Sabrina (1995)
6/10
Paris is always a good idea. Remaking classics on the other hand...
27 June 2020
My mother loves the original SABRINA with Audrey Hepburn and turned this one off after an hour. I was with her at the time and she said that the whole thing struck her as badly paced and much more poorly cast than the original. I picked up the rest of the movie on my own the next day, though I admit, I too was tempted to leave it unfinished. But I'm glad I didn't. SABRINA 1995 isn't that bad, but it is in every way a pale shadow of the original. Wilder's direction was much more assured while I don't think Sydney Pollack wholly believed in the material here-- the movie tries very hard to update the story to the 1990s, which ironically makes certain elements of the plot feel even more dated.

For me, the weakest parts are Julia Ormond and Greg Kinnear in the Hepburn and William Holden roles. Neither have the same charisma or romantic allure as their 1950s counterparts. David Larrabee goes from being a charming rogue in the 1954 version to an outright manchild in 1995, and Sabrina just seems like a deer in the headlights the whole time. I never bought her confidence at all. Harrison Ford pretty much carries the whole movie as Linus-- his performance as Linus Larrabee is the only improvement the movie has over the original (Bogart was good but so clearly did not want to be there). Unlike the original, I can see this Linus and this Sabrina living happily ever after in a relationship since, for all my complaints about Ormond, she does at least have chemistry with Ford.

I feel bad constantly comparing this movie to the original, but that's the price any remake pays when it's redoing a classic. The older film was simply better at telling its story, not wasting time with needless digressions such as another love interest for Sabrina in Paris. The newer version, though it has its charms, just cannot compare.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed