|
| John Adams (HBO Miniseries) | 
 enlarge
| Actors: Paul Giamatti, Laura Linney
Studio: HBO
Category: DVD
List Price: $59.99
Buy New: $34.98
You Save: $25.01 (42%)
New (40) Used (16) from $34.35
Avg. Customer Rating:  342 reviews
Sales Rank: 19
Format: Box Set, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dvd-video, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Number Of Items: 3
Running Time: 501
Aspect Ratio: 1.77:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 7.8 x 5.8 x 1
MPN: 1000038820
UPC: 883929020065
EAN: 0883929020065
ASIN: B000WGWQG8
Theatrical Release Date: March 16, 2008
Release Date: June 10, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 The Good, the Bad and the God Awful March 20, 2008
38 out of 89 found this review helpful
The Good; Nice performances abound.
The Bad; Did the entire Revolution take place in John Adams' front yard? He hustles the kids in the house during the battles of Lexington and Concord, which took place about 25 miles away? Henry Knox just swings by with the canons from Fort Ticonderoga?
And speaking of Henry Knox, he was 26 at the time of the Revolution, the actor playing him is 45. Could be worse though, Thomas Jefferson is played by a 52 year old actor. Jefferson was 33 in 1776. Oops.
The God Awful; There is no excuse for the camera work in this film. Early in the second episode there is a shot of a house that is so insanely tilted that I actually laughed out loud. Then they cut to a dinner scene inside and jumped from one angle to another until I thought I was watching people dinning on a ship at sea. When the executives previewed this farce did it not occur to them to question shots that made it look like John and Abigail were about to slide off the bed?
Poor John Adams, will he never catch a break?
Update; This just goes from bad to worse. The happiest times in the Adams' lives were the days that John, Abigail, John Quincy and Nabby spent in Europe during Adams' SECOND diplomatic mission. After a joyous reunion in London they all went to Paris. There they learned to enjoy what the city had to offer while Thomas Jefferson helped Adams tutor young John Quincy. Instead of the joyous reunion in London we have an awkward meeting in Paris in which John and Abigail are so intimidating by the servents that they dare not even smile at one another. That is SOOO not John and Abigail!
I could understand it if a film maker decided to omit this chapter of their lives in favor of making time for events of more historic import. But why, why on earth, would you replace these true events with scenes that depict the family as deeply unhappy and make John Adams out to be an uncaring father?! Why put John and Abigail in Paris without the two children that accompanied them?
This doesn't even make sense as an effort to increase the drama. If, instead of having Adams snap at Jefferson, "You won't be meeting John Quincy!", the film makers had shown Jefferson and Adams working late into the night as they taught John Quincy geometery (which is what actually happened) then when Jefferson betrayed Adams it would have had the tragic impact that it deserved.
Adams had a temper at times but was, for the most part, an outgoing man with a great self-depricating sense of humor who was also a devoted father. This film not only fails to make that point but seems to go out of its way to portray him as a selfish and angry tyrant. What a pity.
 Not at all compelling like McCullough's Book w/ awful cinematography March 18, 2008
29 out of 85 found this review helpful
David McCullough's book John Adams was one of the best and most interesting books that I read a year or so back. What happened to the HBO treatment of it? A group of us watched all seven parts through the other evening really anticipating the event, and the consensus (but I give my own opinion) was that the translation of the book to the screen was as dry as dust and it looked it, too. John and Abigail Adams are two of America's greatest couples, and Adams was as goatheaded as a man could be. Why, then, was HBO so intent on telling a rather blah story that was even further compounded by the the camera work of Tak Fujimoto? I have to say that as a presentation, the book was followed, but not properly energized for viewing on the screen. The shots during the Continental Congress debates were unbearably dull, continually showing different head shots back and forth, at cock-eyed angles, while rhetoric was flying! This just so took away from the power of the words.
Paul Giamatti is a favorite actor of mine. I thought his look was perfect for the portly ,not overly handsome Adams. I felt as though Giamatti did not interpret Adams correctly, though. Others may disagree, but for me, Giamatti was a huge casting mistake.
The overall look, though, of the series was cheap, and with Fujimoto's truly avant-garde camera work, the editing of tilted scenes was incredibly distracting. For me, it was not so much the content as much as the presentation. I felt there was a great deal of dead time,especially in the opening two episodes.
[...]
