6/10
An entertaining 2 hours - but does it beat the 1967 version?
3 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Although I have given this - it would appear - a miserly 6 out of 10 it is only because I can still recall the Schlesinger 1967 version which, for me, eclipses this version on a number of levels. Carey Mulligan, however, is the high point and she certainly presents a Bathsheba Everdene who any man could easily fall for. Her inherent beauty is perfectly fashioned and she sucks in empathy and admiration every time she appears in a scene. My main problem is with Matthias Schoenaerts who, too frequently, is portrayed rather too much as a lumpen farmhand. I think a professional critic has likened his dialogue with Michael Sheen's William Boldwood as rather like Ralph and Ted's dialogue from "The Fast Show" and once you have that image in your head its difficult to watch any of their scenes together. Schoenaerts doesn't even attempt a Dorset accent and on occasion a mittel-European phrasing creeps into the dialogue. A miscasting would be my opinion. Bates in the 1967 version was - and remains - the perfect Gabriel Oak. The story was condensed somewhat and there were some plot lines that weren't sufficiently developed to allow for complete understanding. Tom Sturridge's Sgt.Troy was duly dastardly and the "sword" scene was atmospherically achieved but where one could understand a woman falling head over heels for Terence Stamp's Troy it was a little tough to see why this Bathsheba could be so infatuated as to be taken in so completely. Maybe I'm nitpicking and I'd say to anyone who was thinking of seeing this: go ahead and enjoy the story and beautiful scenery. Its not a wasted 2 hours by any means. But then get the digitally remastered 1967 version being released on June 1st and then compare the two.
27 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed