Far From The Middle England Crowd.

So, on the day after the general election, I couldn't bear to watch the news and headed to escape from it all in the dark of the cinema for a few hours. What better way to take your mind off things than spending a couple of hours with a Thomas Hardy bleakfest? That's Thomas 'laugh-a-minute' Hardy, Oliver Hardy's funnier brother. That's Thomas Hardy, Dorset's very own the grandmaster of misery. Actually, to be fair, 'Far From The Madding Crowd' has a positively upbeat ending compared to most of his oeuvre but it's still an overwrought melodrama featuring everyone's family favourites: financial ruin, lost social status, unrequited love, heartbreak, unhappy marriage, regrets, suicide, execution and dead animals. I loved it.

Hardy usually translates well to the big screen. I'm a big fan of the epic sweep and romance of the 1967 John Schlesinger version but it does look horribly dated now despite Nic Roeg's ravishing cinematography. This adaptation goes for a more realistic muddy boots approach but still has plenty of sumptuous scenery to wallow in. Carey Mulligan may not have Julie Christie's looks but she is a better actress. Her portrayal of Bathsheba Everdine is just perfect really; convincingly independent and vulnerable. It's a subtle but powerful performance. Michael Sheen is as reliably brilliant as you might expect but he does stray a little bit into Anthony Hopkins territory here. Tom Sturridge is no Terence Stamp but whilst he may not have the same screen magnetism he makes up for it with a more layered performance as the dashing Sgt Frank Troy. The weak spot for me was Matthias Schoenaerts who looks more like a Premiership football player than a rugged Wessex farmer. He's so distinctly European looking (he's Belgian) that it's distracting. He's also about as interesting to watch as a new potato. He's washed and clean and boring where it calls for pained and troubled and earthy. Juno Temple is in it too as Fanny Robbin (Hardy always has the best names) but leaves virtually no impression. 

I liked it a lot but I have to say that it was confusing at times. I don't necessarily mean shot to shot editing - individual scenes are very good - the sabre waving in the woods scene is a standout (as it is in the 1967 film) but the grand sweep of the tale is terribly fudged. You think years have passed but it turns out to be just a few months. Entire connect-the-dots scenes just seem to be missing. Obviously, you understand that plot points have to be sacrificed in order to keep the running time down but there seems to be a real lack of overview of the story. Why does Troy still hold a flame for Fanny? We need the scene where she explains herself. When George the sheepdog turns up later in the film it's a surprise because it's never really made clear that Gabriel owns two dogs. Maybe I just missed this stuff because I'm stupid, but I know the source material and was still a bit lost.

It's very, very good in most other departments. The costume design and the score are wonderful, the locations evocative and it's always luscious to look at. It does lack something though and I'm not sure what it is. It lacks bite somehow. There's just not quite enough of the emotional wax and wane that it needs. Maybe I'm just over familiar with the story. Maybe I'm just miserable. Whatever, I still recommend it. It's the perfect film for a rainy afternoon and I'm glad that it exists.