a good film. but not adaptation of the novel of Garcia Marquez. and the cause it is not exactly the lost of magical realism aura but the option for a slice of soap opera. it is the film of Javier Bardem and Giovanna Mezzogiornno but the desire to give only a dramatic love story in the clothes of XIX century is not the most inspired. it represents only a big mistake. because the story becomes too subjective and, in many scenes, almost childish. because Javie Bardem has the bad luck to must be the shadow/sketch of Florentino Ariza. because the events are almost pieces of broken statue - too many, without precise place, result of improvement. so, maybe, a beautiful film. for costumes, atmosphere and romanticism with taste of cinnamon. but , unfortunately, to far by the novel.and this does a precious virtue - the cast -, becoming a sin. because it is a waste of energy to not use great actors to resurrect the essence of a real seductive novel.

There are reviewers and critics who wrote about the story being of a profound love; this is not entirely true, in fact, the author of the novel completely dismissed the premise. The Nobel-Prize winning author Gabriel García Márquez was depicting love as an illness akin to cholera in his main character Florentino, because of the obsession and delusion of that very character for his first love Fermina. There is spread of cholera depicted in the story, both the novel and the film so the author called this a trap for the critics. The film is faithful enough to the novel as could be expected given producer Scott Steindorff spent the better part of three years courting the author for the rights.Florentino, played by Oscar winning actor Javier Bardem, in his youth, fell in love with Farmina, played by Giovanna Mezzogiorno, who at first reciprocated it, but since her father did not approve, they were denied courtship as Florentino showed little prospect in her family's judgement. Instead, she was courted by Dr. Juvenal Urbino, played by Benjamin Bratt, to whom she pledged her affection and this shattered Florentino; Juvenal and Farmina married. Florentino swore however to remain virgin for her until she would be his again. To make a long story short, he did not uphold his solemn oath for too long, except in his distorted mind. He started keeping a journal of all the women he seduced trying to fill the void; over time he exceeded six hundred such conquests, facilitated by his gift for poetry and his much laid back demeanor (the novel expanded more about his opium smoking habit than the film did). Still, he fantasized Farmina would be his one day.Faith favored Florentino in later years, when Dr. Urbino passed away, but Farmina was jilted by love as her husband had been unfaithful, carrying on a prolonged affair. But Florentino started courting in earnest until he rekindled Farmina's love; they were both elderly by then. This last part is where most readers and viewers get the reasonable notion that the story is about undying love. If you view it as such, you'll best enjoy the movie for the happy ending it delivers. I'd be remiss if I did not mention that Florentino's sexual depravity, in most of his adult life, is not extolled in the movie, but it's rather made plain that he had issues. He went so far as to seduce a distant relative, América Vicuña, played by Marcela Mar, a minor he sponsored while she was in boarding school; in the novel the affair is more lascivious and when Florentino ends the relation to devote his attention to Farmina, she kills herself.The work is a period piece, with some latitude as historical events unfolded, and there are disparities between periods from the novel to the film. But it won't matter much as the feel for 18th and early 19th centuries are a mere backdrop, well staged though, and take nothing away from the well crafted character development of each of the main and secondary players. I could go on about sub-plots but suffice it to say the narrative, delivered by Bardem is excellent, the dialogue simply delightful, and everyone's performance is impeccable. It is not a shock to read accounts of Gabriel García Márquez exclaiming 'Bravo' after viewing the first final cut of the movie.The critics were wrong about the movie, they rated it poorly and the initial reception by audiences was less than cordial at first. There is no merit to these assessments; after all, it was a Nobel literature prize winning story for which there is minimal screenplay adaptation variation. It's not a mass commercial work, but a classic that in time will gather a following as the book did and still does. Of course, I encourage those who enjoy a good book to get this one, while those who prefer the cinema not to miss the movie. I enjoyed both and trust you will. Lastly, the soundtrack is lovely and three songs are performed with great passion by Shakira, two of which are her compositions, music and lyrics.

