What is wrong with the Merchant-Ivory film of E.M. Forster's "Maurice"

(I am going to write this up before I faint. I am)

They deal with Cambridge in twenty minutes, during which they do nothing without doors. People open doors, close doors, stand in doorways and rush through doors. Probably deeply symbolic and all that, but hardly right. Also, it is impossible to prep Sophocles without a Liddell and Scott, which they all seem to do.

HG was appalling casting, and he hardly convinces. He is not nearly good enough a Classicist. You do not look at him and think "That man could do Aeschylus unseen!" Nor do you hear him talk, as he hardly talks about classics for the entire film. And they drop the Symposium reference (it is referred to as those books. Not the same thing). He also cannot do the romance scenes at all.

The London part of the book involves too much socialising and they attend large Bloomsbury type parties, which is not what happens in the novel. In an attempt to make the film interesting the invent a subplot involving Risley being arrested. They drop the telegram during Greece as well. And all the times Clive says "Maurice, dear" in the latter part of the novel (giving the impression that he is rather confused, which is true, and odd that they dropped it). They do at least keep the strange hand kissing scene.

Finally, Alec is the major love affair! Pourquoi? And you are supposed to find him deeply sexy because of the improbable accent and the exploding hair. They spend about an hour and a half on the Alec plot. It makes no sense. (the plot or how they filmed it). Two and a half hours is far too long anyway.

Righto, I may faint.