Having said that, the book is still a good book. Only one plot can give a high score. Not many contemporary novels focus on academic research. There are not many people who understand the various shortcomings of academic research, especially literary research, and even fewer literary works that can be so obscure and poignantly satirized. The author of the original book himself has been immersed in the circle of literary research for a long time, and some chapters can be seen in his unhappy mood. In addition to satire, the author deeply analyzes feelings and gender relations, whether contemporary or classical, from a female perspective. It compares the female sisterhood in the classical world with the multiple choices of modern women's sexual orientation, and explores the freedom and bondage of classical family ethics and modern emotional choices. From the point of view of brushwork, the transformation of time and space is natural but not obscure, and the relationship between characters is complicated but very organized. Nineteenth-century English classicism pervades the lines. It's no wonder that this book received so much praise when it came out.
Watching this movie again, it's not even a passable one. The director and screenwriter tried their best to retain the backbone of the book's narrative, but lost the soul of the book. For example, the original work uses poems and letters to change the narrative perspective, which can emphasize the emotional unity of ancient and modern while narrating. In fact, this can be fully expressed in a movie way, but the actual effect is really disappointing. It makes people feel that the director himself did not read the original work. The humanistic spirit of the original book and the discussion of emotion and gender relations are lost in the film. Even the film also designed the protagonist's relish about theft, which is exactly what the author of the original book wanted to correct - it is not false that Roland stole the draft of the letter in the library. However, after that, Roland and Maud Every step of research and exploration follows academic norms. The two or even three groups of different research groups designed by the author are mocking and criticizing the inevitable selfishness and superficiality in the current academic research system. , which turned out to be fun. I really don't know what to say. In addition, in the different situations involved in the original book, the tension between alienation and intimacy between people is completely absent in the film. A good book explained in simple language was eventually turned into two old-fashioned love stories with little overlap.
If you don't read the original book, just watch the movie. It should be classified as a love sketch such as "True Love Matters". From this point of view, it should be a decent score. The color of the film is bright and the rhythm is not slow. The performances of the two actresses, especially Jennifer Ehle, who plays Chris Bay, are remarkable. Gwyneth's consistent British demeanor and intellectuality are of course not to be mentioned, and Jennifer is simply a miracle. In such a script, she can accurately reproduce and express Chris Beth's tough and gentle character. It's a pity that Chris Bay's contradictions and hesitations cannot be shown. This is not the fault of the actor, but the fault of the director and screenwriter. It's a pity for these two good actors. Three stars for this movie, totally on Jennifer.
View more about Possession reviews
