Sabrina

Passable but overlong remake of the classic Audrey Hepburn vehicle will play best for those not familiar with the original. The cast(Harrison Ford, Julia Ormond, Greg Kinnear) performs well and its production values are high but director Sydney Pollack's pacing tends to flag. By contrast, Billy Wilder's direction of the 1954 version is much tighter and quicker. Interestingly this "Sabrina" is 15 minutes longer than its predecessor but thanks to Pollack those extra 15 minutes feel like 30. Also, Barbara Benedek's and David Rayfiel's script lacks the wittiness that scenarists Billy Wilder, Samuel Taylor("Vertigo") and Ernest Lehman("The Prize," "North by Northwest") provided the first time around.

Bottom line: 6 out 10.

I really liked this film. The acting, the music, the dialogue, the gorgeous scenes of Paris and New England, and the glamourous parties. Julia Ormond is no Audrey Hepburn, but who is? I think she hit all the right notes as the shy, clumsy girl who goes away, blossoms, and comes home confident and glamourous. Ormond's Sabrina never loses her innocence or her good heart. Greg Kinnear was hilarious as the lovable ladies' man (and looks a lot like William Holden in the original). Nancy Marchand was hysterically funny as the crabby Mrs. Larabee, and John Wood turned in a good performance as Sabrina's father.

But I did have a harder time with Harrison Ford's Linus. He seemed too dark and too greedy to buy as loving Sabrina, even when he called off the merger. It always seemed to ring false in a way. He seemed a lot like the character of Richard in "Caroline in the City".

But I regress. This is a very good movie!

The temptation to compare it with the 1954 version is not small. And it is a good thing because the film has the force to use its voice. Julia Ormond is realy Sabrina. And Harrison Ford is a revelation as Linus. But, for me, the authetic good points are Miriam Colon as lovely Rosa and Nancy Marchand as wise,fascinating Maude Larrabee. Short, a seductive film.

Although terribly predictable and a bit too long, this film is kind of sweet. Ford shines as in his typical role of comically aloof and Ormand plays her lead well. Good chemistry and cinematography.

Many critiques on this site suppose that it is somehow superior to the original. I am not sure how this can hold up. While Harrison Ford and Greg Kinnear are fine actors in their own right, comparing them to the coupling of Bogart and Holden is ridiculous. Just because a movie is OLD does not make it better, but if it is impeccably filmed and acted superbly, what is the point in redoing it to inferior standards? I suggest that the state of movie-making has in fact declined, as the art form has given way to popular sentiment, over-the-top portrayals of characters, and remakes which attempt to market themselves on previous successful attempts. To say that someone who repainted a Michaelangelo has made it somewhat made it better because painting has "evolved" is equally as stupid as saying any remake improves. And while Audrey Hepburn is not the world's finest actress, she has a unique cinematic quality which cannot be imitated or reproduced, much like her co-stars in this film. Please Hollywood, stop reproducing classics simply because there is a drought of originality and screenplays. Try rereleasing these classics so the public can see movies as they were meant to be viewed.