Change Your Image
elzicsfarewell
Reviews
Splendor in the Grass (1961)
Histrionics in the grass
I think this might be one of the most overrated films I've ever seen. To begin with, thank goodness nobody hurt themselves trying to make 1961 look like 1929--I think all they did was borrow some old cars.
This hypersexualized and ridiculous movie falls into the _Romeo and Juliet_ trap of confusing hormone- and boredom-driven teenaged lust with love. Bud and Deanie aren't loves-of-a-lifetime: They're first infatuations. Bud is handsome but there is nothing in Beatty's portrayal that suggests he actually loves Deanie instead of just being afraid that he might lose his adorable possession to some other dead-eyed high school boy. His adult love for Angelina, who took him in when he was depressed, displaced, and lonely, seems far more believable even though the movie makes it clear we're supposed to think he settled and gave up his true love for something practical.
There is nothing emotionally gripping or even interesting in any of the acting, either. Warren Beatty is wooden and expressionless. Natalie wood swings from dim-witted, overwrought, childishness to overwrought hysterics, but after awhile you just want her to be quiet and go away. I suppose this had its place in 1961 but it hasn't aged very well.
Les Miserables (1978)
Better than it looks
This suffers because it was made for television in the 1970's and looks cheap by modern standards. Don't be put off: This is the version that is most true to the spirit and message of the book. It's not a romance; Hugo did not intend to write a love story, no matter how badly Hollywood wishes it were so.
The incident with the clergyman is supremely important and Hollywood destroyed it by making Valjean into a desperate, fugitive, thug. All the other versions of this might be prettier, but they got it wrong.
Also: You will never beat Anthony Perkins for silent, soul-gnawing, desperation. It just can't be done.