A decent attempt but would have made a better TV series...

Rating: 6/10 (30 July 2013)

As I have recently read the novel before watching the movie I feel that I can only critique the adaptation of the story rather that as a separate film. Before viewing I was intrigued by how a scriptwriter would fit the intricacies of the many narratives into one movie. I would not say I was disappointed. Each tale is told in snippets linked by similarities in plot while the writer has adapted more than a few details to work better as a film. (Which is something that should be admired. A movie is not an exact copy of a book. It is instead an adaptation of the story - a fact critics should remember!) The film is also beautifully shot with each time period portrayed in a visually wonderful way. Each actor is also very good although Berry and Hanks do not, I feel, have the scope to act in the differing ways required. This did not, however, have a negative affect on the film. Jim Broadbent Shows them up. However, there are some negatives to this movie. The first is unfortunately the prosthetics. Some are very well done but many could have been done better and somewhat ruins the visual experience of the film. In addition, the characters' stories have been largely condensed. I do not know how this stands as a movie independent from the novel as I have read it, however I think it may have translated better as a television series. I would have loved to see each character's story played out in similar detail to the book. It could have been very successful. Finally, be aware of the fact that the film has been 'Americanised'. In other words its plot has been smothered in unnecessary cheese. It is definitely a journey and the time flies by unnoticed. I would recommend the novel for the character and plot development. I think that the directors have done well with this movie but series would have excelled.