Friday 28 February 2014

Sense and Sensibility

Sense and Sensibility



David Morrissey, Dominic Cooper, Dan Stevens, Mark Williams, Janet McTeer and Mark Gatiss lead an all-star cast in Andrew Davies' romantic and stylish three-part adaptation of Sense and Sensibility.


Sense and Sensibility is a story of two young sisters on a voyage of burgeoning sexual and romantic discovery. Rational Elinor Dashwood and her romantic sister Marianne are played by sensational newcomers Hattie Morahan (Elinor) and Charity Wakefield (Marianne).

The death of Elinor and Marianne's father throws their privileged world into chaos. With no entitlement to his estate, they are forced to live in poverty. Although the sisters' chances of marriage seem doomed, attractive men are drawn to the girls.


Elinor becomes attached to the highly eligible Edward Ferrars (Dan Stevens - The Line of Beauty) - but why is he so guarded and secretive? Marianne attracts both war hero Colonel Brandon (David Morrisey - State of Play) and glamorous Willoughby, played by Dominic Cooper (The History Boys).

Do these attachments represent true love, or are the men simply amusing ourselves with our young heroines? With a sub-plot that features the seduction and abandonment of a 15-year old schoolgirl - not to mention a duel - the stakes are high.


Multi-award winning writer Andrew Davies (Bleak House and Pride and Prejudice) says, "The novel is as much about sex and money as social conventions. This drama is more overtly sexual than most previous Austen adaptations seen on screen and gets to grips with the dark underbelly of the book."

Kate Harwood, Head of Series and Serials adds, "It's a passionate and powerful piece, filled with a rich mix of both emerging and established talent. With Andrew's fairydust sprinkled over it, this production is destined to evolve into a classic."


Filmed on location in Berkshire, Surrey, Buckinghamshire and Devon, Sense and Sensibility is directed by John Alexander and produced by Anne Pivcevic.

Sunday 23 February 2014

Gosford Park

Gosford Park is a 2001 British mystery film directed by Robert Altman and written by Julian Fellowes. The film stars an ensemble cast, which includes Helen Mirren, Maggie Smith, Derek Jacobi, Eileen Atkins, Alan Bates, Kristin Scott Thomas, Clive Owen, Emily Watson, Charles Dance, and Michael Gambon. The story follows a party of wealthy Britons and an American and their servants, who gather for a shooting weekend at Gosford Park, an English country house. A murder occurs after a dinner party and the film goes on to present the subsequent investigation into it from the servants' and guests' perspectives.



Development on Gosford Park began in 1999, when Bob Balaban came to Altman and asked if they could develop a film together. Altman suggested a whodunitand asked Fellowes to write the script. The film went into production in March 2001 and began filming at Shepperton Studios with a production budget of $19.8 million. Gosford Park premiered on 7 November 2001 at the London Film Festival. It received a limited release across cinemas in the United States in December 2001, before being widely released in January 2002 by USA Films. It was released in February 2002 in the United Kingdom.

The film was successful at the box office, grossing over $87 million in cinemas worldwide, making it Altman's second most successful film after MASH. It received multiple awards and nominations, including seven Academy Award nominations and nine British Academy Film Awards nominations.

The TV series Downton Abbey was originally planned as a spin-off of Gosford Park, but instead was developed as a stand-alone property inspired by the film, set decades earlier.[3]





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosford_Park

Friday 21 February 2014

The King's Speech



2010 Film
After the death of his father King George V and the scandalous abdication of King Edward VIII, Bertie who has suffered from a debilitating speech impediment all his life, is suddenly crowned King George VI of England. With his country on the brink of war and in desperate need of a leader, his wife, Elizabeth, the future Queen Mother, arranges for her husband to see an eccentric speech therapist, Lionel Logue. After a rough start, the two delve into an unorthodox course of treatment and eventually form an unbreakable bond. With the support of Logue, his family, his government and Winston Churchill, the King will overcome his stammer and deliver a radio-address that inspires his people and unites them in battle.

  1. Colin Firth (King George VI)
    Colin Firth
    King George VI
    Helena Bonham Carter (Queen Elizabeth)
    Helena Bonham Carter
    Queen Elizabeth
    Geoffrey Rush (Lionel Logue)
    Geoffrey Rush
    Lionel Logue
    Guy Pearce (King Edward VIII)
    Guy Pearce
    King Edward VIII
    Michael Gambon (King George V)
    Michael Gambon
    King George V

Wednesday 19 February 2014

Downton Abbey

Alt=series titles and a view of Downton AbbeyDownton Abbey is a British period drama television series created by Julian Fellowes and co-produced by Carnival Films and Masterpiece.[1] It first aired on ITV in the United Kingdom and Ireland on 26 September 2010 and on PBS in the United States on 9 January 2011 as part of the Masterpiece Classic anthology. Four series have been made so far; a fifth is planned for 2014.

The series, set in the fictional Yorkshire country estate of Downton Abbey, depicts the lives of the aristocratic Crawley family and their servants in the post-Edwardian era—with the great events in history having an effect on their lives and on the British social hierarchy. Such events depicted throughout the series include news of the sinking of the RMS Titanic in the first series; the outbreak of the First World War, the Spanish influenza pandemic, and the Marconi scandal in the second series; the Interwar period and the formation o
f the Irish Free State in the third series; and the Teapot Dome scandalin the fourth series.

