The Scarlet Letter

1995 "When intimacy is forbidden and passion is a sin, love is the most defiant crime of all."
5.3| 2h15m| R| en| More Info
Released: 13 October 1995 Released
Producted By: Cinergi Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Set in puritanical Boston in the mid 1600s, the story of seamstress Hester Prynne, who is outcast after she becomes pregnant by a respected reverend. She refuses to divulge the name of the father, is "convicted" of adultery and forced to wear a scarlet "A" until an Indian attack unites the Puritans and leads to a reevaluation of their laws and morals.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Cinergi Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

marioncap Nope, this film is NOT an accurate adaptation of "The Scarlet Letter" by any stretch of the imagination. It's more like a modern "Variations on a Theme by Nathaniel Hawthorne," or one of those Fantasias that 19th- century composers used to write with a famous, much-older melody as a starting point.That said, I enjoyed this movie quite a lot. The depiction of late 18th/early 19th century Native American civilization on the Northeastern Seaboard is vividly and richly imagined; don't think I've ever seen this in a film before. Gary Oldman, as a wonderfully sexy and yet perfectly pure young Rev. Dimmesdale, probably would have pleased Hawthorne on the whole, and his chemistry with Demi Moore's obviously anachronistic, but compelling, Hester Prynne is delicious (their scene in the barn is very hot indeed).Finally, something has to be said about the gorgeous John Barry score. What lovely, memorable film music! On the strength of the score alone, I encourage anyone who enjoys romantic stories (and won't be offended by the vast, ridiculous departures from Hawthorne's masterpiece) to give this movie a look.
minamurray I have never read Nathaniel Hawthorne's 19th century novel, but apparently this is total rape and murder of it. Admittedly Demi Moore's Hester is extremely irritating, like all of the movie's strrrooong women, and celebration of adultery would make poor, Victorian Nathaniel turn scarlet too, but production values are lush and the film is not without entertainment value. Think, for example, the hysterical scene where Hester (or whoever this modern woman among Puritans is) puts wreath of flowers to her head and runs in the woods like 17th century hippie! She is free spirit in narrow-minded, bigoted society, get it? As filmed version of Historical Harlequin book this is not bad at all, as Hawthorne adaptation it is, of course, insulting travesty and understandably angered book's fans.
bm317 I was expecting something awful because of the mockery and disparagement from the critics. I'm so glad I saw it anyway! I am critical and usually hard to please as a movie viewer, and this was a good movie, especially when you compare it to most of the crap being made. I find it hysterical that people are pretending to take such offense that Hawthorne's story wasn't followed to the T. Name one classical story that is followed to the t by Hollywood. Or any book adaptation for that matter. Name one.I think all the mockery is really about the fact that this movie critiqued the early brutal treatment of women in this country's history. This is almost never explored, never exposed. When Hester says, "This isn't about the sin of us women, it's about the sin of you men," that is the sort of line that makes you unpopular with critics. Then they will pretend it's all about the art. There was a lot about the art in this film to appreciate. Oldman's performance was incredible, subtle, believable. Duvall never disappoints, and the abuse of Hester was realistic in its viciousness, even though it only showed the edges. I appreciated most of all that the filmmakers were willing to take on this subject matter. How they adapted it to modern movie viewer tastes, well, maybe they could have done better, but the pressures to make an expensive film commercially successful cannot simply be overlooked. All and all they did a good job. I'm so glad I finally watched it, and didn't let the mocking critics turn me off to it forever.
rainey-3 Okay. Calm down people. This movie is an overall very good movie– terrific cast, great sets, great costuming, lots of action and I've never seen Gary Oldman look so handsome. The actors did a really good job. Very entertaining. The book was boring, people. Boring boring boring. Don't you remember having to read it in high school? THE MOVIE IS MUCH BETTER. And I'll state this unequivocally-- it's way better than 90% better than most stuff I see on the big screen-- hands down. And the amateur critic that pulled the race card and said the Indians in this film were not depicted doing anything other than one dimensional, childish actions obviously didn't watch the scene where the two older tribeswomen were discussing Robert Duvall's character very astutely-- great dialogue! You other hater critics need to lighten up! Seriously. Loved the film.