Love In the Time of Cholera

If you would like to be spared wasting two hours of your life that you will never be able to regain, I would caution you to avoid seeing Love In the Time of Cholera. Instead, go to a used bookstore and pick up a copy of the novel - spend your time reading that.

I was disappointed by this film on many levels. First, it was in English. Judging by the accents of the actors, everyone knew Spanish - there was no practical reason for putting our language on their tongues. (Perhaps Americans simply equate foreign language films with "boring films." If that is the case, then I can at least understand the decision to go with English as a marketing strategy.) There was also a certain amount of incongruity when it came to the language - at one point Fermino refers to one of his ships as "New Fidelity," and moments later we see a shot of the ship with the name "Nueva Fidelidad" painted on the side. You could also catch some of the very minor characters (and extras) speaking Spanish - I noticed this during the first funeral scene. If you're going to abandon a language and replace it with our bastard English, at least be consistent about it. They also botched (as all directors do) recreating a realistic pre-Vatican II Mass. For instance, the priest would not have faced the people, but rather would have been facing the altar. Also, the he would not have said "Corpus Christi" when placing the host on a communicant's tongue, but rather "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam." (I am aware that this has no real relation to the artistic merit of the film, but is a pet peeve left over from my short-lived time as a devout Catholic. That, and I demand historical accuracy of filmmakers, especially in cases where doing so would be painfully easy.) There was also an obnoxious amount of Shakira (yes, Shakira) in the soundtrack. (Though from what I understand Garcia Marquez is to blame for this - apparently he approached Shakira and asked her to come up with several songs for the movie. Perhaps he has grown senile in his dotage.)

The casting was also a let-down. This criticism has perhaps more to do with my distaste for Benjamin Bratt than anything else, but he is the last person I would have chosen to play Urbino. I also found it interesting that they used two different actors to represent Florentino Ariza at different ages, but used only one actress to play Fermina (who, as has been noted elsewhere, was not particularly convincing as an elderly woman).

As it's been years since I've read the book, I can't critique the film properly. From what I remember, however, I finished the novel liking Florentino - yet at times during the movie I wanted to reach through the screen and slap some sense into him. The New York Times capsule review of the movie hit the nail on the head when it said that Florentino "comes off as a crazed stalker, a guy who needs to get a life (as well as a sturdier stomach)..."

I am hoping that someone over at Cosmoetica does a review of the movie. Given Schneider's assessment of Garcia Marquez as a writer (one that I do not agree with) I suspect I can guess the substance of the review. Had I the time I would like to reread the novel, but I have more books at my bedside than I currently have time to read.

Tomorrow I will finally post my review of Whole Grain. I am afraid that I have mentioned this review so much in earlier posts that you will be expecting something more complete. There is much to be said about James Emanuel and his poetry, but I am no critic; I will leave the truly substantive commentary to those more competent than I.