Downton Abbey has received critical acclaim from television critics and won numerous accolades, including a Golden Globe Award for Best Miniseries or Television Film and a Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Miniseries or Movie. It was recognised by Guinness World Records as the most critically acclaimed English-language television series of 2011. It earned the most nominations of any international television series in the history of the Primetime Emmy Awards, with twenty-seven in total (after two series).[2] It was the most watched television series on both ITV and PBS, and subsequently became the most successful British costume drama series since the 1981 television serial of Brideshead Revisited.[3] By the third series, it had become one of the most widely watched television drama shows in the world.[4]




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downton_Abbey

Monday 17 February 2014

The White Queen


The White Queen The Cousins’ War Series



The first in a stunning new series, The Cousins’ War, is set amid the tumult and intrigue of the Wars of the Roses. Internationally bestselling author Philippa Gregory brings this extraordinary family drama to vivid life through its women – beginning with Elizabeth Woodville, the White Queen. Elizabeth Woodville, of the House of Lancaster, is widowed when her husband is killed in battle. Aided and abetted by the raw ambition and witchcraft skills of her mother Jacquetta, Elizabeth seduces and marries, in secret, reigning king Edward IV, of the family of the white rose, the House of York. As long as there are other claimants to Edward’s throne, the profound rivalries between the two families will never be laid to rest. Violent conflict, shocking betrayal and murder dominate Elizabeth’s life as Queen of England, passionate wife of Edward and devoted mother of their children. 

In The White Queen Philippa Gregory brilliantly evokes the life of a common woman who ascends to royalty by virtue of her beauty, a woman who rises to the demands of her position and fights tenaciously for the survival of her family, a woman whose two sons become the central figures in a mystery that has confounded historians for centuries: the Princes in the Tower whose fate remains unknown to this day.

 From her uniquely qualified perspective, she explores this most famous unsolved mystery, informed by impeccable research and framed by her inimitable storytelling skills.

Read more at: http://www.philippagregory.com/books/the-white-queen

Wednesday 5 February 2014

A sense of history combined with the influence of global cultures are among the key factors that create the inspiration for the costume designers behind a new breed of TV shows such as “The Borgias,” “Game of Thrones” and “Boardwalk Empire.”
Here, a chat with the designers about the devotion required to perfect the look and mood of characters in these popular period dramas, historical fiction and fantasy venues.


GABRIELLA PESCUCCI

The costume designer for Showtime’s dynasty drama, “The Borgias,” has also costumed a number of period drama films including “Once Upon a Time in America,” “The Age of Innocence” and “The Scarlet Letter.”

Pescucci discusses the historical backdrop of “The Borgias.”

“The time line is during Pope Alexander IV’s papacy, from 1490 to 1510. During this time, art and creativity reach one of the highest peaks of the Renaissance, all of which is tempered by wars and corruption. This sets the scenario for the Borgia family to make their connections that will lead them to the power of the papacy,” said Pescucci.



“There are painters like [Agnolo] Bronzino, [Sandro] Botticelli, [Domenico] Ghirlandaio, [Bernardino di Betto] Pinturicchio, Raffaello [Sanzio da Urbino], [Vittore] Carpaccio and [Pietro] Perugino, all of whose portraits feature noblemen with their ladies and the lifestyle of that world. That became for me the main inspiration for ‘The Borgias.’ Paintings are very important during any [historical] research process for me to get inspiration of any kind. But it’s more difficult getting the fabrics and the colors of that period because they are no longer made in the same way.…That usually pushes me to search and choose materials to see what they will look like after the aging and dyeing process that is needed to create the look and taste of the period I am aiming to re-create. And as a result, I am constantly guessing the final result,” explained Pescucci.

Regarding the undergarments worn in the series, Pescucci said, “The corsets are made from scratch.…Double canvas stitched together first, then steamed to shape them up to be finally hard-sticked (boned) in order to softly push the breasts up and frame the bosom within a gentle roundness, or sometimes, for a more squared-neck line....I understand [from the actresses] that it feels like torture, but the warmth of the body helps make it more bearable — the actresses can confirm that, but of course, it will never feel like a soft sweater.”

Pescucci added that no bras are worn with the gowns.

“Instead, the boning is sewn in to curve gently to provide room for the breasts,” she said. “Necklines are usually garnished in matching style with the skirt and the sleeves, and colored strings such as soutage with golden tips are used to tighten up the sleeves at the cuffs....Shirts [undergarment shirts for men and women] are rendered in very fine linen, all the way down to the floor, often with golden embroideries that puff out of the dress sleeves and are layered with petticoats that shape up the skirts....Nightgowns are usually made of a very delicate silky organza patterned with flowers from India that are often expensive.”

As for the men’s costumes, Pescucci described the looks as “quite sexy.”

Key pieces include “velvety tights with a co-piece — commonly known as a braghe during the Middle Ages — as well as tight leather boots and short corsets that are worn as jackets.

“The corsets shaped the men in a very sexy way,” she joked.


Michele Clapton of "Game of Thrones."
Photo By Jordan Strauss/WireImage


MICHELE CLAPTON
The costume designer for “Game of Thrones” has a number of historical and fictional TV miniseries under her belt, including “The Diary of Ann Frank,” “Sense and Sensibility” and “The Devil’s Whore.”

Clapton describes her work ethic and how she costumes diverse characters in a medieval fantasy world for the TV series, which was touted in June as the season’s most pirated series by The Hollywood Reporter.

“We really did research very widely across the world and in different climates, and because of the fantasy, we took different ideas of what we really liked, not certain periods. After that, I developed the characters,” said Clapton.

She singled out the character of Daenerys Targaryen, played by Emilia Clarke, a frail-looking beauty whose destiny is to become the Mother of Dragons.

“When we first saw Dany [Daenerys] at the beginning, she was a young girl who didn’t have any sense of herself, so we put her in loose robes. When her brother tried to sell her we gave her a sheer gown for naked elegance. Slowly, she realizes her womanhood and in expressing that we had to be very careful with the undergarments,” explained Clapton. “We use very little undergarments for her, maybe some spinal boning, and we try not to use modern underpinnings.…As much as we can we have the backs of her costumes pop open.…And we certainly don’t use corsets because Dany is very active.”

But Clapton noted that she does design deconstructed corset looks of leather, metal and fabric that are “cut and molded to Dany.”

