Tess of the D'Urbervilles

After reading the book this movie was based on, I was excited to learn that A&E made a film version made. I absolutely loved the adaptation. It stayed pretty true to the novel, and it was wonderful to be able to visually see the setting Hardy was writing about, as well as the characters. The performances of the actors was extraordinary, and Tess in particular was compelling. If you are going to watch the video, be sure to set aside 3 hours at one time, because you will not even want to pause it just to refill the popcorn bowl!

Though all three adaptations I've seen have been very good in their own way, the other two being the Polanski film and the Gemma Arterton mini-series, all three do a noble job adapting a literary classic. Of the three personal favourite and best has to go to this version, and while that it is the most faithful of the three to the book what is done on its own is even more remarkable. The locations are evocative and manage in being really beautiful and atmospheric. The photography matches those qualities with its richness, this is a really beautifully shot adaptation and of the three versions it is the most striking visually. The music adds a lot to the atmosphere too, a great mix of haunting and emotive, very well suited for the nature of the story and the impact of Tess' plight. The dialogue is intelligent and has the spirit of Hardy's writing with the vivid descriptions and his way of words, phrases and poetry. The story really packs a powerful impact and adapted in a way that doesn't make the telling of it feel too complicated. the ending is absolutely heart-breaking. The acting from the three leads is spot on. Justine Waddell is a Tess that we feel immediately feel sympathy for and Waddell also brings dignity to the character. Oliver Milburn's Angel Clare has a sense of optimism though he doesn't make him too one-dimensional, we still get a sense that Angel Clare is not as innocent as he seems. In contrast we have Jason Flemying who portrays Alec as a genuine sleaze and cad and in a malevolent way but there is still the sense that he did love Tess. All in all, brilliant and the best of the three adaptations personally seen of Tess of the D'Urbevilles, if there is a better version I've yet to see it and it has to be really amazing to beat this. 10/10 Bethany Cox

I first saw this as a 3 parter on UK ITV in 1998 and was bowled over by it - imho it's the best ever screen adaptation of any Thomas Hardy novel full stop. Over the years I've seen many films and TV plays adapted from his books many of them very good, but all of them way behind this outstanding LWT (RIP)/ A&E co-production.

Poor, pure and simple country girl gets buffeted by Fate between 2 wealthy men, one essentially bad and the other essentially good, and she nobly suffers all the emotional troubles they bring her. All of the phases of her life as delineated by Hardy are brought out in the screenplay by Ted Whitehead, who did an excellent job in condensing down a long complex novel into a mere 3 hours but still not losing anything of importance. The rosy photography is lovingly and befittingly Constable/Turneresque with so many gorgeous hues and colours of simple rustic scenes and is never rushed - Hardy would surely have approved! The anguished music reflects the emotions at all stages and complements the visual sumptuousness of it all. One very minor niggle was the sometimes sloppy sound dubbing - they presumably had to work to get the accents correct later in the studio. Jason Flemyng as Alec was suitably caddish and young Oliver Milburn was realistically idealistic. But excellent as this was in all departments Justine Waddell was still the best thing about this production: she fitted my idea of tragic Tess perfectly - was she Fated to play her? If you don't crack into a million pieces when she repeatedly whispers "It's too late" to Angel you're made of sterner stuff than me!

If you like Hardy's novels you shouldn't miss this, it's a beautiful, heartbreaking, haunting and vividly memorable version of the tragedy.

Shortly after reading this book for the first time, I ordered this movie and loved it. I had had rather mixed feelings towards the book while reading it (kind of a love-hate relationship), and this film actually made me like the entire story much better. I liked it so much that only a couple weeks later I ordered the 2008 version, and just finished watching it last night. Wow, what a difference! Although the 2008 one has the advantage of some higher quality filming and an extra hour of screen time (more is usually better in my mind when it comes to my literature-based time period films), I found the newer to be considerably inferior to this one! This version has a MUCH better cast all around. I don't think you can beat this actress's rendition of Tess; I knew she was good in it, but couldn't fully appreciate HOW good until I saw the other version. 1998 Tess is way more convincing than 2008 Tess. My heart goes out to her, whereas 2008 Tess actually got on my nerves. 1998 Angel is much much better as well. The difference in both roles is astounding. I even thought the smaller parts, like Tess's parents and the other milkmaids, were better done in this one. The only exception I make, is that I did think the 2008 Alec D'Urberville more like how I pictured him when I read the book; 1998 Alec does a fine job, is more subtle in his portrayal, but simply does not match so much what I thought he would look and sound like.

Although there is an hour less in this film than the other, I still felt like this one is more generally accurate. I am much more tolerant of deletions from book to film (of course they can't fit everything in) than I am about alterations. There was more material in the 2008 version, but they took more liberties, which simply annoys me. This version, while it couldn't have every detail, what was there was very accurate for the most part. And it captures the story in its entirety quite well for its time constraints.

If you're a Jane Austen fan (as I am), understand that this is NOT a Jane Austen story, which tend to be like fairy tales with happy endings; there are "bad guys" in her books, but they are not a real hindrance to the real heroines. This is a grittier story, not set in the posh genteel society of the gentry and nobility; lots of low people, lots of hard labor, lots of reality. And there are the "bad guys", and then those characters which tread the line between "good" and "bad". It's definitely more complex, definitely more drama, but very worthwhile if you're up to it and know what you're getting into. If it is your first experience with this story, don't expect your viewing to be a relaxing ride. There is plenty to make you furious, happy, sad...lots of strong emotions.

When I first read this book, it was something of an emotional roller coaster (I'd absolutely adore one character, only to hate them intensely a few chapters later, and so on), but now that I'm more familiar with the story, I can appreciate it better. It sinks under your skin and makes you keep thinking about it. This movie leaves you like that, too. It's an excellent rendition of an excellent book.

I watched Tess on TV when it was first aired an I was totally blown away! I knew nothing about Thomas Hardy or the novel and was very impressed not only by the shocking story and plot twists but the sensitivity of the acting to the characters. All of the characters qualities and faults are portrayed in such a way that it is not so easy for the audience to judge Angel as good and Alec as bad. It is highly relevant to controversial issues in society today (as with many of Hardy's novels) and you should watch it with an open mind. Since watching, I have not only read the novel but most of Hardy's other novels. I would certainly recommend anyone who enjoyed this to read Hardy and other similar writers such as Wilkie Collins.