Most Helpful Customer Reviews
20 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Who knew Puritans could be so...cool, March 18, 2005
Fans of Joffe's "The Scarlet Letter" plead with people to disregard the book and take the movie on its own merits. This is absurd reasoning, as a remake of any sort invites comparisons by its very nature. It is particularly pointless in this case, because even if there had been no novel to compare it with, "The Scarlet Letter" would still have been an embarassing flop.
Although obstensibly set in a 17th century Puritan community, the movie makes no attempt whatsoever to establish time and place through characterization or action. Demi Moore's character is a free thinking, independant woman who befriends her pagan neighbors (who act like stereotypical hippies) and politely ignores the scorn of the town elders. In other words, she's a cool 90's chick. Gary Oldman is a strong yet sensitive type with a goatee, respectful to women and the local native tribes. He's a cool 90's dude. Granted there have been independant thinkers in every age, but this degree of anachronism makes about as much sense as a caveman invenitng a computer out of rocks and hides.
Since Demi and Gary are both free-thinkers in a repressive (i.e. uncool) society, you just know they're going to get together as soon as Demi's husband dies. When she ends up pregnant though, and her husband turns out to be alive, she just accepts the situation and moves on with self-assured smugness. Of course, her uncool neighbors can't accept this situation, but no matter how much they condemn her, it only makes Demi's resolve stronger. For his part, Gary longs to reveal himself as the father (sensitive guy that he is) but Demi insists that he remain quiet so she can nobly go endure the community's ire alone. Of course, you just know they'll end up together in the end.
Perhaps the worst thing about "The Scarlet Letter" is the numerous missed opportunities to inject emotionally mature drama. Demi's character is a born and raised Puritan, shouldn't she feel some guilt and shame over her situation? Why is Gary, a man from a patriarchal society, submissively letting Demi tell him what to do? Does the Puritan community have any sense of structure and purpose besides condeming people? Unfortunately, none of these angles are explored. Instead we are supposed to focus solely on the juvenile, "this couple is too cool for their environment" plotline.
Yes there is a steamy sex-scene, but so what? Perhaps if they had steered the movie more in this direction, they could have made it a stimulating (but still silly) bit of erotica. Unfortunately "The Scarlet Letter" was intended to be drama, and with its sophmoric story and absurd characters, that is a pretense it simply can't live up to.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
34 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Freely, very very freely, adapted from the novel, February 12, 2001
There's a disclaimer which flashes on the screen at the beginning of this 1995 film. It says it is "freely adapted from the novel" by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Then it goes on to tell the famous story through the eyes of twentieth century feminism, sexual freedom and politically correct happy endings. I must admit I never did read the book, but I've long been aware of the general plot, set in 1666, of an adulteress forced to wear the scarlet letter "A". Demi Moore is cast as Hester Pryne, the adulteress, and we all know what's going to happen to her. She's been sent to America to establish a home; her husband is supposed to be following soon. She shocks the good people of the Massachusetts Bay Colony when she insists on living alone, with the help of a couple of bondsmen and a female black slave. I doubt if Hawthorne's book then had the local minister, played by Gary Oldman, do a little nude swimming on Hester's property. I also doubt that Hawthorne had her peeking, getting excited and sensuously soaking in a bathtub, displaying her own nude body and thinking about the pastor. The couple declare their love for each other but it is only after they think her husband dead that they consummate their relationship. Her pregnancy is a crime and she spends the last six months of her confinement in a horrible prison. Then she is forced to wear the scarlet letter and is shunned by all. She refuses to name her lover, and so Oldman sulks around town, looking guilty but keeping his mouth shut. This is a great role for any actress, but Demi Moore just can't handle it. She might have a nice body but the expression on her face seems to be frozen, incapable of the subtleties, passion and despair that the role calls for. Gary Oldman is slightly better, but his portrayal of the weakling pastor is also one-dimensional. The film is saved, however, by the role of Robert Duvall, who appears late, but yet steals the show with his impassioned portrayal of the wronged husband bent on revenge. He dominates every scene he's in and a single expression on his face tells more about his character than the combined performances of the rest of the entire cast. The story is a good one, and it moved fast enough to hold my interest, especially since there were some action scenes added that Hawthorne had probably never intended. That's why I can't recommend it unless you're willing to just relax and watch a well-plotted historical romance with mediocre acting.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
17 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
This is one CONFUSED movie !!, September 10, 2002
Hawthorne's moving tale of tragedy and tolerance has been so twisted as to be nearly unrecognisible. In it's place is a confused action flic which culminates in a macbre game of musical chairs at the scaffold. First it's "hang the witches", then it's "hang Hester Pryne", then finally let's "hang the minister !" In the end, no one hangs due to a convenient and bloody Indian Uprising. That none of these things were present in Hawthorne's masterpiece is apparently of no consequence. This is a good movie to lend to a kid who is too lazy to read the book, and who you have a grudge against.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
