The American (Masterpiece Theatre) 2/4
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- The era when upstart America challenged the ancient privileges of Europe is portrayed in The American, an adaptation of Henry James's darkly romantic novel.
Set in 1868, the story follows the fortunes of Christopher Newman (Matthew Modine), a 19th-century "new man" who has amassed a fortune in California and heads to Europe to learn its ways and find a wife. After arriving in Paris, naïvely receptive to all its charms and mysteries, he becomes enchanted with Claire de Cintré (Aisling O'Sullivan), a young Parisian widow whose beauty and enigmatic background ignite obsessive desire in the handsome American. But his overtures are discouraged in no uncertain terms by Claire's imperious mother, Madame de Bellegarde (Emmy award winner Diana Rigg), a descendant of ancient nobility who stops at nothing to arrange coldhearted aristocratic matches for her children. Featuring Diana Rigg and Matthew Modine in a classic from Henry James.
www.pbs.org/wgb...
Have no idea what this is and don't care I'm only here for baby Andrew.
I greatly appreciate your uploading the film, and am enjoying watching it, even as it vexes me with its dissimilarity with the original novel. I am no James scholar, and it's been a while since I read the book, but from what I remember, The American is an early James novel, and contains elements of satire, realism, and romance. Christopher Newman is not young, but a vigorous 40 year old man looking for the best wife money and power can buy. Claire's family is nearly as horrid as they appear
Mathew Bodine very good in this. She is pretty when she is smiling and happy and her hair down. She has gone through a tragic marriage. And look at the house she lives in.
I can understand that a film has to be more visual than a book but wow is this so far from the novel. Henry James is subtle which is why perhaps its hard to make a good movie from his writing but I wish the people who made this tried.
And...a sex scene in a James narrative? And... Noemie goes out into the streets in her underwear?! I don't know what's more ridiculous! lol
The narrative and the persons are very confusing unless you read the book, which actually confuses you even more
What a shock that even Henry James is not safe from the desecration of his works. Why do the writers take such liberties? Are the writers better than Henry James. That's the implication.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I have always wanted to see what this novel was like presented on screen.
I assure you this bears no ressemblance to the novel...
Miss Birthistle (Noemie) is so attractive and compelling in her role, I have to say I am as love struck as Valentine. Great Film, read James people he is the Best. Aisling O'Sullivan (Claire) is very well cast and meets my imagination for the character, love to see her further work.
Certainly Henry James is one of the best, indeed. They say that he was the great psychiatriste, and his brother William the great writer...what do you think?
A better question would be where are the similarities?? The dialogue is completely different; the scenes bear no resemblance to the book, the acting is horrendous.
I find it quite interesting, on the contrary, as I find it truly captures the deep differences in the two cultures better than most films that I have seen on that subject, without apology for it, from an American point of living the sudden meeting of the two. No, the acting is fine, much better than most 'murrican films that try to do period drama and noone can read a line to save their skin, they all sound like secondgraders reading a poem for the first time ever in their lives...Insomma..Yes, of course James' book is subtler, different than the presentation here, as he was born into ways where a certain subtlety was de rigeur and hardly even noticed. But I think here they were trying to truly adapt it to an American's point of view from our time who would know little of literature or that period, to teach, likely for schools for instance, where education has been slaughtered since the arrival of the BUsh-Reagan destruction of American culture, freedom and real education. The "French" characters are not that, but they portray the view of French people that an American who is learning might well have in a way that would be familiar. The reactions are British, pas à al française, but, again, enough "other" or "foreign" for an American who has not had the advantages of an international education, to get the story acroos in a way that they'd "get". Then they can go see another version, and they will, because this version spoke to them, Or so I would describe it..I'm quite enjoying the slight tongue in cheek of it all, and the ravishing perfection of the costumes and stage scenery.
I think a really good movie could have been made of James´s book. His story was more subtle, his characters more convincing and powerful than these jokers. THESE are supposed to be the Bellegardes?
Not very French, are they. Just a bunch of mediocre actors slumming in a piss-poor television production made in Ireland.
As someone who has not read the book, and was impressed enough with this adaptation to buy the video and upload it to RUclips, can you please explain to me the discrepancy between the film's adaptation and the book and why it is so upsetting?
I think Matthew Modine was miscast as the american.his acting is high school level compared to professional seasoned actors...everyone else is excellent!!
Andrew Scott is a hoot as the petulant brother...in his blue Little Lord Fauntleroy suit! ☺
What is the discrepancy between the film's adaptation and the book?
There's a well written lengthy criticism of the movie on IMDB that captures the differences.
(continuing previous post) here, but Valentin is charming and genuine, admirable for his love of life. Claire is repressed and tragic; she's reasonably well cast. A sexual relationship between the girl from the Louvre and Newman is perhaps desired and implied in the book (I think), but certainly unlike how it is depicted here. She's my favorite character of the novel; I wish more of her ingenuous immorality was represented. I loved her overly varnished paintings...
Newman despised the girl in the Louvre; he would never had sex with her.
Ah Matthew🥺
First of all it is not your fault for uploading this video and I dont think anyone is upset with you.
Actually Ive been interested in seeing it. Aside from the names of the characters being the same and a rough plotline being similar it is far from the book. I think you would have to read the book to notice the great changes. Or I would recommend going to Librivox.org and hearing a wonderful reading of it for free. Listen while youre driving or going to work.
Really stupid. Whose idea was this?
Unbelievable... this cheesy 1970s production is more sexist than James's 1870s novel.
It was made in 1998.😂
Henry James is screaming from the grave. Stupid script. Terrible actors. Awful production. Bet your two bit derrière. Aw, shucks. Gimme a break.
Very weird movie
Hmmm, trivial.
Period drama is not for American no one can compete the british
BORING. I hope the novel was more engaging.
boring.
horrid ...