This review is surprising. An Academy Award winning writer, superb actors, great locations, authentic period costumes and based upon a great play...and this doesn't even earn a single star?

I haven't seen the film yet, but I can't imagine that it doesn't merit a single star. RottenTomatoes has it with an average rating of 4.4 out of 10. That would be 44% -- hardly a "zero star" rating. The audience at RottenTomatoes is much more generous with a fresh 61% review.

I'm not saying that this is a bad review or that I necessarily disagree; however, there aren't many films that earn an absolute zero. I have a friends tell me that it was "so-so," "just okay" and "something you expect to find on Masterpiece Theater on PBS."

I will say this though: This review is almost seems "petty" by resorting to name calling. "Told by an idiot?" How would the author like it if we said that this review was "written by an idiot?" There is this thing called "tact" that allows a critic to review a film without resorting to cheap shots at the writer.

full of sound and fury Signifying nothing.

...this tone-deaf travesty, this misbegotten farrago, this offensive, rank, charmless, near-lifeless, anti-romantic twaddle, a classic tale "told by an idiot."
I like it when a reviewer really lets it rip. Thank you! So much crap gets positive reviews, it's refreshing to read the real stuff.
Canavese warned us that he knows the play and loves it. His love was betrayed by the film. Let 'er rip, reviewer!

I agree with Nayeli, this review is really over the top, and out of the boundaries - worthy of the ranting nuts on IMDB flame wars. When you say you review something from 1 to 5 stars, you are completely unprofessional - and should be fired - when you go off like that and give something 0 stars.

It is strange, but it is almost as if the reviewer holds to such absolute loyalty to the source material -- every dot and tittle -- that he cannot stomach when the screenwriter strays from it.

Oddly enough, I am still waiting for a faithful adaptation of THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO. It is my favorite book. Unfortunately (for me), I have never watched a faithful adaptation of it. The most recent adaptation, with Jim Caviezel in the role of Edmund Dantes, started well but turned into a typical "Zorro" storyline about half-way through.

While I was disappointed that the adaptation didn't stick to the actual story (and meandered far from it), the actual adaptation wasn't "all bad." It was just a different story.

The same is true of many (if not most) adaptations -- especially of Shakespeare. Have the definitive HAMLET ever been filmed yet?

It is too familiar a story, remade too many times. Give it a long, long rest, please.