The Remains of the Day (1993) movie review

This is a deceptively simple story about an English guy, Mr. Stevens, who goes on his first-ever road trip in the English countryside.  Mr. Stevens is the butler of Darlington Hall, once a center for low-profile international meetings during the Inter-War Era.  As he looks forward to a reunion with Darlington's former housekeeper, Miss Kenton, he begins to examine his past and his life's question: "What is a great butler?"

I read the book for school, and while I like this movie better, it is really, really close to the book.  There was only one major change (the identity of the new owner of Darlington Hall), which was added for extra irony.  I'm not sure how the flashbacks worked for movie-firsters, but they seemed to be portrayed smoothly and clearly.  Cinematography was excellent, music was good, and the casting of Anthony Hopkins as Stevens and Emma Thompson as Miss Kenton was brilliant.

So, if it follows the book, why is the movie better?  To me, it was the fact that Mr. Stevens translates better to screen, than first-person narration.  In the book, Mr. Stevens came across as a bit neurotic and self-centered, constantly worried about himself.  On screen, Mr. Stevens is a really noble character, very loyal and self-sacrificing.  Perhaps he was this way in the book, and maybe it was the first-person perspective that ruined it.

Also, while the romantic subplot seemed to me to be the focus of the book, it was the political subplot that stole the show in the film.  The conflict of good intentions vs. reality, coupled with Mr. Stevens's point-of-view, was just heartbreaking.  (They omitted the part where he dismisses democracy, too, so that was interesting.)

At the end of the movie, you've got to ask yourself "why????" and be prepared for a debate.  One thing my mom and I agreed on was that Darlington Hall, in itself, limited Mr. Stevens's personal life, because of its particular prestige.  Unlike Baskerville Hall, for example, where things are more relaxed. 

The movie is rated PG for "themes," which is quite baffling to me.  I don't recall any objectionable content, unless you count kissing and smoking.  Probably, it was rated PG because it is a "boring" movie with very little action, and you have to understand the dialogue in order to appreciate it.  4 out of 5 stars as a movie, and 5 out of 5 stars as an adaptation.  Great movie for costume drama fans and history enthusiasts.