence of the Creature is, I'd suggest, meant to be a psychological projection of the characters growing instabilities and griefs. It's also, I think, a symbol of mortality. Initially the principal characters are shown as young, beautiful, and talented but their lives are haunted by premature death and sadness. Mary's life was even more challenging than the film indicates; three of her four children died in infancy or by miscarriage. I think the movie is suggesting that her real 'child' was the literary one of the Creature; Mary says in a couple of scenes that she feels the Creature has escaped from the book and become real and, in a sense, that did become true; in the two centuries since the novel was written Frankenstein and his monster have become immortal, especially when compared to the tragically short lives of many of the people associated with the original story.

I disagree with most of the critics, I think it's an excellent film. Camera, music, colors, everything is an harmonic combination. The only possible critic might be, the film can be a little be pretentious, but I would never describe it as tedious. You like it or hate it, I am fortunate ones.

You could stop this picture on any frame and have a beautiful photograph suitable for framing. That is the only good thing I can say about it. The acting is generally horrible (although I did like Mr. Gomez) and the former reviewer's description of the hilarity of Hugh Grant howling in a boat is spot on. I blame the writing and directing. Most of these actors are capable of much better when given decent direction and decent dialogue to speak. The female characters are not shown to have any talent of their own, as we know at least Mrs. Shelley surely did. On the other hand, the men don't display much talent, either! This whole film is a bit like a soap opera on TV, but the acting doesn't rise to that quality. Turn the sound off and enjoy its visual beauty.

At a mansion by a lagoon nearly Geneva reunite (1816) various known characters as Lord Byron (Hugh Grant), the poet Percy Shelley (Valentine Pelka), his fiancée (Lizzy McInnery), her stepsister Claire (Elizabeth Hurley) and Doctor Polidori (Jose Luis Gomez), Byron ex-lover and secretary . The movie is situated in the time when Mary Shelley wrote her novel "Frankenstein". There happens mysterious events with appearance a fantastic personage trying to scare each other and then occurs unfortunate deaths . Meanwhile , Mary Shelley has fabled and hallucinatory nightmares .

This haunting film is based on real events about famous characters as the eccentric poet Lod Byron, , his secretary Doctor Polidori, Percy Bysshe Shelley and Mary Shelley . It concerns the deeds were inspired to write their classic Gothic novels , as Mary Shelley created ¨Frankestein¨ and Doctor Polidori wrote ¨The vampire¨. It's a romantic drama paced in slow-moving , enjoyable visuals and some nudism . It packs glamorous gowns by Ivonne Blake , Oscar winner for ¨Nicholas and Alexandra¨. Luxurious scenarios by Wolfgang Burmann , such as interior with lush palaces and breathtaking mansion from Venice (including a giraffe where resides Byron) and exteriors filmed in Norway , Venice, Veneto, Switzerland , Toledo , Asturias (beaches of Llanes), Spain. Colorful and brilliant cinematography by Carlos Suarez, director's brother . Stunning score with a sensitive leitmotif by Alejandro Masso , adding classical music by Bethoven , Mozart and Paganini . The picture was beautifully directed by Gonzalo Suarez who gives special treatment this interesting flick.

This story was formerly depicted in the ancient classic ¨The bride of Frankestein¨ by James Whale in which Elsa Lanchester played Mary Shelley . Subsequently in 1986 Ken Russell directed ¨Gothic¨ with Natasha Richardson as Mary , Gabriel Byrne and Julian Sands in similar characters and full of ordinary Russell's bag of tricks . And the same tale was told two years later by Ivan Passer who directed ¨Haunted summer (1988)¨ with Eric Stolz , Alice Krige and Laura Dern . But I think that ¨Rowing with the wind¨ is better than ¨Gothic¨ and ¨Haunted summer¨.