Posted by John Nichols on February 01, 2017 at 09:53:21 user Mcneacail.
I started watching the film last night on my small computer screen.
My thoughts on the film,
first minute the year is listed as 1935 - makes no difference to the film so why change.
Greenock is the birthplace of the script writer in Scotland so the change in Mrs Walker is obvious, the writer has not done a film for 12 years and average ratings on the films is 6.6. So at average.
Only 90 running minutes and assuming 20-60 words per minute you are limited to 7000 words, so you have to take 3/4 of the book out. If you want the full book need a 5 hour movie like King Lear.
Lake has been bastardized and the map is really weird. What lake was it?
I cannot see why they mixed stuff up - charcoal burners, that story about lighting fire is just weird and the original better.
Snake in hand -- weird as well
Old Billy was in his 80s.
For the life of me I cannot see why even with the interesting changes and I have no great problem with the spy bit, AR probably did spy in some ways they did not stick to book bits --
Kids being kids is really Billy Bunterish and the overboard scene - pure farce.
Mrs Jackson would not be miscast in Taming of the Shrew and why did Mr Jackson have a truck - more likely a cart.
Amazon's - a random pair of English girls from a random boarding school would have been better.
I loved Titty and Roger was ok for his age.
So the author needed a good kick in the pants from someone who has some film experience and can understand how to portray AR elements without being childish.
Mrs. Walker smoking -- I bloody doubt it
The travelling north wasted 16 good minutes, 2 minutes could have introduced Cpn Flint and spys,
More after watching the end tonight.
I actually liked most of it - I hate the two mothers -- makes me think of a love in in the 60's and Scotland in 1890.
Post a followup (Only if you agree to the Terms and Conditions)