I'm gonna read the book now.

Rating: 3/10 (23 August 2000)

I've never read the book, but having just seen the movie, I think I will. Not because I was so inspired by it. No, this movie had all the poignancy of a rock.
I want to read the book because it has to be at least ten times more interesting than this movie.
The story presented is not new. It wasn't new when the book was written. I say this because I think people get swept away by the story rather than by its treatment in this particular case.
When I watched this movie I felt lost and detached, not knowing what was going on and why.
The music was obtrusive, although it was typical of the era, so I'll give it that. The sets and the costumes were well done, I'll give it that, too. But the only good performance was from Gregory Peck. Everyone else was stilted and forced.
The only way this movie can be justified as good is by comparing it to other films made at that time. It seems real actors hadn't yet realized it was respectable to perform their craft on the silver screen, and directors hadn't yet become artists. Even this doesn't totally fly. I have seen great films made then and before (Cape Fear, High Noon), so I know it could have been done well.
I fault the screenwriter and the director, and whoever it was who told them they were doing a good job.