Something went wrong
Try again later.
The Scarlet Letter
Seeking independence and having a good life, a young beautiful married woman named Haster, goes to England, where she sets up a new life and makes new friends, but once upon meeting a young handsome guy, everything changes, as they fall in love with each other and have an affair, the thing that brings terrible for her, especially after the return of her husband, who she thinks is dead.
13 January 1948, Hull, Humberside, England, UK
15 April 1950, Chicago, Illinois, USA
26 May 1923, Guernsey, Channel Islands, UK
24 April 1953, London, England, UK
24 May 1938, Amherst, Nova Scotia, Canada
1983, Scarborough, Ontario, Canada
12 August 1941, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
28 October 1929, Brigg, Lincolnshire, England, UK
25 January 1951, Wilmington, Delaware, USA
19 June 1967, Inuvik, Northwest Territories, Canada
8 May 1975, Camden, London, England, UK
11 November 1962, Roswell, New Mexico, USA
7 August 1932, London, England, UK
August 04, 2009
Rage, love, defiance, confusion, fear -- Moore just sticks out her chin and makes her eyes brim with tears. She's the stolidly immovable object at the film's center, and there's no getting around her.
August 31, 2004
For anyone who's ever wondered why Hawthorne left out the mute servants, red cockatoos, and rolls in the proverbial hay. As Hawthorne himself would say: "Ignominious!"
May 19, 2005
Oh, Roland Joffé, thy free adaptation of the Hawthorne classic didst produce abudant derisive laughter. Didst thou once direct 'The Killing Fields?'
November 16, 2010
Slaughter, sin, and sex in classic-turned-movie misfire.
August 04, 2009
Despite the cast taking themselves very seriously indeed, The Scarlet Letter is a great comic turn, complete with cod-accents and other period jiggery-pokery.
August 30, 2004
If you've read the book you won't know the ending. Let's just say that Indians with flaming arrows come to the rescue. They manage to keep a straight face, which is more than anyone in the audience will be able to do.
August 04, 2009
For all the talent on display, this is a waste of movie.
August 04, 2009
"Freely adapted from the novel by Nathaniel Hawthorne," the credits say cautiously. I'll say.
June 18, 2002
This is a well-acted, beautiful movie.
February 13, 2001
Though it's unclear what the audience would be for a faithful rendition of the Hawthorne novel, the question of who would ever want to see this one is murkier still.
June 24, 2006
Not only does the film bear little resemblance to the source novel, but it's cluttered with ridiculous symbolism.
March 26, 2009
A very '90s take on a 1660s tale written in 1850, as a picture of early colonial life it's about as convincing as Pocahontas.
