MovieChat Forums > Madame Bovary (1950) Discussion > Surprising

Surprising

posted 19 years ago by BlueGreen
3 replies | jump to latest

"Madame Bovary" became (and remained) one of my favourite books very early in life. And I basically agree with the question in the other thread: why even make it into a film?

But of course, that's what Hollywood does, so it was only a matter of time.

What surprised me about this film is how GOOD it was.
The "message" of the book - for there IS a message in the apparent "rien" of which Flaubert made a novel, let's not delude ourselves - is conveyed by different, more direct means (of course), but very much to the point.
Very importantly, nobody is really portrayed as a "villain" (which would have been in direct opposition to the novel's intentions). They are simply weak - humanly, ordinarily weak. Which is not a sin; but it CAN be a tragedy.

It has some truly memorable scenes (in an understated sort of way), and absolutely no pretentiousness. I think it came as close to Flaubert as any film (especially from that era) could; in fact, I consider it better - certainly more memorable - than the 1991 French version with Isabelle Huppert.

[–] Phillip 17 years ago

I've always said that this is my favorite classic although I read it way back in my teens. I just recently reread it again and enjoyed it just as much. I've always loved the film and wanted to see how close it was to the book. Although the sequence of events is changed somewhat, the intent of the book is there and I think the screenwriters did an admirable job at adapting it.

This movie has such a wonderful sense of atmosphere and the details are wonderful. They just don't make films like this anymore! And the score is just magnificent.

[–] BlueGreen 16 years ago

I am glad you appreciate it!
(Very few people I know have even SEEN it.)

And I couldn't agree more about the book itself. It is truly timeless.
I read as a fifteen year old myself, and have reread it several times.
It has never ever disappointed me.

[–] cold_sky 11 years ago

It's a very understated film, I think, and kind of different than what I'm used to. I've no interest in reading the book, but the film was quite lovely, beautifully photographed, Jennifer Jones was just drop-dead stunning, and the story strangely fascinating.

I'll admit, though, it took me two tries to finish the movie, and I started over (it'd been a while) and thoroughly enjoyed the first hour the second time around, and was nice and surprised by the highly enjoyable last 50 minutes.