war and peace. movie version.

after finishing, "war and peace" i decided to see if there was a mini-series to check out. didn't find one but found the 1956 movie starring audrey hepburn.

i will say that once i saw the cover i knew that audrey would do well as natasha. she did make a lovely natasha. she had the beauty and the spunk of tolstoy's character. she was everything i imagined natasha to be. another great casting was mel ferrer as prince andrei. he was handsome, noble, loving and at times oddly cold. all of the casting was great, helene was beautiful, mayra was not as pretty, kutuzov was fat and old, and all of the men were handsome!!

but i didn't agree with all of the casting. i envisioned old prince bolkonsky fatter. napoleon was way too tall, he needed to be shorter. sadly, i did not like henry fonda as pierre. he just didn't seem like pierre to me, there is vulnerability and uncertainty to pierre that fonda did not project. i have no idea who would do better as pierre, i just didn't see fonda as pierre.

so when i first saw the cover, i assumed that hollywood probably condensed tolstoy's epic into a two hour romance, focusing on the pierre, natasha, prince andrei love triangle. however they didn't! it was actually 208 minutes and the whole novel was covered. some things were cut out or edited but for the most part the whole book was covered. all of the major story lines were there. i will admit that toward the end i started to get bored but that was because it was the war part.

there were some parts that i wished would have stayed true to the book.

-countess rostov's disapproval of nikolai and sonya's romance. they sure did a lot of kissing in front of his family.

-dolokhov's storyline needed to include the fact that he was living with pierre and pierre's close friend when he had his affair with helene.

-pierre's uncertainty about his love for helene. it seemed as if pierre was in love with helene. also it needed to be shown that her family forced him to marry her.

-natasha needed to be more sickly and grief-stricken after her incident with anatol.

-prince andrei's kid was way too young.

-natasha and pierre's ending was way too hollywood.

-and since i loved it so, the nikolai and marya meeting and story.

all in all, i think it is a good adaptation and individuals who don't read or don't want to read the book should check it out.

you were never lovelier.

as i discussed in my "cover girl" post, i checked out rita hayworth movies after i discovered that she was mexican in sandra cisneros' "caramelo". though it turns out she is not, i did discover that rita hayworth is an amazing actress.

before i discuss the movie, i have to express my thoughts on fred astaire as a leading man. maybe because i was so young when i started watching his movies but in my eyes he is really elderly looking. like way-too-old-to-pursue-the-women-in-his-movies-old (don't get me started on "daddy long legs" that one always kinda grossed me out.) even in my favorite movie "funny face", i'm always like really audrey?!?! sadly "you were never lovelier" was not an exception. hayworth is so beautiful and all i can think of is why is astaire so old? and i googled it. he was about 42 and she was 26 when they made this film. and no offense, but he wasn't a hot 40 like brad pitt or george clooney or even colin firth. maybe he's not my type but never drooled over him like i did/do over gene kelly. there is no denying it the man can dance but even that doesn't help his case or should i say face.

so "you were never lovelier" is set in buenos aires and astaire has travelled there looking for work. (which is very similar to his first film with ginger rogers' "flying down to rio"). in his quest for work, he ended up landing a job when he pretends to be the secret admirer of a club owner's daughter who is played by hayworth. the club owner wanted his daughters to marry in order and hayworth was next. her younger sisters also wanted her to marry because they couldn't until she did kinda like "the taming of the shrew" (or "10 things i hate about you" for generation x-ers). but of course, with all of this secretiveness, confusion and drama ensued.

hopefully without ruining it for you, astaire and hayworth do end up together. and the ending was very pretty woman-esque or "pretty woman" has a very you were never lovelier-eque ending. hayworth is upset that she was lied to so astaire had to woo her again. as a last resort, he donned a suit of armor and rode into hayworth's home to sweep her off her feet like a poem she loved. and yes it did work. it was what gere should have done in pretty woman. also i would like to add that i love musicals because before they kissed at the end, astaire and hayworth did a dance! so cute! if only life was like that!

and of course the fashion was amazing!!! just look at these dresses!!!

that sequin ones is to die right?!?!?

after watching two of her films, i am now a fan of hayworth. though i am sad she is not mexican. but ethnicity aside, she really is beautiful. i foundjust lovelier in this film versus "cover girl" (could be the black and white). i do want to see more of films so will start checking them out from the library. (also thanks to measure b for this one too! for my LA readers, not measure b the porn one but measure b in fresno that was to give libraries funding!)

p.s. the dad used an anthology of love letters to help him write love letters as the secret admirer and this reminded me of big from "sex and the city: the movie". also because the receptionist brought the dad love letters from napoleon as well, didn't carrie read one of his in the movies? anyway, right now i am at the end of "war and peace" and reading about napoleon's war "genius". but i plan on checking out a book of napoleon's love letters so i can see his softer side!