An Awfully Big Adventure (1995)

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Redundant and unnecessary.

It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

This movie contains excellent acting, a surfeit of creativity, lovely costumes and visuals, and is, without question, the single most depressing movie I have ever seen. One should be wary of expectations when viewing a movie, but the title, the casting, and the advertisements gave the impression the viewer was going to see a lighthearted English period piece.Instead it gives a relentlessly bleak view of humanity, then blind sides the viewer with a plot development that is so horrifying as to defy description. When I read other reviews talk about the different aspects of the movie I wanted to scream "So what?!". One plot development overpowers the rest of the movie like a gunshot to the gut cancels perception of a hangnail, making the rest of the movie irrelevant. The only work of literature I can compare it too is Kafka's "The Metamorphosis".It escapes me how dozens of people can devote months of their lives and millions of dollars to create something so willfully downbeat and depressing, all to no real end. Pathology and despair and heartache can be handled effectively in cinema, "Apocalypse Now" comes to mind. But this movie just makes you want to take a Valium and watch an Ace Ventura movie.I repeat. This is the single most depressing movie I have ever seen. If that sound appealing to you, seek it out and prepare yourself for the "Citizen Kane" of heartbreak and anguish.

"An Awfully Big Adventure" must imply that the cover has been misdirected to the "comedy" aisle. It's *not* a comedy!!!! It's only a rather unpleasant movie, overall. The casting's good. There's Alan Rickman (oh that voice); Hugh Grant at his slimiest (the only characters he's decent at doing), and lo and behold! Could it be? Gasp! Edward Petherbridge! (who played Lord Peter Wimsey in the 1980s). And you have a very pretty little poppet played by a lovely redheaded girl, who does a fine acting job. It's not the acting that's awful. It's the script and directing, which is an awfully big TRAVESTY. WHAT were you people thinking?Directing. Good lord. You have Alan Rickman sporting woolly jumpers, framed in a lot of Tom Cruise Hair Shots astride a motorbike. He's supposed to be the hardened and pained jilted lover, who happens to also be a great Captain Hook. The only reasoning behind the whole Captain Hook presence is that Alan Rickman's voice scares the bejeezus out of everyone. Otherwise, what's the point? You are supposed to have some pity for poor Stella, who is completely blind to the fact that Hugh Grant's character is obviously as fey as Freddie Mercury AND he's a heartless jerk, to boot. And Edward Petherbridge in his least-interesting role EVER, as he apparently earns his paycheque from this movie prancing around in a toga talking to himself, and then breaking his leg and screaming "YOU BLOODY WOMAN!" Oh the melodrama. The main characters are good, and Peter Firth's done a nice job being the jilted lover of Hugh Grant. But WHY was the alcoholic starlet even there? She served no purpose whatsoever except to give Edward Petherbridge a reason to prance around in a toga talking to himself, and to insert the obligatory "I'm an alcoholic so I'm going to throw tantrums...and blunt objects" scene to spice things up a bit.The story itself is a bit of a shocker, but i was prepared for that. I barely batted an eye with the Lolita scenes and gay undertones. Blah, blah, blah. No, I think the most horrifying scene of all in this movie was seeing Edward Petherbridge WEARING MAX FACTOR. That, my friends, is an image that will stay with me the rest of my lucid days.So it all comes down to this: perhaps THESE are the reasons why "An Awfully Big Adventure" was marketed as a LIGHTHEARTED COMEDY! The script is 'awfully' dreadful, and it's rather like watching an inverted Oedipus Rex. Lighthearted comedy? Well, let me put it this way, darlings: "An Awfully Big Adventure" is as hilarious as "Dancer In the Dark" is a screwball romance.Either Miramax's video-release people either have a brilliant sense of ironic humour, or they 'awfully' dig Sophocles in that silly way. Also ironic that "Liverpool" looks suspiciously like Dublin. Hmmm. Anyway, this movie REAKED!

"An Awfully Big Adventure" is a story of a naive 16 year old girl, wonderfully played by Georgiana Cates, and her interaction with the members of a bottom-of-the-line stock company in 1947 Liverpool. The Liverpool actors are lead by an incredibly nasty, chain-smoking homosexual director, played by Hugh Grant in what may have been the best performance of his career. Their star, "Perhaps the best Captain Hook ever," is played by Alan Rickman in yet another stellar performance. This is a consistently entertaining but very, very cynical coming of age story. Thus, it may not be for all tastes. Nevertheless, I recommended it highly, 8 out of 10.

Well, this movie has definitely changed my views on Alan Rickman. He just blew my mind with his passionate performance...there isn't another to explain it.Now the plot was very complex so you did need to see it more than once to get the gist of every little twist. I'll tell you there are allot of twists in this movie. But thats what makes it a must see.I recommend this movie to anyone thats in need of a good slap in the face. I know that I sure did.