jstredi

I've seen it about three or four times, now. It is lovely and haunting. Fiennes has never been better; Tyler can't quite match him in the crucial scene at the end (it would have been better without tears; still I can't think of any actress who would have been better in this assignment. Anyone who doesn't know the story should be warned that this isn't David Lean's Doctor Zhivago. It was a quite small-budget film, and the story isn't "epic." It's a very ambiguous tale, where the motives of the central figure are certainly open to debate. But I think it works, the cinematography is excellent, and the music is lovely. On the whole, I would mark it higher visually than in any other category, but this is not a negative remark from me, as I love films principally for their visual quality. When I want depth, I read the book.

Fifty Million People Watched and No One Saw a Thing. . .proclaimed the film's tagline. In the case of this movie, fifty million people didn't watch and of those who did, it seems very few saw anything at all.

That this movie -- surely one of the best of the decade -- did not prove profitable is one of the reasons more good movies are not made. Just think -- there's no violence, no invented love interest, just a lot of good writing, acting, and direction.

It's also beautifully shot and has nifty music.

Definitely 10/10.

I'm very glad to see that others are discovering this widely overlooked film. Thank goodness for video stores. Though I didn't like the film as well as Peter Carey's splendid novel on which it's based, I think it a good and quite unusual movie. Deserves to be brought back to theaters.