I found the first half of the movie hard to get through, and my wife actually gave up and went to sleep by the time 40 minutes had passed. I agree that the characters need more depth, and also that there needed to be a clearer time frame.

I felt that lots superfluous day to day activity was included could have been taken out to make more time for character development without needing to add more time to the film. An alternative would have been to take some of the story out of the characters that didn't add to much to the story of what happened. While there is a clear outcome to the film that a watcher could be expected to cheer for, the watcher isn't given much reason to do so based on the lack of character development that happens.

I think this is labeled as a drama, as that's the closest genre that could reasonably be given. There is obviously from the cover some romance involved, but not much. The character development problems also make it feel as though there isn't much drama involved.

If you enjoy the Victorian era, and also like a drama/romance that paints wide panorama of it's story, without too much detail, I feel this is the movie for you.

I gave this movie a six, but that easily could have been a seven if that first half of the film hadn't been so hard to suffer through. I feel the premise of the film could have achieved an 8 with better character development, and that is coming from someone that whose favorite genre's are sci-fi and romantic comedies.

**Three men like the three different seasons in a woman's life!**

This is a wonderful drama, I have been waiting for such film to come and since its release, I have been looking forward to this day. The romance is the theme of the film, so not the entire film as what it looks like. Based on the one and half century old novel of the same name and the fourth film adaptation. I have seen only 'Tamara Drewe', but that was altered to the present era, other than that I've not seen any other version. Still, I believe this will be remembered as the best one so far.

I would say Carey Mulligan is the British version of Jake Gyllenhaal. Because they both make fine films, I admire their selection of the films. Mulligan was so brilliant here and in addition to that, Matthias Schoenaerts was equally good. They both made this film look so poetic, and so supporting cast including Michael Sheen and Tom Sturridge contributed well.

If you like periodic drama, then you probably would enjoy it. The story was excellently told. The three layered romance was narrated like three that happens in the different seasons. Like landscape change, how humans too transform was quite neatly briefed for over two hours. One of the best films in the recent time I've seen. The director of 'The Hunt' did a great job. If you like Jane Austen's kind of story narrations then you must try this, so I highly recommend it!

_8/10_

A young woman (Carey Mulligan) inherits a farm in 19th century England and works hard to keep it running while maintaining her independence. Meanwhile she must contend with three potential love interests - a lonely neighbour (Michael Sheen), a shepherd (Matthias Schoenaerts) and a soldier (Tom Sturridge).

There is no questioning the brilliance of the source material when it comes to period adaptations, and yet so many film makers are content to fall back on this rather than try to make something original. Get a text in the public domain, get someone to write it up into a screenplay (even though it’s been done 3 times before and has a TV miniseries), throw in some big name actors and a healthy costume budget and you’ve got yourself a film.

Fortunately, Far From the Madding Crowd manages for the most part to avoid becoming the dull procedural slog that we’ve seen from its peers. Carey Mulligan lights up the screen like few can, lending an air of strength and vulnerability to the character while maintaining a sense of intrigue about her.

Vinterberg seems to use black magic to make every sunrise and sunset in Dorset look like a dream - either that or he shot the whole film in the three nice weeks of the year. He seems keenly aware of every ray of light hitting the lens and makes it work almost like another person in the frame.

However, at two hours this is a short film for such a long book and it shows. The final third is rushed, and the film as a whole fails to give us an idea of the passage of time. Did the events occur over days, months or years? It has the tone of an epic love story spanning over decades yet elements in the plot suggest it lasted a few months at most.

Better than a four hour snoozefest but ultimately a waste of some great performances.

http://benoliver999.com/film/2017/05/01/farfromthemaddingcrowd/

This is a very classy adaptation of the Thomas Hardy story and Carey Mulligan plays the role of "Bathsheba Everdene" will some skill. It is one of those stories, however, where I never quite understood why the heroine just didn't stick to her plan A and marry the right boy first. In this case, the hunky and decent farmer "Gabriel" (Matthias Schoenaerts). Instead, she has to mess around with the dashing but fickle "Capt. Troy" (Tom Sturridge) whose heart lies elsewhere until tragedy strikes, and then with the wealthy but rather too genteel "Boldwood" (Michael Sheen) upon whom tragedy also pays a visit. The attention to detail is wonderful; the outdoor settings look so very natural with some lovely photography that immerses us in their bucolic life complemented by some fine costumes and period imagery. There is chemistry a-plenty on screen between her and both Schoenaerts and Sturridge; Sheen is adequate but somewhat underused and as the story gathers pace I did find myself wondering if she was ever actually going to see sense. It is perhaps a touch too long, the character establishment is a bit on the plodding side, but it is a strong story of characterful personalities with flaws, lusts, and plenty of passion. Not as rugged, perhaps, as the 1967 version - but still a good watch.