One question kept coming up while watching this. Why on Earth pay for so capable actors and then waste them on clumsy adaptation and catastrophic direction. We are talking Paul Newman, Robin Wright and Helen Hunt in one place, which will never happen again, and even Ed Harris is too good for this production.There is a reason why writers who don't write cinematic novels are normally nor allowed to write adaptations of their own work - they are in love with their own writing and turn a movie into an audio book.That's exactly what happened here. Long, unwieldy scenes with a narrator essentially reading the book and footage serving as a mere illustration. Doesn't HBO have anyone to review this stuff and keep sending it back to square one till it actually becomes cinematic. It even spells out book chapters and has things like "this will be in the latter chapter" which is plain pathetic.Good director can usually rectify this kind of mess but Fred Schepisi has shown such ineptitude that's it's painful to watch how he stumbles, neglects character development and uses multiple copies of prior sequences to the point that it becomes annoyingly noticeable. He also seems to be incapable to compose sequences of the right length to convey sub-plots. He either makes them ridiculously long and boring, all the way to having the book being read into your face, or he cuts them short, doesn't finish the park and makes the final cut look random.Particularly annoying aspect is that he doesn't have the first clue how to visually separate scenes that are long memories serving as sub plots from flashbacks (short and dramatic) and from the main/present scenes. They are all just equally flat, not even a change in the lighting or set decor to depict two different times.

This is about the film. I haven't read the book. So, my take is strictly to the point of commenting on the movie version of the story.I enjoyed this film for the scenic locations and amazing cast artfully giving us the complex characters of the story.If you have never been to New England, take it from a recent transplant from Southern California, it is all and more than you imagine or see in the movies. I lived in San Diego for the first 45 years of my life and moved to rural Massachusetts 4 years ago and plan to stay for the second half of my life. This film captures real locations that I have visited in my travels around New England. It's a different world on this side of the country. Not better. Not worse. What is most different is that the everyday landscape just pops out at you in endless contrasts. This film does an excellent job of capturing that.The intricate stories in this movie develop carefully as details are revealed deftly in smooth transitions to flashbacks. The characters each hold a special interest and stake in the dynamics of life in a town overshadowed by a rich, vengeful widow (Joanne Woodward) wielding her will as she (you-would-think) supposedly struggles with her own guilt. This facet of her character is not easily given up by Joanne Woodward.Woodward surprises in the unfortunate way she delivers her role in a rather formal style of acting that pre-dates most films made after 1960. She says her lines as if on stage and doesn't really play "in frame" to the camera. Her scenes seem oddly out of sync in the film.The other actors are thoroughly convincing and imaginative in their portrayals. The motivations and demeanors are all clearly understood even with some of the deliciously portrayed complexities of the characters. The scenes with Ed Harris (as Miles Roby) and William Fichtner (playing Jimmy Minty) are masterfully acted to reveal numerous layers in each character's persona. There is so much more than just dialog going on in those scenes. I'ts absolutely convincing.Helen Hunt (as frustrated and angry ex-wife, Janine Roby) is just a tiny bit off center in this role. She seems to be trying too hard and ends up all over the place from a crass broad with no humor to a painfully inept mother with no mother's instincts. Her shallow portrayal doesn't allow for much sympathy. Throughout, she just isn't believable. But, you go along because it's Helen Hunt.The back story of the abandoned high school kid, John Voss, (compellingly acted by Lou Taylor Pucci) and the Roby's daughter (Danielle Panabaker) adds an unusual twist to the story. I can't give away details. But, I think the Voss character needed more attention in the film. We want to know more about him.The production seems to unravel near the end when it wraps up rather abruptly with the epilogue. Anyone would think they should have taken it farther. It doesn't feel like there is closure even though you know what happens. It's not necessarily clear. Maybe the answer is in the book. Maybe something was edited out for time's sake.The Special Features are okay. I enjoyed Paul Newman's comments on how much he enjoyed staying in the town where this was filmed in Maine. He mentioned staying in the town and making some new friends.I'll bet he liked that little harbor side restaurant that was in a few scenes when going to and from Martha's Vineyard. The restaurant is actually in Hyannis on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. I've been there 5 times. Great lobstah at that restaurant. The ferry landing to the Vineyard is just a short walk away.I enjoyed this series quite a bit on many levels. There is not any one thing that sticks out. It is a high quality production all around. I will watch it again.

Some people did some fantastic performances. Pucci's performance was so real, you could say he wasn't acting. You could swear that the actor who played the principal actually had been a principal, and a kind one. Robin Penn Wright didn't have any false notes, which is incredible inasmuch as she had to show what love is like. The fellow who played Zack Minty was near perfect--playing the kid you hated. Helen Hunt was outstanding as the middle-age woman looking for romance. Estelle Parsons played her mother so well you would think she was Helen Hunt's mother. Farina was great. Hoffman had little screen time, and yet was very touching in a way I can't describe. The only problems were with the people who put the movie together. The difference was too great between the old and new Paul Newman. The old Paul Newman was a much deeper character than the portrayal done by a young version of himself. And Joanne Woodward Newman just didn't seem mean enough to be believable. The Newman's knew how to cast everyone but themselves.

**This contains spoilers about the second part of the movie** I really appreciated the casting, the first few acts, and the setting. Very true-to-life and relevant. The second disk was a soup sandwich, and I imagine that the closing of the novel stunk as well. After the strong first 2 hours, the letdown of the last part was tremendous, and made we wonder "why bother?" When it was finished, I wanted that time back -- I had been cheated. It was evident to me that the author/screenwriter had wandered out into a field and needed a way to get back. Also, I wondered if HBO had funded the first part and then lost funding on the second. So much was contrived that it looked as though they were trying to save money and just get it over with.Very disappointing, and I think this is a good example of why Hollywood is losing box office and relevance. When you start out strongly relating to *real people* and *real life,* you should try to end up that way, too.The first few chapters are worth watching, but you're going to be let down. You were warned.