Not everyone finds the transition to sexual adulthood easy, particularly as one is supposed to find it natural. It must have been even harder in the 1950s, when sex was something that you weren't supposed to talk about in polite company. And yet, I never quite understood the point of Ian McEwan's novel 'On Chesil Beach'. The fact is, the human race has never had a problem, overall, in reproducing itself, whatever Larkin may have said about sex starting in 1963. And the book, it seemed to me, sets up the past as another country, completely different from the world we know today, instead of showing how (for most people) life went on more or less as it does now, albeit masked by different norms. Dominic Cooke's film, with a screenplay by McEwan himself, is a pretty faithful rendition of the novel, but doesn't manage to escape its nature as a carefully constructed, unfortunate but fundamentally minor story, whose anchoring in a generally frigid past obscures rather than illuminates its more universal aspects. Now, if someone was to film 'The Comfort of Strangers' that is a movie I'd sure like to watch.

"On Chesil Beach" is primarily set in the year 1962. But by all indications, the action should really be taking place in 1862 at the height of the morally repressive era in Victorian England.

In the guise of being a romance, the film develops the story of a young British couple, Florence Ponting and Edward Mayhew, who fall in love, but their relationship falls apart with a disastrous wedding night that culminates in a long conversation in the idyllic, pebbly setting of Chesil Beach. Again, the story sounds like that of a frustrated married couple out of a Henrik Ibsen play like "A Doll's House."

In the bonus track of the DVD, there was a lengthy segment where the writer, director, producer, and actors attempted to offer a rationale for this strange film. Here is a digest of their remarks:

(1) The leading actress described the film as being "about two lovers." That statement is difficult to understand, based on a relationship that was never consummated.

(2) The screenwriter described the theme of the young couple "crossing the line" from "innocence" to "experience." With vague generalities, the writer was avoiding the main subject matter of the film: the frigidity of Florence Ponting.

(3) The screenwriter made another unsubstantiated claim that the conflict between Flo and Edward was based on "emotional understanding running ahead of physical understanding." But if that were the case, it was difficult to believe that their "problem" was not identified much earlier in the lengthy period of courtship, as opposed to the single, shocking revelation on their wedding night.

(4) The film was described as "a love story" and "a tragedy." But the break-up of the couple due to a case of frigidity was hardly the subject matter of a love story. The cringeworthy subject matter was closer to pathos than tragedy. One of the film's producers made the jaw-dropping observation that "many people will identify with the relationship of Edward and Florence." Without any support for her contention, the producer then went on to assert that the film is "universal" in its implications!

(5) The filmmakers boasted of how the film reveals the "internal life" of the characters. But in the crucial scene where Florence meets with her local vicar, all we see is that she is bottled up emotionally. We never learn much of Flo's internal life until the climactic conversation on Chisel Beach. There might have been more empathy for Flo's character if she had opened up to the vicar with the truth.

Contrary to the objective of the film artists, "On Chesil Beach" was not about "internal life," but about the suppression of that life.

SPOILER ALERT: At the close of the film, we fast forward from 1962 to 1975 and finally to 2007. During this sequence, it is revealed that Flo married and had children with Charles Morrell, the male member of her string ensemble. But it is never explained how that relationship was successfully consummated or how Flo had changed over time from her disastrous experience with Edward.

There is an inherent dishonesty in a film that makes a bold claim for universality, yet refuses to explain character development and how people change over time. Specifically, what happened to Flo between the wedding night at Chesil when she described her bedroom experience with Edward as "revolting" and the time when she evidently discovered conjugal bliss with Charles Morrell?

Most assuredly, Edward Mayhew has to be wondering what happened behind closed doors between Florence Ponting and Charles Morrell that was different from his experience with Flo at the Chesil Beach hotel.

Am a great fan of period dramas, have been from a very early age. Have loved Saoirse Ronan in many things (great in 'Atonement' and continued to grow and grow) and there is a lot of talent in the cast. Also love Ian McEwen's book, which is unflinching and very moving though with a complicated structure that is difficult to adapt, and was interested hearing that he would be the one adapting it to film.

Catching 'On Chesil Beach' well after its somewhat brief release, my thoughts were that it was well done in many areas but came up short somewhat and could have been much better. This is an example of a book to film adaptation where the book would have perhaps fared better adapted as a mini-series, meaning hopefully richer detail and more time to go into depth. As an adaptation of the book it disappoints, something that one wouldn't expect with McEwen himself adapting it, on its own (and a fairer way to judge) it doesn't fare too shabbily at all.

'On Chesil Beach', first of all, looks great on the most part. It's beautifully shot, with some shots looking like picturesque paintings (particularly outdoors),and the period detail is handsome and evocative. The music matches the restrained tone of the film well and the music choices, consisting of Elgar, Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, Mozart and Rachmaninov, are well chosen. Particularly "Nimrod" from Elgar's 'Enigma Variations' and the second movement of Schubert's "Death and the Maiden" quartet, both sublime pieces in their own right, particularly the Schubert.

In terms of the performances, Ronan is wonderful, very sincere and heartfelt performance with enough steel to stop the character from being bland. Billy Howe is a sympathetic and suitably awkward match for her and their chemistry grows nicely from uncertain to intricate without rushing it. Ann Marie Duff, despite not enough screen time, is particularly good of the supporting cast.

While steady and deliberate, this proved to be a perfect and necessary approach with the restraint and intricacy of the story coming through. There are thought-provoking moments and others that are genuinely affecting, the relationship and the reactions to it just about believable. The direction, for a first timer, was competent in the direction of the actors and the mood.

By all means, 'On Chesil Beach' has imperfections. The choppiness being a big issue. Not just the editing, which does feel jumpy in places, but McEwen struggles surprisingly with bringing his complicated story structure in the book to screen. Instead of being flowing from scene to scene effortlessly, it feels choppy at times.

This does affect the story clarity with the back and forth not always as clear as it could and also the depth of characterisation. The personalities are correct and interesting enough but there was more of an opportunity to go more skin-deep, motivations better explored.

Found the dialogue to have its clunky and corny moments, while some of the middle act is at points sluggish (after a great first act). While picking up in emotion afterwards, the ending was far too pat and felt tacked on. If anybody who hasn't read the book thinking that this ending doesn't sit right within the film and that the ending should have been something else they cannot be blamed, there is that feel and that it was a vastly inferior alternate ending is obvious.

Concluding, worthwhile but many good elements, particularly the production values and acting, but comes up short with the choppy structure and the ending as particular debits. 6/10 Bethany Cox