I just came out of the theater. The first impression i got is that they succeeded in adhering closely to the book, there were no twists in the story or some other kind of adaptation.
I've read so many disappointing comments here and the overall average score is below what i expected (8).
I read the book and i think they did a good job in transposing it to the screen.
I think that at 150 minutes it still falls short, had they made a longer movie like Titanic they would have had more space to 'maneuver' and could obtain a better result and i imagine that's what the critics were expecting, a colossal.
Moreover, Tom Hanks underperformed and i would have preferred Sean Connery in the role of Leigh; In the end, i felt like i had a good dinner in the restaurant but i would have preferred more spice in my main course.
8 out of 10
I've read so many disappointing comments here and the overall average score is below what i expected (8).
I read the book and i think they did a good job in transposing it to the screen.
I think that at 150 minutes it still falls short, had they made a longer movie like Titanic they would have had more space to 'maneuver' and could obtain a better result and i imagine that's what the critics were expecting, a colossal.
Moreover, Tom Hanks underperformed and i would have preferred Sean Connery in the role of Leigh; In the end, i felt like i had a good dinner in the restaurant but i would have preferred more spice in my main course.
8 out of 10