halejr I liked this mini-series. As was previously mentioned, a mini-series is often a better format for a novel than a movie because mini-series aren't restricted to 120 minutes. I thought Jane Seymour was great in this movie. The rest of the cast was merely good. But despite the lack of experience of the young cast, at least their youth made you believe they were only a few years removed from the war. Well, the editors said I have to have 10 lines to get my comment posted. So I also liked Leonard Nemoy in this movie. I like the background music playing in the bars. And the scenery in the movie. Given Hemmingway's sparse prose, this is the sort of detail that doesn't come across in the book, but makes the movie well worth watching.

ducdebrabant The filmmakers built up the part of Brett's Russian admirer for Leonard Nimoy, and added a murder -- not trusting the Hemingway plot to hold the audience. I actually liked Hart Bochner's world weary hero, and Jane Seymour isn't bad. Robert Carradine is absolutely marvelous -- one of our most underrated actors. The movie gets the period pretty well, and the real locations help a great deal. But Leonard Nimoy ........ oh. my. God. He is truly terrible. He disdains to trouble himself with any sort of Russian accent, and his mustache twirling turn is phony baloney every step of the way. I have never looked at him the same way since. This is basically a project designed to say, loudly, that Hemingway's novel cannot be dramatized. That's pretty much its message, forget the Lost Generation stuff, even though the script does treat of the horribleness of WW1 and its aftermath. Considering how awful this travesty is, I don't think its makers are in any position to criticize the original material. I await another Sun Also Rises adaptation that stays true to the original, as this does not, gets the period (as this does and the 20th Century Fox film does not) and gives us a Jake and a Robert Cohn this effective, and a Brett a little more so. Seymour, as I say, isn't bad (she gets Brett's privileged Englishwoman dimension down pat), but she's not ideal. Gardner had the hormonal quality Brett needs, but couldn't do the upper class Englishwoman thing one bit.

goodchessmoves This is one of my favorite movies on the planet. The movie is set in Paris in the 1920's. I enjoyed how the character's visited various clubs where live Jazz was performed by African Americans. Seeing the Jazz musicians reminded me that in the 1920's African Americans were treated much better in Paris than in the United States. I think Hart Bochner is absolutely gorgeous and plays his role as Jake Barnes very well. I love the wardrobe in this movie, the suits Jake wore and the Chanel dresses that Jane Seymour wore. In this movie I saw glamor, sadness, hopelessness, hope, comedy, and tragedy. As I said before it is one of my favorites I watch it at least twice a year. I give it two thumbs way up!

schappe1 Some good and some bad compared to the 1957 effort. The story is better told. The movie is basically the latter half of it. (Yes, we do learn what happened to Jake). There's more time in a miniseries to tell a story like this. Jane Seymour, a very talented actress is fine as Lady Brett. Hart Bochner lacks charisma as the lead. It's hard to tell why everybody thinks he's such a dynamic guy. Robert Carradine is a much more impressive Cohen than Mel Ferrer. We learn much more about the character here. The actors are all much younger, (or at least younger-looking) than their 1957 counterparts. It gives the impression of kids playing "grown-up". It's hard to compare Bochner to Tyrone Power, Zeljko Ivanek to Eddie Albert, Ian Charleston to Errol Flynn, etc. because the 1957 cast consisted of older, more accomplished performers. And yet, since this takes place in the 1920's, the characters would have been more the age of the performers in the mini-series. The 1957 cast was almost old enough to have fought in World War I themselves.