A week ago today I took my girlfriend to see
Love in the Time of Cholera. I read the book from which it's based and figured that this would be the quinisential "chick flick". I was very hyped about the adaptation but knew from past experiences not to expect much. Still, I'm a huge fan of
Gabriel García Márquez's work. I've read all his books and a good number of his editorial works as well. Having seen the movie, I can't imagine they'll be adapting any of his other works. His style of writing has been termed "Magical Realism" and is a blur between South American storytelling and senility, imo. To write a screenplay from him is to pluck a bird clean and ask it to fly. I think this was doomed from the beginning. Most things about this movie were par if not subpar. Mike Newell's direction, subpar. the cast was strong and yet somehow came across as fledgling.
Newell's most recent notible work,
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. It's not like he's been pushed to direct lately. I'm thinking New Line Cinema thought that the book sales, and the plot would drive the movie instead of getting this movie to be a work in and of itself. To Newell's credit, the set and costumes were damn good, like Potter. The makeup was atrocious. how many gallons of eggwhites did they use? This is the 21st century people! You can't have a character age 50 years without changing the actor. It's more unpleasant to see a thirty year old person in a wrinkle suit then to see a completely different actor. AHHH. I'm so pissed this movie fell short. If you liked the book... read it again.