Fair, at best.

Rating: 7/10 (17 August 2000)

It is always a shame not to have grown up with something that is considered a classic. I can't draw back on my childhood memories of visiting a movie palace and taking in this movie in the time for which it was intended. I saw this movie for the first time on DVD, remastered in 5.1 dolby digital. It is a beautifully photographed movie, but other than it's historical significance I can find little positive to say about it. Much like Star Wars for my generation, this movie lives in the glory of its period.
The acting was, for the most part, good. I can't really criticize any of the actors, as they all play their parts well.
Much of what makes a movie enjoyable to watch, however, are the characters. When have lead characters been so unlikeable?
Scarlett O'Hara may be the least likeable female romantic character ever conceived. I did not, for one minute, give a damn (no pun intended) about her. She was whiny, bratty, conceited, and annoying from the first scene. Nowhere in three hours and fifty-two minutes did I find myself with any sympathy for her. Her epiphany was about three hours too late in the movie for me to even consider. And the glory of her ancestral home was lost on me. "As God is my witness, I'll never go hungry again!". Hmmm. If the purpose of Scarlett was to annoy and alienate the audience, I must say, she was beautifully acted.
The altruistic Melanie Wilkes, played convincingly by Olivia de Havilland, was another character I could not bring myself to care about. Her fragile naivite made her feel weak and stupid to me. Constantly abused by Scarlett, she never came away from kindness. What a little angel. The anti-Scarlett, (and equally extreme in goodness as Scarlett was in whinyness) I found her character ridiculous. Olivia, in my opinion, was the film's most physically appealing actress. By far.
Hattie McDaniel's character, Mammy was archetypical, but appealing nonetheless. Her acting was excellent, with well timed deliveries and always an appropriate look of fear on her face.
Clark Gable is a charming actor. I enjoyed his performance.
As for the plot, drama, drama, and more drama. Endless ridiculous drama. This movie is like a realization of Murphy's law. Everything that could go wrong, does. Despite the extreme length, the movie moves along fairly briskly. This is due to the continuous string of tragedies that play out over its course. Make no mistake, this is a soap opera, in perhaps it's grandest form, but soap opera nonetheless. Non-stop yelling, whining, death, unhappy marriages, and more death. I threw up my hands on more than one occasion. Isn't there a limit on the number of horse-related accidents you can have in one film, no matter the length? No rest for the weary, let me tell you.
Wow, this is sure starting to sound cynical. I gave the movie 7 out of 10 stars, based solely on a few good performances, the stunning cinematography, and the historical significance. I can't say I enjoyed the film, and honestly, I don't think I'll ever sit down to watch it again. But I think everyone should see this film once, simply to make up their own mind on it's value.
In sum: a glorious relic from the past that has acquired a sour taste in the present.