Moll Flanders

source: Moll Flanders

Trailer—Moll Flanders

Moll Flanders

Long movie. Direction good. Photography good. Robin Wright is beautiful. She was the "saving grace" of the movie. Stockard Channing and Morgan Freeman did not need to bother with their roles. Anyone could have played their parts. You sometimes wonder what well-known and/or talented stars are thinking when they choose to play certain roles. Do they REALLY need the money badly enough to lose favor with their fans?? Screenplay was OK. The movie progression was V E R Y slow! John Lynch, Moll's lover/husband played his role well. It rained and was cold the day I watched this movie, so I stuck it out to the bitter end. A nap would have been more rewarding!

The movie has excellent acting, excellent photography, excellent music and a fascinating story. The complaint that it is not the Daniel Defoe novel seems absurd: James Whale's "Frankenstein" is not Mary Shelley's novel, but it is still a great movie. Robin Wright, Morgan Freeman and Stockard Channing are all terrific as nearly everybody notes, but we should also give credit to Aisling Corcoran who plays Moll's daughter, Flora. She gives one of the most spirited and believable children's performances ever. It reminds me of Dakota Blue Richards' performance in "the Golden Compass." This film shows the tremendous hostility the upper class had towards both women and the poor in 18th century England. It is a good representation of the times. I show it as an example of the time period when I teach Humanities courses. It is also a great example of a strong woman character who develops her own moral standards. So it is especially recommended for teenage girls.

Daniel Defoe would be mortified if he knew that his delightful novel, full of energy and wisdom, was the basis for this plodding, sentimental film. Stockard Channing is delightful to watch in her role... if you mute the sound, so that you aren't forced to endure the dialogue. Other fine actors are wasted also, including Morgan Freeman looking like he's costarring in Battlefield Earth and knows it. Use this film only as a cure for insomnia. Watch the 1995 British made-for-tv adaptation instead; it does everything right that this film does wrong.

"Moll Flanders" (1996) tells the tale of a young woman's struggle with life in 18th century England. This film received mixed reviews from both critics and consumers for obvious reasons. Everything about the film is good except the telling of the story. In spite of all the pluses, Moll Flanders trudges so stoically through her ordinary life as to not whet the edge of the viewers interest but rather make a wonderfully produced film a tedious and boring watch punctuated with poignant moments barely sufficient to keep the waning eyelid open.

This is an epic and unexpected period tale with some rather out of place modern touches to the story. It covers quite a sweeping journey from orphanage to whorehouse to art to class differences to the New World. Whatever the differences from the novel, it is a moderately watchable movie. There are some hits and misses with the casting. Robin Wright in the title role is a bit old for the role - when she tries to play a virgin wench it's a bit frightful. Might have been better to use a different actress for the earlier part and then switch to her. Stockard Channing is suitably grotesque as the madam. Morgan Freeman is watchable even though his accent is neither here nor there. The English cast is more convincing but I guess they needed some international names for box office draw. Overall worth a watch but not a great movie.

When I watched "Moll Flanders", it was impossible not to cry... it's just one of those movies. A sweet and sad film, the title character was excellently played by Robin Wright. Some might find it overly emotional, but I found it very enjoyable in its tenderness. My only displeasure with this movie is that it is not true to the story in Defoe's wonderful novel "Moll Flanders"; it is true to the novel only in the spirit of the character Moll Flanders. To say the movie was a loose interpretation is not adequate; it's much more of a new story using the old character of Moll Flanders. Defoe's work has a different (and I find, more entertaining) style as well as a richer plot line. Mobil Masterpiece's presentation of "Moll Flanders" (with Alex Kingston in the title role) is much truer to the novel. I found it much more entertaining and much less sentimental. However, it doesn't have the gut-wrenching emotion of this "Moll Flanders". Each viewer will have to pick their own favorite.

The main problem with this film is that it calls itself "Moll Flanders." It has very little to do with the Defoe novel. Moll Flanders, who in the novel appears as a resourceful, intelligent, fun-loving and talented woman is transformed here into a helpless fallen angel who has little control over her own fate. There is no mention in this film of her many husbands (as well as the clever ways she obtained them), her thieving career, her other children, her mother and brother, and generally everything else in the novel that was entertaining and meaningful. Robin Wright Penn is boring and anemic in a role that demands the opposite. Sentimental Hollywood has never before ruined a good story with such skill. If you want to get the full flavor of this great novel, do yourself a favor and watch instead the British adaptation with Alex Kingston, also from 1996.