Mr. Malcolm's List

The Achilles heel of the romantic comedy is that at times it feels generic, with no surprises. This one, based on a book, somehow has a charm that makes it functional. What more can I say.

It IS predictable, but it is definitely worth watching. Fantastic cast!!!!

I miss the days of historical accuracy in period pieces.

Not as enjoyable as any Jane Austen remake that it copies.

I keep trying to finish watching it but it's just so boring.

Interesting start/premise but boring the rest of the way. Stopped watching properly about 4/5 of the way through. At least the costumes were nice.

Poor Jane Austen knockoff with none of the charm and obnoxious characters.

I found the choice of actors disappointing. I didn't believe the love story/stories. The chemistry was not right at all. Since this is one (if not the only) of the most important parts of the telling story in a film adaptation, I have to deduct half the stars. Otherwise - everything else was perfectly and beautifully done.

I am really, really, really no friend of "Epoch pieces" as I hate all this posh decoration and ridiculous fake behavior, and definitely not of romances set at the beginning of the 19th century, but as this flick has two excellent actors, Frida Pinto and Theo James, I thought I could give it a try. Though I have to admit that I fast-forwarded a few small stretches, all in all it was surprisingly interesting and well made. The end is, as in most romances, extremely ridiculous, but well, at least till then, one could admire a few nice palaces (inside and outside), parks and countryside views. 5/10 points.

Very boring and simple movie with no surprises whatsoever. No chemistry between actors/actresses. A perfect Sunday movie to sleep on... What is annoying is for the cast to be composed almost exclusively of actors issued from minorities for a 1800s period movie. Please, Directors, could you please respect history and stop using wokeism or include political statements in your "art", especially in so called "romantic period movies"? In the 1800s, in the UK, minorities were very limited and sadly were mainly domestic workers. The portrayal of the British aristocracy being composed exclusively of minorities in the 1800s is historically completely inaccurate. The Director said she "wanted today's minorities to be able to identify as members of the British high-society in the 1800s". Why? So, next there will be an Elizabeth I from Africa and an Henry VIII from China or India? (we already have an African Ann Boleyn in the mini-series of same name, and recently an African Cleopatra in a so-called "documentary" causing a scandal in Egypt). I think Directors should concentrate on delivering good movies (which was not the case here) instead of wanting to "make the buzz" and get media attention using politics. They should respect identities of characters and the times/places they were living into. This "obligation" to impose minorities characters where it is historically inaccurate is wrong and does not benefit to anyone. Minorities actors understand they are used in a political narrative, which I believe has no place in historic/period movies or Tv shows.