A tiresome retelling of a really exciting,excellent book.Sorry HBO March 20, 2008
25 out of 86 found this review helpful
I grew very tired of "John Adams" after episode 4. I honestly was not planning on finishing it. Since I had been given a screener's copy I decided to finish up episodes 5 through 7 and pretty well came to the conclusion that after reading David McCullough's book John Adams from which the screenplay is based, that HBO had not done a good job at all in it's production of the book. This is not in any way to take away from the character, John Adams and his accomplishments in the least, but as a piece of film work, strictly, I truly thought it was a tiresome effort from a production standpoint. The screenplay closely followed the book, (actually TOO closely for my tastes),but though I would have edited much of the material for economy's sake,THAT was not my problem. My dislike came in the way in which the entire series looked. I found that the cinematography, the music and the editing distracted me from appreciating John Adams. I mean, after all, this IS a film, and the components that completely go into a film are ALL important in communicating a story, not just the character of Adams, or his wife, or the fight for freedom etc.etc. THAT is well communicated in McCullough's book! HBO's treatment was, in my opinion, off in the many areas that I mentioned before. HBO did nothing apart from McCullough's book except to communicate what was already in the book-plain and simple. There was no "umpf" in the soundtrack (especially) and continued odd-angle shots that looked as they had come out of a 1960's Italian film detracted from the presentation. If that was attempt on HBO's part to make it more interesting, I personally feel it was a misstep on their part. Of any mini-series that I have ever seen, "John Adams" looked the worst-especially for seven episodes.
There is nothing wrong or unpatriotic about not liking HBO's "John Adams" as it is no different than the fiasco of a few years back when Sofia Copolla unveiled her "Marie Antoinette" to all kinds of reactions! I loved the biography by McCullough and so appreciated who and what John Adams was and did. HBO only made it drawn-out boring and distracting. In this case, the book is far superior, in my opinion, to this seven episode mini-series.
As concerning the acting, I really did not see anything unusually fantastic from Laura Linney, Paul Giamatti, Tom Wilkinson etal in making me understand or realize these magnificent Americans any better. I thought the characters were not as well formed as the book had done. Many books have gone to the screen with much success,and then again, many have not. This is one case where for me the "have not" applies.
Would I have done it differently? Well, one thing for certain, seven episodes were about three too many. The opening two episodes were extremely sluggish, and much incidental material could have been cut in order to expedite the story more efficiently.
There are other great books on Adams that I found interesting:My Dearest Friend: Letters of Abigail and John Adams, and American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation. As far as other films concerning Adams, I especially like Hail Bop! A Portrait of John Adams!!
A real HBO misfire in JOHN ADAMS March 18, 2008
24 out of 95 found this review helpful
HBO should have really taken a long look at SHOWTIME'S The Tudors - The Complete First Season before they released this really dull 7-part miniseries on John Adams. I just completed the whole series thanks to a Film Society screening, and I could not begin to remotely recommend purchasing this. Probably the singlemost disturbing aspect of this not-compelling docudrama is the bizarre camera work of veteran cinematographer, Tak Fujimoto, who insists on filming every scene with the camera tilted as if you are on board the ship 'Amistad' during rough seas! It is most unsettling as we follow John and Abigail turned to the left and then turned to the right and then back again. Whatever HBO was thinking, Tak Fujimoto, whose numerous credits include Gladiator (Widescreen Edition), Devil in a Blue Dress and The Silence of the Lambs (Two-Disc Collector's Edition) is totally out of his Revolutionary War element here that his angles become down right distracting. Director Tim Hooper allows the series to be done with "coverage" shots with this person talking, then that person talking,and back and forth and so on and so on. Very uninspiring for such a subject as John Adams.
Screen composer Rob Lane has composed a good Celtic based rebel-rousing theme, but the rest of the soundtrack is rather mundane.
Jemma Jackson as production designer has assembled a good look for the film, but Melanie Olsen edits Tak Fujimoto's scenes so tersely that there is never a moment for the film to simply relax.
On the other side, though, the story is just down right as bland as boiled New England lobster. Paul Giamatti, as Adams, takes a lot of getting used to. He just seems wrong, plain and simple, for the part. The scenes and the dialogue are very staged looking, and there is no attempt for this show to be anything other than "Made for T.V." I frankly was glad when it ended. It never picked up any steam, and was tepid in all respects at best. Laura Linney as Abigail?....nothing new for a great actress of her likes!
For more compelling treatment of the John and Abigail story and the American Revolution, I would turn to 1776 (Restored Director's Cut), American Experience: John and Abigail Adams, John and Abigail Adams: Love and Liberty (Biography). These recommendations are far more compelling, even though one of them is a musical and the other two are documentaries; combined they are far more enjoyable and enlightening than this rare misfire "heard around the world" from HBO.
 EXTRAORDINARY! March 23, 2008
24 out of 31 found this review helpful
I wish that everyone would take the time to watch! What a masterpiece! Ive never seen a more realistic portrayal of the beginning of this country. I have a new appreciation for the men and women who gave so much so that we could live as free as people can. Many thanks to the writer director and actors.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
