This is what happens when you try to turn a richly detailed 400 page book into a 100 minute made-for-TV Hallmark Hall of Fame movie. Needless to say, much is lost. The script ignores Hardy's lush narrative and substitutes expedient blather. Characters aren't developed so they come across as shallow and one-dimensional. Wildeve's passion for Eustacia is portrayed (to cite one example) as simple lust. In the book, his feelings are more complex."As for Wildeve, his feelings are easy to guess. Obstacles were a ripening sun to his love, and he was at this moment in a delirium of exquisite misery. To clasp as his for five minutes what was another man's through all the rest of the year was a kind of thing he of all men could appreciate."Because of time constraints, events are compressed, condensed and in some cases simply deleted. The subject of Thomasin's and Clym's inheritance (and an associated lengthy and amusing gambling sequence) is completely ignored. Worse yet, Mrs. Yeobright's attempted reconciliation with her daughter-in-law, her long, torturous and dramatic journey to her son's house and back, and the subsequent repercussions, are given absurdly brief and unconscionably unfaithful treatments. Thus, the arguably most important episode in the novel, the one that precipitates all of the ensuing tragedy, is glossed over in the movie. The (strangely well-lit) climactic storm sequence was also botched.As for the acting, I thought that Catherine Zeta-Jones as Eustacia Wye and Clive Owen as Damon Wildeve were actually pretty good given what they had to work with. Of course I might not have been so charitable with CZJ if she looked more like, say, Roseanne Barr. Steven Mackintosh succeeds in capturing the quiet dignity of the Diggory Venn character. Everyone else was pretty much forgettable except for Ray Stevenson who was awful as Clym Yeobright.Another positive – good scenery, reasonably faithful to Hardy's (extensive) description of Egdon Heath.

The story opens in southwestern England, in the year 1842. Clym Yeobright, a successful businessman, has just returned to his beloved heath after some years in Paris. He meets beautiful Eustacia Vye, the local vixen and tease, believed by many to be a witch, so powerful is her hold over men. Eustacia dreams of escaping the dull moor and sees in Clym a way to finally make it to the bright lights of Paris. Clym, however, wants to live out his days as a humble schoolmaster on the heath with his beloved Eustacia.It's no wonder Thomas Hardy's novel is a classic and this TV-movie does it justice. The acting is uniformly excellent, the location is, in turns, bleak and wonderful, the sorrowful mood is enhanced by a plaintiff folk score, and the literate script stays close to the book. The hypnotically beautiful Catherine Zeta-Jones captures Eustacia's willfulness and pride and is perfect in the role. Clive Owen plays Damon Wildeve, a local man who lusts after the elusive Eustacia. He's very good, as is Ray Stevenson, the 'native' blinded by Eustacia's charms. Together, they form a powerful and tragic love triangle. Recommended.

I only wish it were possible to see this movie on the big screen. The scenery was magnificent. Hardy loved the English countryside and this production made me feel as though I was there and at that place in time. I loved "Far From the Madding Crowd" also, but I think Catherine Zeta-Jones is better cast as Eustacia than Julie Christy was as Bathsheba. As a matter-of-fact I think Catherine Zeta-Jones would have made a perfect Bathsheba in a "Far From the Madding Crowd" film if she could have played the part at the same age she was when she acted in "Return of the Native." (she was about 25). After all, Thomas Hardy's Bathsheba was dark-haired and beautiful. Not to say that Julie Christy was not good in the role, but she didn't have dark hair and her hair style seemed from the sixties. I would love to see an Ang Lee ("Sense and Sensability", "Brokeback Mountain", and many more films) version of either one of these movies in the future.

I chose this video because of it's historical flavor and the choice of actors. Unfortunately, neither of the two were very interesting. Not having read the book I was totally lost for the first 20 minutes or so. The story just moved so slowly and didn't keep my attention. Catherine Zeta-Jones gave a very poor performance and I was very disappointed. Joan Plowright came through, as usual, but still a little subdued. The whole thing was very subdued and sluggish. If you are looking for a movie with no nudity or language this will do. Also, if you are studying this book in school I am sure you would find this video helpful. Otherwise, I do not recommend this video.