"Far From the Madding Crowd"

[Stewball]

It's hard for a period piece not to be good if the production values are there, but also it's hard to excel as well. The fly in this ointment is the Sgt. Troy character whose polar opposites are so extreme, and Bathsheba's acceptance of him so out of character, it wakes one up from trying to believe the story at all--and nevermind his cheap-shot reincarnation. [spoiler]It also misses a perfect closing quote. When she repeatedly says to "ask me" (again) but he remains silent, he should have asked, "So then, I've tamed you?", which she'd said he could never do.[/spoiler]

Perfect!

Ahem, this could be used as an alternate, or only, ending in the DVD release, for small fee of course (c).
If only these people would learn to use all the resources available out here.

[ShogunRua]

As always with adaptation of classic literature, I have to ask; did you read the original Thomas Hardy novel?

Incidentally, it's my opinion that it's almost impossible to faithfully adapt Victorian novels of manners into film form. Without the internal thoughts and subtle cues of the book, it ends up being too obvious, on-the-nose, and simplistic.

[Stewball]

As always with adaptation of classic literature, I have to ask; did you read the original Thomas Hardy novel?

Incidentally, it's my opinion that it's almost impossible to faithfully adapt Victorian novels of manners into film form. Without the internal thoughts and subtle cues of the book, it ends up being too obvious, on-the-nose, and simplistic.

No, I read little non-fiction, getting most of that from film. But according to the synopsis I read, this is one of the more faithful cinematic renditions of a novel (or history on which it is based for that matter) that I've done any research on in a good while. And Hardy, btw, revised it twice. The elements pertaining to Sgt. Troy and the ending are as described. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of all this is the pro-feminist viewpoint from a 19th Century British male, which would be considered very politically incorrect by modern standards.

[ShogunRua]

Stewie, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there is simply no way to "faithfully adapt" a 400+ page Victorian novel of manners. For starters, it would be have to be 4+ hours long.

Secondly, there is just no way to convey the minute descriptions, emotions, thoughts, and facial expressions that make up the bulk of such novels without doing so in an excessively obvious, cartoonish manner. You would know this if you had read more classic literature.

[Stewball]

Stewie, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there is simply no way to "faithfully adapt" a 400+ page Victorian novel of manners. For starters, it would be have to be 4+ hours long.

Secondly, there is just no way to convey the minute descriptions, emotions, thoughts, and facial expressions that make up the bulk of such novels without doing so in an excessively obvious, cartoonish manner. You would know this if you had read more classic literature.

Descriptions, emotions and facial expressions, in the hands of the right director and actor(s), could be accomplished in a sophisticated manner in seconds. If a picture is worth a thousand words, a one second video shot could be worth a million. And I think many of the people who are down on voice overs, are so because it is so effective at communicating written thoughts--word for word if necessary. To some purists it just doesn't seem fair.

[Suture Self]

As always with adaptation of classic literature, I have to ask; did you read the original Thomas Hardy novel?

Incidentally, it's my opinion that it's almost impossible to faithfully adapt Victorian novels of manners into film form. Without the internal thoughts and subtle cues of the book, it ends up being too obvious, on-the-nose, and simplistic.

I thought the latest Jane Eyre adaptation by Cary Fukunaga was quite good. With a focus on close-ups and an ominous atmosphere it does a terrific job translating the internal thoughts and subtle cues from the book into visual expressions more in line with a film medium. That's not to say it was a perfect adaptation, but again, it was quite good! In the right hands, I think a Victorian novel can be done on screen.

[Stewball]

As always with adaptation of classic literature, I have to ask; did you read the original Thomas Hardy novel?

Incidentally, it's my opinion that it's almost impossible to faithfully adapt Victorian novels of manners into film form. Without the internal thoughts and subtle cues of the book, it ends up being too obvious, on-the-nose, and simplistic.

I thought the latest Jane Eyre adaptation by Cary Fukunaga was quite good. With a focus on close-ups and an ominous atmosphere it does a terrific job translating the internal thoughts and subtle cues from the book into visual expressions more in line with a film medium. That's not to say it was a perfect adaptation, but again, it was quite good! In the right hands, I think a Victorian novel can be done on screen.

It probably fits with my preference for film fiction, but my favorite period piece is Belle, which is based on a script with a modern viewpoint and a fantastic, historic painting of the two main characters, where they actually look more attractive than their cinematic counterparts.