• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Cold Mountain

novella

novella

Active Member
Well, I didn't like the book. Definitely one of those overhyped ordinary books that some publisher has decided to firmly push onto the bestseller list, a la Snow Falling on Cedars. Poor uninteresting writing and simplistic throughout.

So I saw the movie Cold Mountain last night, having read somewhere that it is "better than the book." Ahem. Don't waster yer time. Sure, the fashions were terrific. Nicole Kidman and that Zellwegger girl have incredible (!!) clothes, considering they are two starving damsels in the middle of nowhere.

As for the movie's adaptation strategy, it was just a big soap opera without any real meat, pretty much like the book I would say. I mean, these characters seem to bounce back from warfare, murder, starvation, and torture in about ten minutes. They wash their little faces and go on to the next scene. Huh?

Zellwegger's acting seems to rely on squinting a lot, and I'm sure she got lots of praise for allowing herself to look wrinkly and dirty, whereas Kidman never looks wrinkly or dirty and her acting seems to rely on very good posture and flirtatiously cocking her head like a certain late Princess. She certainly is an exquisite creature, though.

And the guy, forget actor's name, if you like old Westerns, you'll probably like him. He was as good as, say, Eli Wallach in Hang 'Em High, or maybe Alan Ladd in Shane, without the highheeled boots.



So that's my review.

Novella
 
Oh my life - how crap was that book??! I was so, so disappointed. And I've been wondering whether to bother with the film, but you've just convinced me not to :) I can't stand Nicole Kidman, I think she's really quite unattractive... so I'd probably despise it.
 
I didn't read the book because it's not really the type that interests me; however, I did agree to see the movie on a chick night with my sis-in-law and mum. I totally agree with your review. I don't like Nicole Kidman or Renee Zellwegger, and their performances in this movie were nowhere near as good as I expected them to be (based on the reviews I read). The one scene that got me, though, was the one where the mentally handicapped man was killed when he thought his picture was going to be taken. My heart was ripped from my chest.

The guy in the movie is Jude Law. I thought his performance was good, but I was left so cold by everything else that perhaps his big blues just warmed me up.
 
I agree completely - I didn't see the point of this film. It was just depressing without having any redeeming features.
 
Glad to hear I'm not missing anything. All the reviews of the film left me cold. I was impressed with the detailed and beautiful language of the book, but was never in the mood to finish it. I expect to at some point, tho.
 
I would have to disagree about the movie. i cannot comment about the book as i have not read it, but having seen the movie twice, i must say it is a very good movie. not amazing or timeless, but very good nonetheless. Rene Zellweger was great in it, and Jude Law, considering he's british, managed to pull of the southern accent off quite well.

There were some very awkward moments in the film that made absolutely no sense to me. but I enjoyed Kidmans transition from prissy, dont-know-anything-about-the-country girl to strong and self-empowerd woman. especially when she manages to hunt by herself and shows that she can be very threatening.

i enjoyed it quite a bit. but this is a book board, so i appologize if i talked too much about the film, as opposed to its book. I have heard from several people that the book isnt all that. But the movie is i think quite good... but as i said before, far from a classic motion picture.
 
I have been mentioned about this book in other thread. This book is really slowly and stuggle as well. Today I watched the film which is ok with me. I have noticed some of them were make up which aren't there in book. Bit of overdramtic.
 
The main characters are poorly developed - its hard to identify with them. The violence is gratuitous. The bad ending is thrown in to create artful realism.

Kidman seems to do her best film work where seduction and fornication are involved. The "evil" characters that terrorized the town while the men were off to war would have been ambushed and murdered in the deep south during that time. Everybody had guns and would use them at the drop of a hat.

I think some of the horses did exemplary work. Why isn't there some kind of award for animals?
 
Everett said:
The main characters are poorly developed - its hard to identify with them. The violence is gratuitous. The bad ending is thrown in to create artful realism.
Click to expand...

actually i think the bad ending its just to try to cover up its just another bad rip off of the odisey

i think its an ok movie to rent, but totally not worth the trip (and the money) to the movie teather.
 
I actually enjoyed reading ”Cold Mountain” ; I found it to be immensely moving and beautifully written.
The movie was good too, Zellwegger and Kidman were great, but in my opinion Law was best; I was amazed by the way he did almost all his performance with his eye's. Wow.
 
Someone talked to me about this book/film, the other day, and that person was absolutely crazy about it. The enthusiasm rekindled my interest, so I thought I'd revive this thread to see what all you people think of both the book, and the film.

Cheers
 
I liked both the book and the film. The book might seem simplistic because of the way it was written, which is how people talked back then. I thought the book was a little long, but worth it in the end. In the film, Nicole Kidman did look too clean-I remember reading once where there was a discussion about using computers to put more dirt on her face after the movie was completed, before it was shown in theatres, but they decided not to.
 
Miss Shelf said:
why? the book or the movie? both? why?
Click to expand...
The movie. Never read the book. I feel it is overrated because it got pretty well received ratings, and most people who have seen it have loved it and declare it one of the best of 03 or 04, whichever year it came out.
 
are you saying you think it's overrated because "most people who have seen it loved it"? That's like saying I think the LOTR triology was overrated because most people who have seen it loved it. I'm not trying to be snide here-I just don't understand your reasoning.

Maybe the year it came out there were a lot of crummy movies and this seemed like "Gone With the Wind" in comparison with the rest of the movies that year.
 
I couldn't get past the first two chapters of the book. I also couldn't get past Jude Law's horrible accent and acting in the film (no offense Jude, love ya still!)
 
That generally is how something becomes overrated. Many people feel LotR's is overrated because of the amount of people who absolutely love it and how many Oscars it won.
 
My understanding of "overrated" is that it means when something isn't that good but the majority of people who have read or watched something think it is good. Is that what you mean?
 
I heard the movie was poor, but I had to see for myself because it was Civil War related. I thought it was alright, but nothing I would add to my movie selection at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top