The film adaptation of the famed piece of Spanish literature, Love in the Time of Cholera by Gabriel García Márquez, is not an entirely accurate portrayal of this conflicting love story. In the civil war-ridden nation of Columbia, circa 1880, with the devastating cholera epidemic continuing to ravage the country, a conflicting love story is inspired. Fermina Daza, a prudent young girl with a tyrannical father, inadvertently attracts the eye of Florentino Ariza, a telegraph boy with a romantic nature. He falls hopelessly in love and pursues her with intimate letters. As she responds, a passionate bond grows and they share this love together. However her feelings are more reserved than her lover's. In the book, García Márquez explains "In reality they were distracted letters, intended to keep the coals alive without putting her hand in the fire, while Florentino Ariza burned himself alive in every line." (pg. 69) Florentino's intense devotion to her could be a consequence of spending most of his time overwhelming himself with love themed literary works. Fermina is yet a less vulnerable character. However, Fermina's father discovers her secret affair and has other plans for her. He threatens Florentino, then forces an involuntary move upon Fermina to separate the star-crossed lovers. Fermina travels with her father for about three years, while concealing her contact with Florentino over telegrams. They remain sure of their arrangements to marry, until comes back from traveling. The moment she sees him upon her return, she realizes that their love was an illusive product of immaturity. Florentino is left heartbroken and vows that he will love her until he dies. She marries a distinguished doctor, with the support of her father. Florentino maintains 622 affairs, using sex to mend his heartbreak while waiting for Fermina's husband, Dr. Urbino, to die of old age. Until, at the age of about 70, Dr. Urbino finally dies and Florentino makes his move. Offended, Fermina disgraces him and is left to grieve for her dead husband. After time, Fermina and Florentino's love is rekindled carefully. They spend valuable time together on a cruise, and Florentino's purpose for life is obtained. In the movie, Florentino is shown as a love-stricken man with a pathetic and creepy obsession. His character is almost irritating to watch. García Márquez hints at these elements in the book, but they are not so dominant as in the film. Also, the connection between Fermina and Florentino is not described in the movie to the extent that it is narrated in the book. Although she does return her love for him in the movie, their deeper connection and agreement still does not appear on screen. In the novel, they exchange love letters for about five years (since she was thirteen years old) and had thoroughly planned their engagement. The film seems to ignore their character development in that aspect and continue to demonstrate them as two distant lovers lacking union. When she first realizes Florentino's affection towards her, she does not predict him to be admirable or serious. Her experimenting with his attachment in the beginning evolves into a real one on her part. Márquez writes, "These unexpected, almost childish antics caused an unfamiliar curiosity in Fermina Daza, but for several months it did not occur to her that it could go any further. She never knew when the diversion became a preoccupation and her blood frothed with the need to see him…" (pg. 58) . The movie illustrates half the events and insight needed to get the main ideas across. I strongly suggest that if you are interested in this movie that you read the book before hand. It will not be as typical and the situations will not seem as unrelated as they do in the film. The only way to enjoy this movie is to understand the story further than what you are shown. PS> The movie also does not explore Fermina and Dr. Urbino's marriage as though it should have been (read the book). He is also a very prized citizen in the book, having founded numerous organizations and leading many foundations. He is portrayed differently in the movie.

Although the film managed to cram most of the novel's story, it left much more to be desired from the actors. Aside from Benjamin Bratt marvelously playing the part of Dr. Juvenal Urbino, the supporting cast members did a much better job of making me believe their character than the main cast did. There is a fine line between being passionate and being pathetic, which Javier Bardem did a perfect job of crossing. Not to mention John Leguizamo's lame attempt at a Spanish accent.This film might be perfect for the person who has not read the novel and is just interested in watching a film for the sake of watching.I don't believe justice was done to the Dr. or to the love shared between Fermina and Florentino. A deeper understanding of each characters background would have been satisfactory.I suggest people read the book and then read it again because this film is a waste of time.