ada the leading man is my tpye

StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

kitellis-98121 There have been at least five or six screen adaptations of Lady Chatterly's Lover, and this one adds nothing new or noteworthy. It is mediocre at best, and despite the ludicrous warning on Netflix that this version contains "strong sex", be assured it is decidedly tame. There is not so much as a nipple to be seen in this TV quality offering, which is so careful and safe that it feels like something aimed at schoolchildren studying the book.Since costume dramas are ten-a-penny these days, yet another version of Chatterly is surely surplus to requirements, unless, of course, it is willing to offer up a bit more flesh than, say, "The Tudors".Since graphic (at the time) sex was the main selling-point of the original book, causing much controversy and litigation, it would not be inappropriate for a modern screen adaptation to similarly push the boundaries. Otherwise, what's the point?And lack of sex aside, there is little else to recommend this film either. The script, acting, direction, and cinematography are every bit as flaccid as Lord Chatterly, and there is minimal visual splendour in of countryside or stately homes upon which to feast the eye.There is, however, one pretty good music cue, during the main "sex" scene. It's just a shame that the music was so good because it was making up for so much else that was missing.Having said all that, it ed the time pleasantly (if blandly) enough. I won't be re-watching it, however.

hammondjemma I knew very little of what Lady Chatterley's Lover was about before watching this adaptation of the 1928 novel of the same name, due to the fact that I don't really read classics, until I saw the trailer for it one day on BBC One. After I saw the trailer a few times, I knew that I wanted to watch it and then, after viewing it, possibly get around to reading the novel. Now that I have seen the TV Film, I know that I am definitely going to finish the novel at some point in the near future.The on-screen chemistry between Lady Chatterley & Mellors, portrayed by Holliday Grainger and Richard Madden respectively, had me hooked from their very first meeting. I found myself willing them to be together and was almost brought to tears on numerous occasions in the last 40 or so minutes of the show.Having already seen Madden as the self-proclaimed "King of the North" Robb Stark in the current HBO adaptation of George R. R. Martin's Game of Thrones I had an idea of how I felt regarding his acting and let me say, he does not disappoint. His portrayal of gamekeeper Oliver Mellors was, to me, simply astounding.I am relatively new to the acting of both Grainger and Norton, having only fleetingly seen them as small roles in other TV shows. But boy did they impress me. While Norton was given the task of playing the wheelchair-bound Sir Clifford Chatterley which, in my eyes, could not have been the easiest of roles for an actor to play, Grainger was given the role of Lady Constance "Connie" Chatterley. Grainger plays Lady Chatterley so very well. She is a character that you'll just love to hate.I understand how film critics may be a little disappointed with this adaptation, if they have previously read the novel, as I quite often compare a film adaptation with its book counterpart but, as someone who went into watching this adaptation completely blind from knowing any previous history of it, I thoroughly enjoyed it and would definitely watch it again.

Prismark10 The only other version of Lady Chatterley I have seen was the 1993 version directed by Ken Russell, the Infant Terrible of British Cinema returning to BBC television. The series was a critical and ratings success and of course whipped up controversial headlines but this was Russell being respectful for the television medium although he still added a bit of his flair in which I believe was his last substantial directing project.This cut down version directed and adapted by Jed Mercurio once again shows that the good doctor tends to struggle outside the confines of a hospital ward.Constance Reid marries the upper class Sir Clifford Chatterley a wealthy mine owner who is paralysed in the Great War. Her sexual frustrations drives him to a ionate affair with the gamekeeper Mellors who also served in the trenches with her husband.Although DH Lawrence novel becomes infamous for its sex the book also examined the class relationships between the wealthy and the working classes.Holliday Grainger plays the sultry Lady but she looks more innocent and vulnerable, rejected by her wheelchair bound husband who she loves but he can no longer can get physical with her.James Norton plays Sir Chatterley and Richard Madden is Mellors but I felt both actors were interchangeable for each other's parts not something you can say about Sean Bean in the Russell version.The sexual content here was toned down. Mercurio did not want the sex scenes to overpower the drama but he also subdued the class war aspects of the novel as he made everyone too nice.Sir Chatterley is shown as the decent sort of landowner despite his snobbishness, injured doing his duty for King and Country, wanting an heir and its only towards the latter part of the film that the class divide is raised more explicitly.The tenderly short sex scenes robs Mellors of the animal ion that attracts both he and Lady Chatterley. In short the drama leaves him impotent because without the sex he really is not that interesting a character.The ending based on a draft of the novel does not entirely work for me. Both Lady Chatterley and her lover leaving together to an uncertain future seems far fetched for the time period. She has given up her title, wealth to a man who seemingly has no prospects now he has lost his job.

Irishchatter I think it was truly unfair for Lady Constance Chatterley to cheat on Sir Clifford just because he was so physically not able to give her a child. I suppose it really did hit her hard as she always was dying to have kids. At the same time, it was really wrong. It was too bad that there was no back then on relation to having kids with a disability or even consider adoption. By god, there is so much better changes now, it's really amazing to get the now with therapy, counseling, etc. I felt really sorry actually for poor Clifford since he truly had lost confidence and he just was always so teary, god help him! You wouldn't blame him!I honestly think this is a sad sad story that would make you sigh a lot after watching it....