To capture the mean-spirited nature of another character, Queen Cersei, played by Lena Headey, Clapton does use corsetry underneath long, soft kimonos, a kind of “fire and ice” approach.

“I like the idea of hard core for the interior and softly draped for the exterior,” she remarked.

When creating a gown, Clapton said she uses “boning within the dress and builds a shape and attaches the shape to the dress.”

“It’s like going back in time before there were bras.…I want to show different ways that women can be powerful and who they are, like Dany, who turns into her own person rather than being dictated to by her brother,” she noted.

Clapton described fabrics as “hugely important,” saying, “We spend so much time with fabrics. For Dany in the desert, we wove the garments ourselves. It’s the only way we could get the look that we envisioned, a mix of slightly Nomadic and African, and we used a lot of crafts that Nomadic tribes use as well, such as a precious color like blue, that is precious only to a tribe.

“We also try to do a lot of our own prints.…We painted and printed all of Qarth’s fabrics ourselves. And we sometimes spend more time breaking out a fabric than actually using it. We dip it, dye it and drag it — it’s a huge task because I want the fabrics to look like they’re dirty and smell.…And we sometimes have to make things look frosted so we paint on wax to create a look of snow.”

JOHN DUNN
The costume designer for “Boardwalk Empire” has wardrobed numerous motion pictures, including “Casino,” “Pineapple Express” and “The Women.” For “Boardwalk Empire,” he works closely with co-designer Lisa Padovani, whose background includes associate costume designer for Fox’s “Fringe” TV series as well as the motion picture “The Departed,” where she served as assistant costume designer.

Dunn and Padovani give a snapshot of the Roaring Twenties.

“We made a conscious decision not to do corsets,” said Padovani. “Of course, there were still a lot of women wearing corsets in the Twenties, elastic long-line girdles down to the knee and up to the bust, but there was a softening up of wearing a cami underneath clothes....We had not been using vintage underwear, so we came up with our own undergarments like camis with no support that still keep the bosom together...We discovered that if you have a woman wearing a modern bra underneath Twenties apparel, it doesn’t look correct for the period. The right foundation is the key to the silhouette.”

Dunn called lingerie of the Twenties “exquisite.”

“We love the lingerie of the period, which still looks gorgeous today. Lingerie in the early Twenties was just exquisite.…The more fine and delicate the undergarments, the higher the station of the woman. Underwear and lingerie were definitely important and it was a status symbol, especially layering beautiful lace and silk underwear underneath a beautiful chiffon or georgette dress so it could be seen. A woman of means would definitely have had an extensive wardrobe of underwear and lingerie,” said Dunn. “We’ve often thought we should do a line of lingerie. It would be interesting for women to be able to wear Twenties-style lingerie because you don’t need all of that molding, stretching and underwires.”

He added that while there was no colour photography or films during the era, there was an abundance of color, especially in lingerie and hosiery.

“There were only black-and-white movies and photos and it all looked very gloomy. But a lot of people don’t know there was a lot of colour — bold brights, prints and embellishments,” said Dunn.

Padovani said re-creating the look of vintage hosiery was a “real challenge.”

“Hosiery was all silk and back-seamed with clocking at the foot and women would roll the top of their stockings, while some wore rolled knee-sock looks...sometimes women wore garters or preferred to roll the band down. It was all about the length of the stockings, all about the seduction,” said Padovani. “There was a lot of colour and different patterns in hosiery —superbrights, hot pink, purples and stripes. And when you see how high up the decorative element is on the band, you know how high the dress hem should be.”

Dunn noted that a certain sense of eroticism gleaned from a variety of elements — ranging from Vaudeville and the Ziegfeld Follies to silent-screen vamp Theda Bara and King Tut — influenced the impact of colour during that decade.

“There was a strong European and Russian influence, mythology, and Egypt with the discovery of King Tut’s tomb, and a lot of exotic clothes were coming in.…There was a huge visual impact and influence, especially with what they were doing on stage. The Ziegfeld Follies were not allowed to be naked on stage, but they did everything they could to expose every inch of the body with shiny, see-through fabrics. It wasn’t until the Thirties that people got all up in arms about sex in the movies,” Dunn said laughingly.
http://www.wwd.com/media-news/film-tv/costume-designers-behind-the-borgias-game-of-thrones-and-boardwalk-empire-6121950?full=true

Saturday 1 February 2014

Sandy Powell: Costume Designer For The Young Victoria

Sandy Powell was the principal costume designer for the 2009 period-drama movie The Young Victoria, for which she won an Oscar. Below is a short history of her career, followed by an interview with her about her experiences during the making of the movie.
Most of the text, and both photographs shown below were kindly provided by Brian Gross, an official promoter of the movie.

Sandy Powell — Short biography

Winner of two Academy Awards® for her work on The Aviator, for Martin Scorsese, and Shakespeare in Love, for director John Madden, Sandy Powell had also been nominated five more times for Mrs. Henderson Presents, Gangs of New York, Velvet Goldmine, The Wings of the Dove and Orlando. In addition, she has won the BAFTA Award for Velvet Goldmine and been nominated for eight more. Other awards include winning the Evening Standard Awards for her work on Orlando and for Edward II.
Sandy Powell studied at London Central School of Art and began her career in film collaborating with Derek Jarman, working on Caravaggio with the director. Other credits include Interview with the Vampire, Michael Collins, The Crying Game, The Butcher Boy and The End of the Affair, with director Neil Jordan, Hilary and Jackie, Sylvia, Far From Heaven and The Other Boleyn Girl. She recently worked with Martin Scorsese on his multiple Academy Award® winner The Departed and is currently at work on her fourth collaboration with him on Shutter Island.

