Scarlett Letter

309 Words2 Pages
Movie Review: Not Hawthorns’ Scarlett Letter If all this money and talent had been spent on a true adaptation of Hawthorne's beautifully structured novel ‘The Scarlett Letter’, it might have been rather good. Demi Moore was probably necessary to get the film made, and although she wouldn't be anyone's first choice as Hester Prynne, she isn't terrible, nor is Gary Oldman as her lover The Reverend Arthur Dimmsdale. However, the odd power of the original story is lost in all the melodrama, which in no way compliments or expands on any theme in the novel. Flaming arrows, savage Indians and holocausts of blood and gore in no way add to the magical sense that this tiny Puritan community is holding bay against the wilds of a new country; they just make it all seem ridiculously overpopulated and over wrought. The filmmakers added a happy ending, but it turns out, they also changed the beginning, the middle and the very essence of the book. Which is to be expected in a adaptation of a novel. The problem is not that the novel was changed, but that it was changed to something so trashy and absurd. The film proceeds to the first scene of the novel in over an hour, with Hester on the scaffold adorning the scarlet letter ‘A”. Hester soon catches a sight of a man-swimming nude near by as she arrives at church later that day she recognizes her nude swimmer as none other then the minister. Hester routinely receives her letter A and convinces Arthur to stay silent (no need for both of them to be humiliated) at this stage of the picture the otherwise awkward comedy is traded for a dull want to be action-adventure, which includes but is not limited to witch hunts and Indians to the

More about Scarlett Letter

Open Document