> that helps, but it suggests that the title, while
> perhaps relevant to
> the original novel, is only very happenstantially
> connected to the film
> . . . which reinforces my sense that the film is
> loaded with loose ends
> that do not tie up at all
I think that's probably inevitable in a film which has
almost nothing in common with its source material but
the British setting, the universal sterility, a
miraculous pregnancy which has to be safeguarded from
conflicting interests, and a few characters' names. I
was astonished when I saw the trailer originally that
they had even bothered to acknowledge the relationship
with James's novel.
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|