Interview with Sandy Powell (December 2, 2009)

Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) dancing.
Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) dancing.
How did you first get interested in costume design?
As a child I always liked clothes and dressing up. I learned to sew from an early age and made dolls clothes and clothes for myself, once I learned how to use a machine. At the age of 14 I saw a show at the theatre called 'Flowers' by an avant-garde dancer and choreographer that reinforced my love of costume, and knew then that that was what I wanted to do.
Have you always wanted to work in fashion? Who are some of your style icons and inspirations?
I've always liked fashion, but never wanted to work as a fashion designer. I think designing costume is more interesting as it is not just about the clothes but also the character. Having said that, some of my main inspiration has come from fashion. I will always look at contemporary fashion when researching any period. Some of my favorites are: Balenciaga, Vionnet, Dior (from the past) and contemporary designers such as Galliano, McQueen, Yamamoto, Comme des Garcons, Gaultier and Westwood.
Besides your visit to the archive, how else did you prepare for the costume designs of The Young Victoria?
I assume you mean the archive at Kensington Palace of Victoria's own clothes. This visit was particularly useful and inspirational, especially as we were allowed to handle the clothes. It was remarkable to note how tiny they were. Apart from that I researched in the usual way which is looking at paintings and other contemporary sources, although there were no photographs of Victoria until she was much older in the 1860's.
Which costume took the longest to complete? Did you have a costume that was more difficult to create than the others?
Probably one of the longest costumes to complete was Victoria's Coronation Robe. This was made completely from scratch with us creating the fabric first. Having seen the original in the archive, it was a challenge to recreate this. We did this by buying a plain fabric with a metallic thread in it, then dying it to the right shade of gold, then all the intricate embroidery was recreated by printing and hand painting. The other complicated costumes were all the trains worn by all the women at the formal occasions such as the King's birthday and the Coronation. Unfortunately a lot of these aren't seen in their full glory. They were actually about 15ft long and completely covered in decoration consisting of jewels, embroidery and flowers.
Victoria (played by Emily Blunt) during her coronation.
Victoria (Emily Blunt) during her coronation.
How long did you spend constructing the costumes before shooting began?
We had about a 3 month prep time and then continued producing costumes throughout the 3 month shoot until the end.
What was your biggest challenge in the overall process?
As usual, producing a huge amount on a tight budget and also making it look sumptuous and royal!
Which character was the most fun to dress?
Everyone!
How did the actors react to the costumes/clothing — were there any costume malfunctions?
All the actors seemed happy with their costumes. Since most of them have had experience in the theatre they were all used to wearing period clothing, therefore this made it very easy for me. I can't think of any costume malfunctions, we were lucky everything was beautifully made!
Do you have a favourite time period that you enjoy creating costumes for?
I enjoy all periods, you learn something new every time, even if it's a period you have done before.
What exciting projects are coming up next for you?
I am working on a project called 'Medieval' which is an action movie set in 1500! A bit of a departure for me but a costume movie nonetheless. I also worked on The Tempest, directed by Julie Taymor which will be coming out in 2010.
Any advice for those who would like to become costume designers in the movie industry?
I would always advise anyone who wants to be a costume designer to learn to sew. I think it is essential to know how a costume is constructed to be able to design properly. As far as the movie industry is concerned, it's a tough one, you have to be pretty determined to succeed, so be prepared for low paid work to begin with and don't give up!

Other interesting costume information concerning the film

The costumes and production design were able to benefit from the help and support of Swarovski Crystals. Crystallized Swarovski elements were included in the Coronation Sceptre and the Coronation Ring, and various jewelry loaned by Swarovski from their archive collection was used in the production, including Victoria's spectacular tiara.
Each costume that Emily Blunt wore in the movie was insured for £10,000.
The floppy mesh bonnet that we see Emily Blunt (Victoria) wearing in the garden is the same one as that worn by Rosamund Pike (Jane Bennet) in Pride and Prejudice 2005 (when, in Merton, she discovers Mr. Bingley has returned to Netherfield), by Catherine Walker (Eleanor Tilney) in Northhanger Abbey 2007 (when in the garden with Catherine), and by an extra at church in Becoming Jane 2007.
http://www.perioddramas.com/articles/sandy-powell-costume-designer-for-the-young-victoria.php

Sunday 26 January 2014

Reflections on Les Misérables

Musicals may not spring to mind as being period dramas, but in the case of the 2012 musical film Les Misérables, being set in the period of great social upheaval in France in the early years of the 19th century and involving high drama indeed, I feel justified in including this one in the category.
Of course, Les Misérables has not always been a musical – it began as an amazing book written by the French poet, novelist and dramatist Victor Hugo published in 1862; has developed through an estimated 47,000 stage performances, and at least 10 filmed versions from 1934 onwards; was set to music by composer Claude-Michel Schönberg and lyricist Alain Boublil and opened as a musical in Paris in 1880, then in 1985 as an English-language musical production by Cameron Mackintosh in London’s West End. It premiered at the Royal Shakespeare Company’s Barbican Theatre, where it was actually not so well received by the critics, but certainly was by the public and by Princess Diana who said it was the best show she had ever seen. It has now been translated into 21 languages, shown in 300 cities in 42 countries, and is the 2nd longest-running show in London’s West End, second only to The Mousetrap which opened in 1952 – that’s some head start!
Then we come to the new award winning musical drama film Les Misérables of 2012, directed by Tom Hooper (director of The King’s Speech), scripted by William Nicholson, incorporating Schönberg and Boublil’s songs but with additional music that they created specially for the film together with Herbert Kretzmer and starring an array of super talented actors, headed by Hugh Jackman, Russel Crowe, Oscar-winning Anne Hathaway (alias: Jane Austen from Becoming Jane) and Amanda Seyfried. The director made the brave decision to have his actors sing all their lines live on set (see the featurette on the right for more information), whereby the songs flow like dialogue and sound perfectly natural – a decision that well paid off – brilliant! We knew that Amanda Seyfried could sing from Mamma Mia, but some of the others were a very pleasant surprise! The film also incorporated a beautiful totally new purpose-written song, ‘Suddenly’ which Hugh Jackman sings in a taxi en route to Paris to take up a new reformed lifestyle as an adoptive father.

