nabirasch-30555

Half an hour too long for the short story they condensed the book into and, just when you think it's done they tag on an extra totally weird 10 minutes--my GF said 'Who are they?', regarding some characters that suddenly popped up (you had to be paying attention)--I suppose just to round out some arty ending in the book. The main development--a trial-- is undigestible. You';; scratch your head wondering at theDA going to court with such a laughably weak case. The 'twist' is predictable but again laughable since it verges on incredible. Better denouements were available. Still a good film for the scenery and competently acted despite the wobbly plot. 7 for the white washed environment and the acting crew.

The whole saga of books is stolen from the excellent Hornblower novels. Anybody familiar with the Hornblower books (or even crusing under sail) would spot Crowe's captain as nincompoopley incompetent. 'Ye'll not catch me a 3rd time!' he shouts as due to sheer stupidity he's almost let his ship fall into enemy hands twice in the 1st part of the flick. Having run out of wind by this point the screen writers fall into that old trope of having the vessel skip over from the Atlantic to the Pacific, via the obligatory Horn scene, where the plot meanders into The Voyage of the Beagle.

Great as a curiosity and 3 stars for the laughs.

It kind of works on an art house film level. Unrealistically pious types who think that a woman in her twenties can't be conned by a legally juvenile guy should stay clear. It's likely getting a lot of backing for awards because it's full of Hollywood 'in' jokes--only one or two of which likely resonate with the general audience. I sort of enjoyed it, altho it was a slow ride to a predictable place, but my girl friend was horrified by the critical acclaim and said 'Gimme a hundred thou and I can make a movie that bad too.' 6.5/10.