Alas, I digress. Let's go back to the film.
There are countless people who watch this film on behalf of the leader of the new generation of British people, on behalf of Ji Dousen. It is estimated that there are countless people on any platform. Of course, I can't avoid it. Even when I heard about this film, it was because Dousen happily took the girl with him. A friend went to Toronto; but I can't help but mention that Terence Rattigan is also a very powerful name, and someone trying to remake his script always makes people curious, especially after the highly rated 1955 version has been It's basically a lost case - it seems like a far-fetched topic to discuss Rachel Weisz taking Vivien Leigh's gun, but it's interesting to have Hidddleston play a role played by Kenneth More, after all, the two have a relationship. Opposite temperaments and life experiences, one is sensitive, the other is rough, the other is thin, tall and thin, the other is short and sturdy, and the other is a top student at Cambridge RADA. As soon as he graduated, he met a good master who was willing to teach by hand, so he went straight to the sky; the other was self-made, From Canadian fur hunters and theater janitors to the West End and Hollywood stages. But after all, the status and value of TDBS in Rattigan's works are always unchanged. Rattigan became a prominent post-war British playwright, and the success of a series of plays since TDBS is of course the most important factor. But it is a pity that this adaptation is almost a complete failure. Returning to the meaning of the title, every adaptation of a masterpiece is a difficult choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, but this time Terence Davies' grasp of the core spirit and the choice of the central plot completely deviates from the script. The original intention is to simply break a story of human nature into an eight o'clock bitterness drama, which is really embarrassing.
Thinking back to when TDBS first came out, drama critics commented on it as "Rattigan's view of human nature has become more complex and profound", and this is an important reason why TBDS has been named in drama history: complete Telling a good story full of emotions is only the requirement of melodrama. A good melodrama can indeed move people's hearts with the ups and downs of the plot, but after all, it does not have universal significance. The only ones that can truly have universal significance are those who directly attack human nature through the plot. Essential things, they may not give a perfect definition of a certain aspect of human nature or give a general guide, but they will make you feel that you have touched some softness that is not easily found beneath the hard surface of life. Although melodrama and main drama should not be divided into superior and inferior when commenting, but the playwrights who are the eyes of society need to rely on the unique perspective and depth of their works if they want to really arouse the public's attention. What this adaptation ignores is precisely some of the "complex and deep" things in the original that reflect human nature. Hester's interactions with the other characters are almost completely cut out, which is incomprehensible. Who will turn over the old script from 60 years ago to see the eight o'clock file? Aren't there too many newly written hypocritical stories?
Although the focus is wrong, the performance of the two leading actors is worthy of praise, although, once again, I have to say that their focus has also been returned to Mr. Rattigan along with the focus of the film. Weisz's control is still excellent, and her accurate performance of emotions and Hester's contradictory characters keeps the film from falling out of control; Hiddleston's sense of rhythm and explosiveness still shows the outstanding strength and stage sense of the academic top , but I have to say that his performance is far from the strong and charming but uneducated alcoholic image in the original work. The old man Rattigan who has participated in RAF in person will probably also feel that in this role, Kenneth More's image and performance method will be different. Get closer to the original spirit.
(A fighting hero who can be slender and whiter than a woman after taking off his clothes, often with tears in his eyes. I blame YOU, Terence Davies.)
In general, the adaptation of this version is really disappointing; the script of the original drama has not been read yet, if you have any other thoughts after reading it, you will come up with an addendum. The bottom line is that the plot is too loose and the rhythm is too slow, the director is too convoluted, and a film that is neither suitable for nympho nor for killing time.
View more about The Deep Blue Sea reviews
