CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.3/10
17 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
La aventura entre una joven y un pastor protestante tiene consecuencias desastrosas.La aventura entre una joven y un pastor protestante tiene consecuencias desastrosas.La aventura entre una joven y un pastor protestante tiene consecuencias desastrosas.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 10 nominaciones en total
Lisa Andoh
- Mituba
- (as Lisa Joliffe-Andoh)
James Bearden
- Goodman Mortimer
- (as Jim Bearden)
Diane Louise Salinger
- Margaret Bellingham
- (as Diane Salinger)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
This adaptation of Nathaniel Hawthorne's novel is pretty disappointing. The casting of Demi Moore as Hester Prynne is laughable - she looks what she was at the time, a pretty, A-list, Hollywood star. Gary Oldman does slightly better as Dimmesdale - in fact he might have just saved the film - but Robert Duvall is atrocious as Roger Chillingworth; totally wrong.
The adaptation is stodgy, the story tampered with, and the direction by Roland Joffe is pedestrian. Faces like Edward Hardwicke, Tim Woodward, Roy Dotrice, and Joan Plowright, give the film some credibility, but not enough.
The adaptation is stodgy, the story tampered with, and the direction by Roland Joffe is pedestrian. Faces like Edward Hardwicke, Tim Woodward, Roy Dotrice, and Joan Plowright, give the film some credibility, but not enough.
This film, is just bad, that's all there is to it. It's just bad in so many ways. Nothing but corny writing, the scenes are just awful. All they really took from the book were it's characters and the basic idea of the story. After that, they totally f**k everything up from the book. It's one of those films that makes you wish Demi Moore would just go away for the overrated actress that she is. Just a truly awful film that's a waste of a lot of money.
Ridiculous take on the Nathaniel Hawthorne novel as those who worked on this behave like they never even read the book. In the Massachusetts Bay Colony of 1666 a young woman (Demi Moore) fears that her husband (the much older Robert Duvall) is dead after a year of absence. She befriends pastor Gary Oldman (laughable that he could ever be a religious man in a film to start with) and soon romance blossoms. The romance turns physical, a child is born (no one knows who the father is), Moore is forced to wear the titled item, Duvall returns and plots revenge on the man who impregnated his wife while he was captured by wild Indians and Oldman secretly punishes himself as Moore keeps their affair a secret from the townspeople. Where will all this lead? "The Scarlett Letter" is a really disappointing film considering that Roland Joffe' (a once great director in the 1980s who made modern masterpieces like "The Killing Fields" and "The Mission") acts like he is just not comfortable with the material and does not know how to execute the excruciating novel into a cohesive cinematic product. Oldman and Duvall, usually very dependable players, cannot cope here and Moore just continued to under-achieve in front of the camera. Void of intelligence, dim-witted and poorly paced, "The Scarlett Letter" is one of those films that has absolutely no tone and thus becomes a hard experience to get through. Turkey (0 stars out of 5).
ICK! I was actually in physical pain as I watched this movie. I feel this way for several reasons:
1. It's below Gary Oldman. Come on! He can do so much better, and has!
2. THIS IS NOT WHAT NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE WROTE! I know it's supposed to be an image of his novel, but actually incorporating some of the story into the film may have done well.
3. Demi Moore ruins everything. EVERYTHING she touches turns into some sexually explicit trash, like this was some Danielle Steele piece of crap instead of Hawthorne! Classic literature people! I read the novel in high school (which was only two years ago) and yes, it was painful, yes, I hated being forced to read it, but you can't ruin things just because you have a huge (fake) rack.
A horrible film, terrible interpretation of the novel, and the second worst film I've ever seen (the worst was "The Avengers" with Ralph Fiennes). I give it two thumbs, two toes, two whatever way way way way down.
1. It's below Gary Oldman. Come on! He can do so much better, and has!
2. THIS IS NOT WHAT NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE WROTE! I know it's supposed to be an image of his novel, but actually incorporating some of the story into the film may have done well.
3. Demi Moore ruins everything. EVERYTHING she touches turns into some sexually explicit trash, like this was some Danielle Steele piece of crap instead of Hawthorne! Classic literature people! I read the novel in high school (which was only two years ago) and yes, it was painful, yes, I hated being forced to read it, but you can't ruin things just because you have a huge (fake) rack.
A horrible film, terrible interpretation of the novel, and the second worst film I've ever seen (the worst was "The Avengers" with Ralph Fiennes). I give it two thumbs, two toes, two whatever way way way way down.
The basic sin is to not be a real adaptation of Hawthorne novel. inspired by it - yes. but nothing more. the second error is to transform a classic novel in a kind of "ad usum Delphini", in which every nuance of a great and profound drama is lost. the only significant virtue is the fight of Demi Moore and Gary Oldman to save their roles. not with real succes because the script does a so simple and pink story than nothing could change the sense of it. and the only prize is the atmosphere, costumes, and hope than another director will do a better and smart adaptation for a novel who remains one of fundamental books not only for American literature.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaWhile viewing a scene during production, Demi Moore so disliked the way her hair looked that she insisted the scene be re-shot, at her own expense.
- ErroresNicholas Rice is credited as playing the clerk, but the role was actually played by someone else.
- Bandas sonorasAgnus Dei
(Based on Samuel Barber's "Adagio for Strings")
Performed by Robert Shaw and the Robert Shaw Festival Singers
(Adm. by G. Schirmen Inc. (ASCAP))
Courtesy of Telarc International Corporation
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is The Scarlet Letter?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- The Scarlet Letter
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 46,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 10,382,407
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 4,119,086
- 15 oct 1995
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 10,382,407
- Tiempo de ejecución2 horas 15 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta