Genres

Visitors Review

2013-05-16 06:32:24

Too bad there is no negative scale...

If there were, I would give this movie a perfect -10. Not only this movie reduced the novel to three colorful copulations and one as wonderful birth scenes, but it doesn't even stand as a work by its own. In fact, the person with whom I watched this movie, who didn't happen to read that particular Hardy's novel, couldn't understand of anything what was going on. Just a jumble-mumble of episodes, play with movie color, terrible acting, horiffic character development and so much more that I could write a whole novel, just on how uninventive this movie was. Thankfully, I don't have too; instead just a pick the original novel by T. Hardy, "Jude the Obscure" and you will have the chance to experience the utter tragedy of Jude's life dreams, demonizing Sue, of Phillotson's destroyed life and of the ultimate life's winner: Arabella. When Hardy's wrote that novel he got such an angered reaction because of its realism and unconventionality, he never wrote any novels again. Let's hope that that the director of this picture will never have a chance to shoot any more movies, but for the different reason: stylized, heartless and cold movies disguised under such a prominent novel could be and should be forgotten.

Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat 2013-05-15 21:39:02

Harrowing and compelling screen adaptation of Thomas Hardy's novel set in 19th century England

Charles Thomas Tatum, Jr. 2013-04-10 13:51:03

Searing emotional tale

While the novel is famous, this film tries to do it justice. Eccleston andWinslet are marvelous, the direction is thankfully unstodgy, and the lookisgrim. Griffiths, however, is all wrong as Arabella, and the screenplay isso loaded with sex and unconnected scenes, it almost sinks the goodwill ofthe rest of the cast. I give this a strong 8, and do not let your childrenanywhere near the TV when you rent this.

ShellyShock 2013-04-10 03:50:18

Hardy would be ashamed . . .

I must say that I watched this movie with a jaded eye, I had just finishedreading `Jude the Obscure' and expected to see the philosophical, socialandmental complexity the book contained reflected in the film. I was so very,very wrong. The plot meanders roughly to the book, glazing over most oftheSchopenhauer-driven importance of suffering and welcoming of the deathwish.As Jude and his illegitimate wife/ cousin Sue make their way throughabjectpoverty, the plot drags on so much that the misery the two main charactersis nothing compared to the misery of watching this movie. To make mattersworse, the director throws in a nude scene that has no purpose, notfurthering the plot nor matching with the rest of the movie.My best advice is to pawn the movie and use that money to buy the book.Evencliff notes would be better than this poor literary ripoff.

2013-04-04 09:16:33

ow!

i think it is important to note in reading this review that upon seeing this movie i had never read the book. having said that i found this movie thoroughly engrossing. it peeks around corners and through windows giving you the feeling of a vouyeur spying on this mans life as it hits bottom after bottom. the effect of this feeling is that you become involved in the story in a more emotionaly realistic way. i for one did not realize how involved i had become until halfway through when things actualy looked to be going well for the characters it is of course then that they are thrown a shovel and new lows are discovered leading to the crushing final scene that left me with one conclusion... this movie hurts. i imagine would only hold true for people who have yet to read the book and are generaly unfamiliar with the story

BasF 2013-04-03 23:58:01

Gripping lovestory

This is a beautiful, sad and very gripping lovestory. One of the reallygreat lovestories in cinema, maybe even more intense then for instance"GoneWith The Wind", "Romeo And Julliet" or "Love Story" ( though the last oneisin fact on a comepletely different level). This is the story of two peoplewho are made and meant for each other, but by fate, social conventions atthe end of the nineteenth century and all kind of other misfortune, areprevented from becoming happy together. Off course there are more storiesabout this subject, but this one of the most powerfull ones I have everseen!

2013-03-30 08:57:38

be faithful to yourself

One of my all time favorites. Throughout the whole movie you keep askingyourself why, and you always know the answer. The movie that makes youreview your beliefs, that sets your life back on the right track(for sometime at least), that, although utterly depressing, makes you walk out ofthecinema one foot off the ground.

philip tissandier 2013-03-29 22:36:45

The aesthetics of Hardy

This film moves you. In its beauty, in its tragedy. The aesthetics of thenovel by Hardy, the Wessex landscapes, the doomed pursuit of love, are thereto behold. Whatever artifice the filmmakers had to create in their pursuitof producing a beautiful lasting work of art, was worth it judging by theend product. Their achievement is complete.

camel-9 2013-03-27 07:41:10

mid-800's England love and tragedy

There are some beautiful scenes of crowded places and greatcinematography.The way the camera is held, moved, and framed on moving people is notable.Don't see this film if you have children. The tragic ending is too sadandmight be too painful to watch.

2013-03-26 14:35:06

Superb Acting Though a Grim Tale

Those familiar with the bittersweet, obsessive, compulsive aspect of Thomas Hardy's so-called romantic novels will instantly know that this film is not apt to leave one with a warm fuzzy feeling by the last reel. Certainly it is not recommended that one read the novel, Jude the Obscure, before viewing. How many films have failed to live up to the expectations of the literary adaptation? Why would this be any different? Jude is a man of humble birth who strives to rise above his allotment in life. Rather than approaching the subject as a modern fairy tale where dreams do come true, the standard treatment in cinema, there is a grim realism which reflects the destructive nature of impractical and unnatural compulsions. Jude attempts to fly in the face of social convention in a headlong flight of self-destruction which at times has the horrific fascination of a slow motion train wreck, one is disturbed by the sight but unable to turn away. I knew nothing of this film save that the title characters were played by the extremely talented pair, Kate Winslet and Christopher Eccleston. That was sufficient enticement for me and as always I was not disappointed by the performances. Despite the current trend to degrade the "Masterpiece Theatre" production style actors and directors of immense talent breath life into even the dullest works. Dull this film isn't but grim it certainly is. Only a brave director would tackle this kind of project. How much easier it would have been to soften the hard edge to make the viewing more palatable. There is much to be gleaned from witnessing in all its ugliness the past stigmatization of relationships we now accept as commonplace. If one comes away from this film with nothing more than an inkling of gratitude or awe for the sacrifice of those who attempted to effect social change then this film is worth the viewing.

IridescentTranquility 2013-03-24 23:14:41

A tragedy caused by their own time

How to summarise Jude? They say that in the late Victorian era therewas a school of thought that almost glorified the state of childhood,believing it to be a perfect time in a person's life when innocencereigned, but I don't believe Thomas Hardy followed this line ofthinking. No matter how young, both Jude the father and Jude the sonseem weighed down by doom and misery in this film.I think this film fell under the category of "independent film", whichis just as well. Following the Thomas Hardy convention whereby nothingcan end happily, Jude ultimately ends with a miserable mood, but in asense this is perfect. Although it's not the sort of film anyone wouldwant to watch on a "down" day, I'm sure that - had this film been giventhe Hollywood treatment, the storyline would have been mercilesslyrearranged to have a loving happy ending. The problem is, if thathappened, it wouldn't be Hardy.There is something stark about the opening of the film - the scratchymusic, the loneliness of the solitary young Jude, the clattering noiseof the bird-scarer and yet, combined with the black-and-white filming,it evokes the appropriate mood for the film so easily and so early on.In amongst the winter scenes and the aerial shots that show only a tinybit of movement in an otherwise still landscape, Jude and Arabella'swedding is possibly the busiest, most colourful scene in the wholefilm. Of course, there are also many interesting social and sometimespolitical issues raised, partly because of the time in which the filmis set. Had the story been moved forward a hundred years, there wouldbe nothing remarkable about Sue attending lectures, smoking cigarettes,drinking beer in the pub, visiting Jude without a chaperone. Therewould be nothing surprising about being educated when you had a job -like Jude's - that didn't require it. But Jude and Sue are tragic in away - both impulsive people in a world and a time when a commitmentlike marriage was not to be taken lightly.There are many bad omens in the film - Aunt Drusilla remarking that"The Fawleys were not meant for marrying" - and the particular tragedyof Jude's character is the way he rushes into things only to regretthem later. Though Jude is tragic, his cousin and partner Sue isequally blighted - to watch her change during the film from anirreverent, sparky, impertinent, independent single woman into atortured, guilty (in her own eyes) shadow of her former self isheartbreaking. Although in some ways women's lives and opportunitieswere limited in various ways in the nineteenth century, as a femalewith a job, no husband and no parents or other family, she did havequite a lot of freedom. Oddly, Jude's wife Arabella is not so different from Sue - she is asforward and daring physically as Sue is intellectually. During theirmarriage, she and Jude almost reverse roles - she goes out to kill apig single-handedly when he is too sensitive to do so. There is aninteresting contrast between Jude's sex scenes with Arabella and theone he has with Sue. The wedding night with Arabella is warmly lit andcosy, whereas the scene with Sue is stark, almost grey, with a coldfeeling and yet in some ways Sue and Jude are more necessary to eachother than Arabella and Jude ever were. On the costume side I note that - as with the more recent Kate Winsletfilm Finding Neverland - the costumes don't look like fashion plates,they look like real clothes (occasionally none too clean but when youtake into account how time-consuming and labour-intensive it must havebeen to wash them, it's hardly surprising). It seems strange now thatKate must only have been twenty or twenty-one when this film was made -in her first scene she looks mature whereas in others she seems very,very young.This isn't the easiest film to watch - there are a few sections Ialmost always fast-forward - but that is not to say it's not good.Every time I watch it, a bit of me wants things to end happily, but -as I said before - that just wouldn't be Hardy.

2013-03-24 01:43:42

one of the best movies of all time

even if you are not a diehard kate winslet fan (why aren't you?) you should she this movie. it is so amazing. the acting is wonderful as is the storyline. be prepared though. no hollywood endings here. END

TheLittleSongbird 2013-03-23 08:33:12

Ambitious and anything but tender, but wonderfully acted and well adapted

Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure is a very complicated and ambitiousbook, and while heavy-reading it is a fine piece of literature. This1996 film adaptation is a rock-solid adaptation, that is ambitious andrealistic. I will admit some parts like the killing of the pig isanything but tender, but none of the scenes are over-sensationalised.As an adaptation of the book, it works very well. If I had a quibble,the secondary characters could have been developed more than they weredepicted. The screenplay is well crafted; the writers and the directorhave at least some idea how Hardy's work should work on film and stayrelatively true to the book. The music both haunting and beautiful atthe same time was absolutely outstanding.The direction is very fine, never sluggish and never overdone. It wasabout right. The cinematography is superb, dark, fluid and sensitive.And the period detail was just as good. It was this element alone thatcontributed to the mood of the adaptation. The love story here which isdirty and tragic was beautifully realised, and very rarely struck afalse note.The performances were just brilliant, no overplaying or underplaying asfar as I could see. Special mention must go to the two leadperformances. Christopher Ecceleston is a very talented and I thinkunder-appreciated actor, and in the title role he was perfectly castand showed real versatility. As Sue Brideshead, the beautiful KateWinslet is positively luminous and is true to her character. Out of thesupporting performances, the best is Rachel Griffiths as Arabella, avery modest performance I must say.Overall, has its minor flaws but a very well done adaptation of acomplicated book. Always realistic and never overly-sentimental as Ifeared. Though the ending is heart-rending. 9/10 Bethany Cox

2013-03-23 01:39:35

a warning for those with weak stomachs...

Although this is a beautifully made film, I feel compelled to warn those who are horrified by images of violent and painful death that they may find parts of this film deeply disturbing. I found the graphic slaying of a pig early in the film almost as sickening as the discovery of the three dead children towards the end. If you enjoy wallowing in melancholy and can take scenes like these, or manage to avoid them, you might enjoy this tale. It is finely acted, beautifully filmed, and, before the big tragedy strikes, offers some joyous moments amidst the hearbreaking longing and disappointment.

2013-03-13 20:45:49

sweet love story

tragic, power of love, courage, full of hope, and good enough for art-direction. secara dramatis dan segi cerita film ini mempunyai unsur-unsur yang cukup memukau, namun dilihat dari segi visualisasi 'Jude' masih cukup jauh dari kesempurnaan.

Kevin Thomas 2013-03-13 10:35:48

The dark, steel engraving look that cinematographer Eduardo Serra has given Jude endows it with a somber magnificence.

Sherazade 2013-03-13 07:53:20

Kate Winslet shines in this very grotesque film by Michael Winterbottom...

It's an adaptation of Thomas Hardy's harrowing novel in which a youngman (Played by Christopher Eccleston) falls in love with his cousin(played by Kate Winslet) upon meeting her for the first time. Theirlove is probably to blame for all the problems that come their waythroughout the course of the film. Winslet is especially daunting asshe is haunting in the character of Sue, a young woman who is just outto please the ones she loves until tragedy strikes and she is forced tothink differently. Eccleston is stellar as the title character of Jude,a role that was also offered to the likes of Ewan Mcgregor and ColinFarell just to mention a few but just watching Eccleston in his firstscenes as the character and you just cannot possible imagine anybodyelse playing the role. For the sake of art, you will have to endurefull frontal nudity on the part of Winslet, as well as a graphic scenein which she gives birth. So, you've been fore warned. Director MichaelWinterbottom, captures the beauty and picturesque nature of old Englandin his brilliant masterpiece.

2013-03-12 23:12:40

Challenging!

In the tradition of Thomas Hardy, this film challenges core social assumptions. Specifically, the fact that Jude and Sue are cousins in the pre-modern era forces them to enter the margins of society. Both Kate Winslet and Christopher Eccleston are superb actors. As a previous reviewer mentioned, it is a breath of fresh air to see that they did not cast some pretty-boy to play the part of Jude. With regard to Winslet's performance, this film puts her role in Titanic to shame! Despite the fact that this film was pretty depressing, it had a lasting and emotional effect on me. If you are looking for an intellectually inspiring film, this is definitely one to watch!

Michael Dequina 2013-03-11 09:58:19

Superbly acted by all involved.

2013-03-10 23:23:40

Best

What I have to say is pretty much the same as evryone else,I watched Jude because of Kate which I remembered seeing on tv in Liverpool(very few channels I amy add).The movie has great footage and is really pleasing to the eye as well the sound track really adds to the movies feeling.At the end I felt as if someone had took a knife and drove it into my stomach and twisted it,this made me go further and read Jude the Obscure which was quit good,and if you liked the movie you will also enjoy the BBC mini serise-but sorry to say Kate is not in it. END