Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #51343 in DVD
• Released on: 2002-05-14
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
• Formats: Color, DVD, NTSC
• Original language: English, Latin
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 123 minutes

Amazon.com
British filmmaker Michael Winterbottom didn't make a particularly good film until Welcome to Sarajevo, and this curiously dry adaptation of Thomas Hardy's last novel is a good example. Christopher Eccleston plays Jude Fawley, a self-educated stonemason who dreams of attending university but identifies with the working class. Kate Winslet is his cousin Sue Bridehead, a young woman with suffragette leanings and a position as a teacher's assistant. When the two enter into an illicit union, they are condemned to the margins of society, ultimately resulting in a horrifying tragedy. Winterbottom takes an oddly lean approach to Hardy's deterministic story, which leaves a viewer feeling short on emotion just when one needs it for the from-bad-to-worse third act. Welcome to Sarajevo proved that Winterbottom needs a whole other level of personal involvement to make a film that inspires him. Jude isn't one of those lucky films. --Tom Keogh

From The New Yorker
In adapting Thomas Hardy's "Jude the Obscure," the screenwriter, Hossein Amini, and the director, Michael Winterbottom, have dropped the obscurity from the title, but the Jude who remains (played by Christopher Eccleston) still looks as dour and defeated as any reader of Hardy could wish. The movie is in fact remarkably true to the darkness and chafing disgust of the novel, and that fidelity is where the problem lies. Jude, the stonemason who dreams of becoming a scholar, is mired in failure from the start; even as you respect the picture for its earth-toned palette and its bestial pain, you know that any dramatic momentum will lead nowhere. As a result, the bond of love between Jude and Sue (Kate Winslet) seems more like an endurance trial, or the difficult rapport of a brother and sister. She chatters and smokes as if she were a free spirit of the nineteen-twenties; he looks trapped in the old century. There is much to admire here, almost nothing to enjoy. But the picture needs to be seen, not least for the skill with which Winterbottom frames the swift, unmitigated horror of the climax. -Anthony Lane
Copyright © 2006 The New Yorker

Customer Reviews

Jude the Obscure - English Novel Brought to Life
In this 1996 adaptation of Thomas Hardy's novel, Jude the Obscure, a sad, archetypal story plays itself out across the rainy English landscape, helped along by brilliant acting and directing alike.

Though the film is admittedly incredibly bleak, and the ending sad beyond words, it is all-told a brilliant, classic film.

After a short opening sequence introducing us to the young Jude, the viewer is quickly drawn into the parameters of Jude's adult world. Almost at once, we begin to feel his pain, his longing, his hope, and his persistence. We understand well what is driving him in his journey through life. This is a novel brought to life, a story in motion.

As a die-hard fan of Kate Winslet, I have to say that this film one of my Winslet favorites. In my view, 1997's blockbuster Titanic was not only a success as a box office triumph or well-loved film in its own right, but also because it opened the world's eyes to the talent of this young British actress, whose consistently fine performances and willingness to break through barriers as an actress have brought the world great joy on the silver screen, and will surely continue to do so well into the new millenium. In Jude, Winslet is charismatic and beautiful (as usual), and plays Sue Brideheard to a tee. Introduced to her in a small, well-loved photograph, we soon come to understand what Jude sees in her. Her beauty, her intelligence, her promise of a better life. Her laughter still echoes in my head, like the flashbacks in the film. She is youth, she is carefree, she is unattainable, she is a vision, a memory, love.

Eccleston is perfect for the role of the ever-yearning Jude, his face a landscape of green hills, rain, cobblestone streets and stone carvings, and green hills yet again. There are shadows in his eyes, in his face. The depth of his feelings is well-conveyed. His tall frame is so strong and able in one way, so thin and aching in another. We walk with him, cry with him, and love him as we must love ourselves when fate comes crashing down upon us.

P.S. This was my introduction to British actress Rachel Griffiths, who went on to star in Hilary and Jackie, and is currently starring in Me, Myself, and I. Although her role is smaller than Eccleston's and Winslet's, and her character perhaps less likable, she also does a fine job.

Jude the Confused: "Why is everyone suddenly so likeable?"
While I realize a filmmaker can't be expected to slavishly follow the original text word for word, most go too far in remaking the characters as they see fit. "Jude" is a good example. In this version, Sue has been crystalized from a flighty woman "in love with being loved" to an opinionated pre-feminist. Arabella has peeled off several layers of crassness to reveal a pragmatic, self-sufficient person who is simply trying to get by. Even Aunt Drusilla must have found better living through medication; she's now a basically good-hearted person who cares deeply for her adopted nephew! After I got past those little changes, I had to take a skeptical look at Jude himself -- with everyone around him now presented in such a sympathetic light, you start wondering, "What's HIS problem?"

For example, since Arabella's basic lack of compassion is never exposed, one can only wonder why Jude leaves the house as she's butchering the pig: Is he sickened by the sight of blood? Is he repulsed by seeing his bride up to her elbows in pig entrails? In the book version, the issue was that Arabella wanted to prolong the pig's death to make the meat tastier, while Jude insisted on putting the poor creature out of its misery. In the movie, you might assume he'd thought bacon grew on trees.

Another change from book to film: "Jude the Obscure" was considered scandalous when it was published, but what can shock a jaded '90s audience? Hmm... *ponder*... Oh, I know! More sex scenes! Suffice it to say, if you've ever wondered what Kate Winslet looks like in the buff, you need wonder no more. As for Christopher Eccleston, a fig leaf would've covered everything we didn't see. There's a lot more eroticism here than the book called for. Whether that's a good thing is to be determined by the eye of the beholder.

The ending, like the title, is sharply abbreviated. Without the book as a reference, you'll be left wondering how things all turned out.

Overall, I thought the movie failed to either remain true to the original or stand on its own merits.

Do not expect a happy end
This screen adaptation of the classic by Thomas Hardy (Jude the Obscure) stars Christopher Eccleston as Jude Fawley and a slim Kate Winslet as his cousin, Sue Bridehead. Strong supporting roles are provided by Rachel Griffiths, June Whitfield and Liam Cunningham.

The film starts like many American films: someone poor and disadvsntaged has a driving ambition to succeed. If this were an American film, we would be sure of a happy ending: Jude finds a well-paid job and lives happily ever after with Sue and the children. Anyone familiar with the work of Thomas Hardy will expect fate to intervene and somehow make it impossible for the protagonists to realize their dreams. If Thomas Hardy had been born somewhat later and worked as a screenwriter, I cannot help thinking he would have specialized in the film noir genre.

My main criticism is that none of the actors manages an authentic Dorset accent, with the possible exception of June Whitfield. Christopher Eccleston attempts one but invariably goes back to his Manchester accent. Rachel Griffiths produces something that sounds more like an Irish accent whilst Kate Winslet usually speaks like she does in Titanic.

The film contains a few very strong scenes: a pig being slaughtered and disembowelled as well as a close-up of Kate Winslet giving birth.

As a screen adaptation of one of the classics of English literature there is a lot of material, feeling pain and suffering, crammed into 110 minutes, so much so that I kept finding new meaning after four viewings. Perhaps those familiar with Hardy will prefer to read the novel whilst those who are not will find this adaptation slow and depressing. The highlight for Winslet fans may well be seeing her totally naked, but I doubt they would think it worth sitting through the whole file for those 15 seconds.

This is an excellent film, faithful to the Hardy classic. The highlights of the film are the excellent cinematography and the outstanding original score by Adrian Johnston. I would strongly recommend this film with the caveat that it may not be suitable for those without the stomach to take the scenes described above or those who would find a tragic story too distressing.