At this stage I think I should give a brief rundown on the storyline, although I’m sure you all know it – I’ll try to be brief! Jean Valjean stole a loaf of bread because his sister and her children were starving, for which he served 19 years in jail/hard labour/slavery, before being released on parole. At the start of our story in 1815, we see him using his great physical strength to lift a heavy oar pinning down one of his fellow prisoners, an act of kindness which is observed by Javert, the prison guard supervising the release, who vows that prisoner 24601 (Valjean) will never be free. Valjean steals silver from a bishop, who when confronted by the police says that he gave the silver to Valjean as a gift, and insists on giving him more. Deeply touched by the bishop’s love and kindness, Valjean decides to break parole and start a new life doing good for people. Eight years later we see him having achieved this and having built himself a new respectable life: he is now Mayor of Montreuil-sur-Mer and a wealthy but kind factory owner. One day, he witnesses the desperation of a poor girl, Fantine, who has been dismissed from his factory by a foreman and has had to resort to prostitution and to selling her hair to raise money to pay an unscrupulous landlord and landlady of an inn to take care of her illegitimate daughter, Cosette. As Fantine lies dying, Valjean promises to take care of Cosette as a father, which he does (after managing to pay off the innkeepers) with great paternal love. He has witnessed the injustice of the society around him, and takes the side of the revolutionaries who are fighting for change. In 1832, on the death of Jean Maximilien Lamarque, the only government official to have sympathy for the poor, the rebels decide to take a stand against the government and build and defend a giant barricade. Along the way, one of the student revolutionaries, Marius, has met Cosette and they have fallen in love. To cut a long story short, Valjean manages dramatically to rescue Marius from the barricade, after poor Eponine (daughter of the innkeepers) has sacrificed her life out of unrequited love, to save him, and just before the whole group of rebels, having decided to fight to the death, are annihilated by canon fire of the National Guard. I haven’t mentioned that along the way, Valjean has various skirmishes with Javert, who has become a police inspector obsessed with catching up with him. Valjean escapes each time, but in the end, when given the chance to execute Javert, he fakes the execution and lets him go free; an act of kindness incomprehensible to Javert, but leading him in the end to take his own life by plunging into the Seine. The story has a ‘happy’ ending for Marius and Cosette who later marry, but there is so much unhappiness and tragedy, that we are left in tears anyway.

