A tale of three Chatterleys

5 thoughts on “A tale of three Chatterleys”

1. I dunno, I’d rather watch sex scenes than read about ’em – the 2000s version with a French actress (can’t remember her name) was pretty hot too

2. I’ve seen the 1955 version with Danielle Darrieux, and all I remember about it is that it was dull. Ditto for the 1981 version with Sylvia Kristel. I did not see the 1993 version, probably because I had learned that adaptations of big-time old novels are dull.

   ( I am just not a fan of costume drama. I wonder if movies made in the 1930’s and 40’s are now costume drama? What if they are made now, but set then?)

   Anyway, after reading what UncleScoopy has written about D. H. Lawrence, why do people keep remaking this book? It must still say something to some people, or it would have faded away like other once great novels nobody makes movies of any more, like “Magnificent Ambersons.”

   1. I was curious about what I had written about ol’ Bert Lawrence, so I re-read that review, not without some embarrassment. I do have a tendency to go on and on, don’t I? I barely mentioned the film I was supposed to be reviewing. I wonder if I ramble more than Trump.

      1. The rambling was the best part. I don’t know anything about D H Lawrence except vague references. Hearing a clearly expressed and well reasoned opinion about him was very interesting to me. I know it’s just one opinion, and opinions vary all over the place, but it was a lot more about Lawrence and his place in literature, both then and now, than I knew before.

         Things like that are why I like reading Orwell’s essays, even about things like English comic postcards or boys magazines.

         Oh, and Trump doesn’t ramble anything like you do. He rants, he raves, he maunders (there’s a word I’ve never used before), he drivels, but he never says anything intelligent. He’s a huckster and con man gone senile.

3. Did Sean Bean’s character die in this version of Lady Chatterley’s Lover?

Comments are closed.