michaelplewa
Joined Sep 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges6
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews18
michaelplewa's rating
Watching the oh-so-British-television production from 1995 having just read the book was an exercise in frustrating artistic restraint. Everything is too-bright; gauzy pastels overburden the frame. And many of the performances suggest most of the cast was incapable of more than recitation of Austen's words. In other words, I didn't like it - though admittedly the leads are good. Well, then I saw this version.
This version is overwrought and underthought. High school students are taught that this story is supposed to be a satire. The filmmakers here, apparently, missed all of that. They read this is a terrifyingly grim psychological thriller and went overboard on the post-production re-touching to make it look more like "Lord of the Rings" and less like the countryside of England romanticized by Austen herself.
Sorry, I'm all for artistic license but this movie completely misses the nuance and humor of the original text, not to mention most if not of all of the emotional beats. It's a long book and honestly it should have been a long movie. Praise of the "Robert Altman" quality of the film is foolish - major moments of dialogue are spoken over not only by nearby inconsequential characters but also the shoddy music mix in the final cut.
And the camera work is subpar, at times resembling a TV-movie with it's showy zooms, long takes and lack of interesting angles. It's all shoulder-height perspectives and sun-drenched backlighting.
In the words of my high school English teachers and the l33t - FAIL.
This version is overwrought and underthought. High school students are taught that this story is supposed to be a satire. The filmmakers here, apparently, missed all of that. They read this is a terrifyingly grim psychological thriller and went overboard on the post-production re-touching to make it look more like "Lord of the Rings" and less like the countryside of England romanticized by Austen herself.
Sorry, I'm all for artistic license but this movie completely misses the nuance and humor of the original text, not to mention most if not of all of the emotional beats. It's a long book and honestly it should have been a long movie. Praise of the "Robert Altman" quality of the film is foolish - major moments of dialogue are spoken over not only by nearby inconsequential characters but also the shoddy music mix in the final cut.
And the camera work is subpar, at times resembling a TV-movie with it's showy zooms, long takes and lack of interesting angles. It's all shoulder-height perspectives and sun-drenched backlighting.
In the words of my high school English teachers and the l33t - FAIL.
So I thought, hey, why not see this - mindless date movie with attractive leads and exotic locales, right? Lots of underwater footage, beachy locations, sexy but not too sexy - no big deal, right? Wow. The writers REALLY don't get what a romantic comedy is supposed to be at all. They also, it should be noted, have no idea how to write a filmable script.
There are far too many scenes of characters sharing expository dialogue (which is fine if it happens once, maybe twice) to help the lesser minds in the audience catch up. But the plot is so needlessly convoluted that after the overdrawn setup is finally explained these hacks manage to make you 1) still not understand what the hell is going on and 2) not care anymore.
Boredom sets in early as numerous subplots are cast aside for a handful of overplayed ones. The "in debt to gangsters" plot, the "stern but benevolent father figure" plot and the always exciting "come on, it's obvious you two are still in love" plot.
Some side notes: too many people are killed, shot or mortally maimed by geysering tide waters. Seriously, I can handle Rambo but not in this movie. Also, the climactic plane crash played for laughs in the trailer? It's played for heavy, heavy suspense and drama in the movie. Tone deaf writing and direction.
The cast, it should be noted, with the exception of one terribly written part that sadly would humiliate any actor, comes off alright by the credits - you can't fault their professional devotion to the craft, even if it is in service of such crappy amateur material like this script.
There are far too many scenes of characters sharing expository dialogue (which is fine if it happens once, maybe twice) to help the lesser minds in the audience catch up. But the plot is so needlessly convoluted that after the overdrawn setup is finally explained these hacks manage to make you 1) still not understand what the hell is going on and 2) not care anymore.
Boredom sets in early as numerous subplots are cast aside for a handful of overplayed ones. The "in debt to gangsters" plot, the "stern but benevolent father figure" plot and the always exciting "come on, it's obvious you two are still in love" plot.
Some side notes: too many people are killed, shot or mortally maimed by geysering tide waters. Seriously, I can handle Rambo but not in this movie. Also, the climactic plane crash played for laughs in the trailer? It's played for heavy, heavy suspense and drama in the movie. Tone deaf writing and direction.
The cast, it should be noted, with the exception of one terribly written part that sadly would humiliate any actor, comes off alright by the credits - you can't fault their professional devotion to the craft, even if it is in service of such crappy amateur material like this script.