Les Misérables
(2012) DVDs

Amazon U.K.
Amazon U.S.
The 2012 film is so very well done, giving us, as the medium of film can, such a close-up, personal view of the emotional and tragic circumstances and events, that I think everyone in the cinema must have been in tears! The shocked silence that accompanied the long credits at the end was also a mark of respect. Just a few months before seeing the film, I had finally seen the musical stage show in London with Jeronimo Rauch as Jean Valjean and Tam Mutu as Javert, and had been very highly impressed - my husband had been raving about Les Misérables for so many years after seeing a production in New York that it was high time I saw it. I enjoyed both the stage show and the movie very much indeed, and found the movie just so sad but awesome, partly because of the intimacy of film!
Continuing my reflections on the story, I’d like to go back to the book. Victor Hugo (1802 – 1882) grew up in Paris during the period his story is set, so experienced the drama of events taking place at first-hand. These were turbulent times in France, when the general population was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the incompetence of the monarchy, religious authority and the privileges and decadence of the aristocracy, whilst the poor were suffering devastating poverty and degradation. The uprising of the angry and frustrated under-privileged started with the storming of the Bastille on July 14th 1789 and within just three years the absolute monarchy that had ruled France for centuries collapsed and King Louis XVI was executed by guillotine. The first French Republic was proclaimed in September 1792 with Napoleon Bonaparte declaring himself as Emperor –Louis-Charles, the young son of Louis XVI was supposedly King Louis XVII at the time but was in fact being held prisoner till his death on June the 8th 1795, whereupon his uncle Louis-Stanislas (Louis XVI’s brother and grandson of Louis XV) claimed to be King Louis XVIII, but the power stayed with Napoleon. Four years into the Revolution, the people were frustrated that they could see no improvement, and in September ‘93 a horrific period of slaughter known as The Reign of Terror began, during which up to 40,000 ‘upper class’ people were guillotined – the Jacobins and Maximilien Robespierre are the names most associated with these events, though Robespierre himself also lost his head to the guillotine in the end. The French Revolution itself is said to have lasted from 1789 to 1799, but the period of political and social upheaval whilst the poor suffered and the revolutionaries fought for their rights that started in 1789, in fact, also spanned the 1st half of the 19th century. This is a very complicated period of French history, so it’s probably most unwise for a non-historian like myself to delve into it, but still, I will try to put the story Les Misérables in context!
When Victor Hugo was just 2 years old, in 1804, Napoleon officially became Emperor of the French, sometimes considered the first constitutional ‘monarch’, the post he held (with just a brief period of exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba from April 1814 till he escaped in March 1815, during which time Louis-Stanislas actually did become King Louis XVIII) till defeated at the Battle of Waterloo on June 18th 1815 after just 100 days back in power. He was then permanently exiled to the far-away island of Saint Helena in the middle of the South Atlantic Ocean, where he died in 1821. During Napoleon I’s time as Emperor he fought various Napoleonic Wars spreading his power over much of Europe, and in fact made lots of social reforms improving the human rights and introducing voting for all men in France, till his attempt to invade Russia turned the tide against him.
Back in France in 1815 at the start of our story, after just a 2-week attempt of Napoleon I’s son as Napoleon II, the House of Bourbon monarchy is restored in the person of King Louis XVIII again till 1824, followed by his brother Charles X till July 1830 when his repressive regime and disregard for the poor resulted in his removal during the July Revolution. The following, and last king of France, Louis-Philippe, a 6th generation descendent of Louis XIII, managed to stay on the throne, despite more uprisings such as that of 1832 (the final backdrop to Les Misérables) till 1848. This was because he was a little more popular than his predecessors; he called himself the Citizen King of the French (rather than King of France): a constitutional king linked to the people and with a parliament. He claimed to have sympathy with the liberated citizens of his country and did away with a lot of royal privileges, but still the gap between rich and poor increased and the living standards of the workers deteriorated, till the people revolted against their king once again in 1848. Louis-Philippe abdicated in favour of his grandson, who might have become a Louis-Phillipe II, but partly because of his refusal to accept the tricolore (adopted and worn as a rosette by the revolutionaries) as the flag of France, preferring the white royalist one, he never came to the throne and we finally see the end of the royal monarchy and the setting up of the 2nd French Republic with Louis Napoleon III (nephew of Napoleon I) as the first president of the French republic – he was still called Emperor of the French, so in a way he was the last ‘monarch’. As to whether social justice improved vastly then; well that’s another story.
Victor Hugo took the writing of his novel very seriously and spent a long time over it as he felt very strongly about social justice and human degradation and rights. He considered that he was addressing the same issues in other European countries, such as Britain, Spain, Italy and Germany, and hoped that his book could have a good influence on them. The critics’ response to his book at the time was varied; a lot of it negative as some parties didn’t want to know about social problems and considered him over-sympathetic to the revolutionaries. However, commercially, the book was a great success and has remained so ever since it was published.
Returning to the subject of monarchy: the kings and queens of European countries are all intermingled, with battles and marriages swapping power from country to country – intricate and fascinating, but far too big a topic for me to tackle! However, I am interested to speculate on the reasons why the British monarchy survived whilst the French didn’t. I should think it may be partly due to the fact that a constitutional style of monarchy (with much reduced power compared with the absolute version) co-existing with a parliament representing the people was introduced much earlier in Britain.
Oliver Cromwell, a staunch puritan/protestant with strong anti-catholic views (highly controversial in Ireland!) was a key figure in promoting the power of parliament and diminishing that of royalty. He played an important role in the English Civil Wars between Parliamentarians and Royalists that started in 1642 and lead to the execution of King Charles I in 1649 – Cromwell was one of the first to sign the death warrant! A republic was declared known as the Commonwealth of England, which lasted till 1660, during which time Cromwell was Head of State as Lord Protector (he was offered the crown, but refused) from 1653 till he died of kidney problems in 1658, only to be exhumed and posthumously hung for treason three years later, after the restoration of the monarchy in the form of Charles II in 1660. During this interregnum period, Cromwell was instrumental in building up a government system with a proper elected parliament for England, Ireland and Scotland, but he took on more and more royal trappings for himself yet was a hard puritanical leader for the people, such that when Charles returned from exile in Holland, he was welcomed and was a popular king, nicknamed the ‘Merry Monarch’ as he allowed theatres which had been closed since the beginning of the Civil War to re-open and encouraged the arts and science.
Unfortunately, Charles was never able to produce a legitimate child as an heir (though plenty of illegitimate ones) so on his death in 1685, his brother James who was an ardent Roman Catholic convert succeeded to the throne as James II. James’s Catholicism became the cause of increasing unrest, especially so when his 2nd wife (a Catholic) produced a male heir, displacing his two daughters from his first Protestant wife, and in 1688, William, a sovereign Prince of Orange of the the House of Orange-Nassau of Holland was actually invited by British Protestants and Parliamentarians to invade Britain and overthrow James II. William invaded and James fled, after which William together with his wife Mary (actually James’s daughter) became joint protestant monarchs as William III and Mary II – ‘William and Mary’, a well-known duo. This established that the British Monarchy was to be protestant - though not really officially till the Act of Settlement of 1701, which still stands today, despite having been started by Henry VIII’s break with Rome in 1536. It was also the beginning of Constitutional Monarchy in England with Parliament established as an official institution and doing the real governing, as opposed to ‘parliaments’ dating back to 1066 after the Norman conquest by William II, which were really just a group of earls, barons, bishops and abbots who were called to talk (French – parler – hence parliament) but no doubt in those days the king always got his own way anyway!
A more recent boost to the British monarchy came right at the end of the 19th century when a certain Princess ‘May’ of Teck married Prince George instead of his elder brother Prince Albert Victor, known as ‘Eddy’ who died of pneumonia in 1892. ‘Eddy’ was heir to the throne and on his death, George inherited not only the throne, but also Eddy’s fiancée May, and in 1910 when his father King Edward VII died, they became King George V and Queen Mary. They were a couple who took their duties, and in fact the role of the monarchy extremely seriously, much more so than Eddy would have done. The beginning of the 20th century was a tense time in history with industrial relations problems, strikes and the struggle of the Suffragettes in Britain, but most especially, the looming conflict in Europe, which led to World War I. Mary was a very intelligent woman who gave her husband very wise advice; especially during the war years, they worked tirelessly at supporting their subjects, in particular the poorer ones and the soldiers; Mary organised women to knit and sew and send off parcels of warm textiles to the battle front, among other things. They cared for their subjects and the monarchy rather at the expense of their family: George felt he couldn’t offer shelter to his cousin, the last tsar of Russia Nicholas II, who was subsequently executed along with his whole family by the Bolsheviks; and his sons also didn’t receive much loving support, maybe with consequences; elder son Edward who would go on to abdicate the throne in favour of his true love Mrs Simpson, and younger son George who would become a very nervous but very good King George VI (as in ‘The King’s Speech’). George V, till his death in 1936, but more especially Mary, till her death in 1953, just 10 weeks before her granddaughter Princess Elizabeth (whom she had instilled with her own strong sense of royal duty) was crowned Queen Elizabeth II, together made a tremendous contribution to the survival of the British monarchy. The affection for Queen Elizabeth II displayed at her Diamond Jubilee, after 60 years on the throne, shows she has stood the test of time and her successors seem secure.
1978 version
Just one last point about the stealing of the loaf of bread: when I watched the non-musical 1978 film version of Les Misérables with Anthony Perkins as a grim Javert, I was so struck by how terrible it was that a man should receive such very harsh treatment for stealing a loaf of bread to save his family from starving to death. Tragically, there are still people starving like this, and it makes me reflect that while there are people starving, we can never have a happy peaceful world. Men whose families are starving can not be expected to just put up with it, but will rebel and cause revolutions such as the Russian Revolution where the normal people rose up against Tsar Nicholas II, protesting against the decadence of the aristocracy and the severe shortage of food; the women joining in shouting “Give us Bread!” after being constantly sent home from bread queues empty-handed. The soldiers were starving too, so many of them refused to obey the Tsar’s orders to fight and even shoot rebels, leading finally to the Bolsheviks under Lenin signing the peace Treaty of Brest-Litovst in March 1918 to end the war with Germany, and ultimately leading to the creation of the USSR.
At the moment we have financial crises in countries all over the world. Thankfully, the people in many of these countries are a good step above starvation, but if the family’s income is barely enough to feed itself with nothing left over to spend on other things, the other things will go out of business, workers will lose their jobs (if they were lucky enough to have one) dissatisfaction amongst the people will escalate and the economy of the country will suffer – a vicious circle, and it all comes down to the humble loaf of bread!
I called my article ‘Reflections on Les Misérables’ and I think I’ve reflected quite long enough, probably making some blunders in my history along the way; please feel free to correct me if you find any, and well done for plodding through to the end! I really enjoyed the 2012 ‘period drama’ musical movie, Les Misérables, great acting, scenery, script and music, and I thoroughly recommend it to anyone who hasn’t seen it yet.
http://www.perioddramas.com/articles/reflections-on-les-miserables.php

Friday 24 January 2014

Girl with a Pearl Earring: Painting, Book, and Period-Drama Film

“Girl with a Pearl Earring”: essentially the beautiful painting by the Dutch artist Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675), but also a captivating book by Tracey Chevalier and Peter Webber's haunting film released in 2003.
Living in the Netherlands close to Delft, where Vermeer lived probably all his life (although many details of his life, including his precise date and place of birth remain unknown), I have a natural interest in him and admiration for his work. When in 1996 an exhibition of 22 of Vermeer's 35 known paintings came to the Mauritshuis Museum in The Hague, the country was abuzz with the name “Vermeer”, and such was the demand that it was all but impossible to get an appointment to see it! When Tracey Chevalier's book was published and available in the bookshops, copies flew off the shelves like hotcakes. I loved the book and read it several times. Of course, it is a fictional interpretation of Vermeer's life in which the author is entitled to exercise any amount of poetic licence. However, judging from the small number of works accomplished in his lifetime and the fact that he had a wife, mother-in-law and eleven children, plus the servants, to feed, I can well imagine that the women in his life would have preferred him to have churned out more pictures and might have been a bit frustrated at his obsessive reverence to his art, which they didn't understand and which slowed him down. For this reason I have the feeling that we could be seeing quite a true likeness both in the character of the real and fictional man, and in the lifestyle of a Dutch artist of the time.
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Top: Vermeer's wife Catharina (Essie Davis) and the local art collector Pieter van Ruijven (Tom Wilkinson).Bottom: Griet (Scarlett Johansson) cleaning the windows of Vermeer's studio, just before their eyes meet.
When the film was released in The Netherlands in April 2004, I hurried to see it. Having enjoyed the book so much, I was ready to be disappointed by the film, and to be honest, I was just a little bit. However, having just watched it again on DVD, and again listening to the director's comments, I have revised my opinion and have concluded that I am not disappointed at all, so much so, that I feel inspired to write about it and to draw some comparisons between book and film.
My first disappointment in the film came right at the beginning, when I felt that Vermeer and his wife should, as in the book, have been seen to visit Griet's home when considering taking her into service, as it was on that occasion that they had witnessed her creation of the chopped-vegetable pie-chart. Vermeer had recognised her eye for artistic detail, which he had seen in nobody else, especially not in his wife, who had little appreciation of art and was rather clumsy, as typified by her knocking the vegetable-knife off the table and sending it spinning across the floor. He had known instantly that he could trust Griet with the cleaning of his precious studio! In the film, we get a glimpse of the vegetable arrangement and the spinning knife, but don't get to see the Master till much, much later when Griet has already been working in his house for several days. Their first real encounter is in the studio and is a very significant moment in the film, coming after a big build-up. The head maid, Tanneke, has already explained why his wife, Catharina, has not been allowed in the studio for so long; they had ushered her into the studio, themselves remaining on the threshold, furtively peering through the doorway – she had opened the shutters, at Catharina's command, so throwing light onto the darkened studio and we saw the way her eyes lit up when she first saw the half-finished painting on the easel. Before entering himself and seeing Griet reaching up to clean the windows, Vermeer lurks in the doorway silently watching her, and immediately we can sense the unspoken, forbidden chemistry between them – the perfect build up! The fact that the man in question is Colin Firth makes this moment worth waiting for!
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Vermeer (Colin Firth) and Griet (Scarlett Johansson) preparing paints together.
The book gives us many more facts than the film; for example, about Griet's father's accident when the tile-firing kiln exploded leaving him blind and injured, such that he could no longer practise his trade and hence necessitating that Griet go into service to save the family from starving. The film also tells us nothing of her brother who suffered terribly during his arduous apprenticeship, nor of her sister who was devastated at Griet's departure and at her subsequent distancing from her family. In the film, one glimpse of her father's cruelly disfigured face and hand tells us enough – no explanation is needed! Again later, a great line in the book: “I never thought I would learn from a maid”, spoken by Vermeer after altering his painting at Griet's silent bidding, is rendered superfluous in the film by the look that passes between them and the closeness of their hands as they mix colours – it says it all!
I now realise that in film, emotions are immediately visible and often make facts unnecessary. As emotions and relationships develop, the story unfolds and races onwards. Additional facts about Griet's family background would have hindered the unfolding, and her mother's tortured expression as she has to part with her daughter communicates all we need to know about the family's circumstances.
The intricate descriptions in the book give us a vivid mental impression of the thoughts and feelings of the characters and of the life of the household, whilst leaving our imagination to create our own actual images. This is part of the charm of books. However, when we watch a film, especially a period drama as well done as this one, we are immersed in the situation and actually experience the things as they happen:
  • the sounds, of footsteps above her when she is feeling isolated in the cellar, and of babies crying below her when she is isolated in the studio, of the laundry water bubbling, of the geese and chickens and of the pet parrot, and of the all-important chair as she drags it across the floor, so putting into action her suggested change in the painting scene, which in the book, incidentally, is a subtle and silent change in the folds of the blue table cloth – very different;
  • the hustle and bustle and the smell of the meat market;
  • the coldness, visible in the freezing breath and the frozen-stiff nightshirt;
  • the facial expressions and eye contact – the tear as he inserts the earring and the shared emotion as he wipes away her tear with his thumb. Here, another difference between book and film: in the film he tenderly pierces her ear himself at her request – in the book she has had advance warning and has pierced her ear herself with the help of numbing clove oil (less painful but less romantic) and the tenderness is further impaired by his insistance on her painfully inserting the other earring, which couldn’t be seen – his obsession for his work making him selfish. In fact, the use of the earrings at all: quinttessential for the painting, fateful for Griet, bears witness to his selfishness. Of course, the film gives a hint of this aspect, but by being less expicit the romantic feeling is less impaired.
  • the flashes of realisation seen in the eyes, of Tanneke, when she realises the implications of the change of sleeping places, of Vermeer when Griet describes the clouds and he realises that she sees beauty, light and colour as he does, while others see only commonplace things, and of Griet, when she realises and is shocked at her master's unwitting insult to his wife when he quietly points out to her the artistic value of the pearl in his wife's ear;
  • the light versus shadow (of course, a key element in Vermeer's work), the camera obscura, a brand new invention of the time, and the reflection she observes in the silver bowl she is cleaning;
  • the hesitation and wordlessness, especially as she leaves the house for the last time knowing that he is standing silently behind the door
– all of these things work together to give us such a ‘real’ picture, that we can do without lots of facts. Maybe we do need to be rather thoughtful, patient viewers to appreciate all of these things, but perhaps that also applies to appreciating Vermeer's paintings!
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Top: Paul the butcher (Geoff Bell) and his son Pieter (Cillian Murphy) selling meat at a local market.Bottom: Vermeer (Colin Firth) putting the pearl earring on Griet (Scarlett Johansson), shortly after piercing her ear.
The scenery of the film is second to none! Despite many of the scenes having been filmed in Luxembourg, Belgium, and Venice in order to show life lived at the water's edge, using the canals for transportation, but also for so many other daily functions (Holland is too spick and span and would have required more set-building), it portrays perfectly how I imagine how the Dutch lifestyle would have been at the time. The glimpse of Vermeer's famous painting, “View of Delft”, displayed behind Griet when she is (reluctantly) in the house of Vermeer's lecherous, all-powerful patron, van Ruijven, together with the real-life views of Delft's market square, the old town hall with its unmistakable red shutters, and the Nieuwe Kerk, all serve to place the location firmly in the Netherlands.
Here again, the book explains more about the significance of the star in the centre of the market square, which incidentally disappeared just a few months after the shooting of the film, when the square was repaved in preparation for the funeral of Prins Bernard in December 2004 (such a shame after so many years, but at least the film made it in time!). The star was important for Griet as she and her brother and sister had played and explored by following each point of the star. It features again at the end, as she stands in the centre wondering which direction to go to find her future.
The book fast-forwards ten years to Vermeer's death, and we see Griet happily married to Pieter, the butcher's son, with two children, her mother finally able to eat meat, and her father having passed away. We learn that Catharina is forced by the lawyer handling the will to hand over the earrings to Griet, and how painful it is for her to comply. Griet also hears from one of the sons that his father had borrowed back the painting of her and had it by him as he died – all very emotional! The film is open-ended: soon after Griet's departure, Tanneke comes, presumably to her house, and gives her a cloth containing the earrings. Griet just scrunches it up in her hands and the film ends by focusing on the painting itself, which cannot but be appropriate. However it leaves us with unanswered questions. Having read the book first, I can't judge whether film-viewers who have not read it predict the ending, but I'm sure they know she will turn to Pieter – after all, she already made a commitment after realising that her master actually did still love his wife, and why not – Pieter is rather nice – much nicer than I had pictured him when reading!
This brings me to the two essential features of film – how can I have left them until last?!: the music and the actors. Alexandre Desplat's haunting music beautifully fills any otherwise silent moments, and the acting is superb. It goes without saying that Colin Firth is brilliant, his subtle smile captivating, but all of the actors are great! Especially the women: Essie Davis' haughty but sad Catharina; Judy Parfitt's austere but understanding mother-in-law, Maria Thins; Joanna Scanlan, the perfect, plump head maid, Tanneke; Alakina Mann as the smirky, callous daughter, Cornelia; and of course, Scarlett Johansson as the innocent yet sensuous Griet, who just happens to look so much like the girl in the painting! I think Vermeer would have approved of these women – most of his paintings are of house interiors including a woman.
In conclusion, the “Girl with a Pearl Earring” painting is a masterpiece, and both the subsequent book and the period-drama film are great! We don't have to choose between them; they complement each other and each excels in its own way. I'm sure that the author and film director have mutual respect for one another, and it would be nice to imagine that Johannes Vermeer himself would also have had respect for both of these art forms, which highlight his genius and have brought his work to the attention of so many!
http://www.perioddramas.com/articles/girl-with-a-pearl-earring.php