Change Your Image
philmphile-1
Reviews
The Buccaneers (1995)
If you liked the show, don't read the book!
I read THE BUCCANEERS first and found this production irritating: no Kentucky Derby race, for one; Greg Wise has political dialogue nowhere in the book; and, to refrain from spoiling anything, I'll just say the depiction of the Julius character completely jars with my perception. I wrote a literary analysis of Wharton's work while in grad school and, sadly, I've yet to see a film or television production that does much justice to her. My least favorite book, ETHAN FROME, at least had Liam Neesom as the title character in the adaptation. In the great novel THE HOUSE OF MIRTH, truly an American masterpiece, paragraphs weave with wit and irony. In the disappointing film, parts were greatly miscast. As soon as I heard who was playing Selden, I knew disappointment lay ahead. (I usually like Eric Stoltz, too.) And since when is Bertha more attractive than Lily? (Well, when Laura Linney is in one role and Gillian Armstrong the other.) So many possibilities, so many erroneous turns, but still the film surpassed the tacky American Playhouse version. Unfortunately, THE AGE OF INNOCENCE miscast the lead character, a bland milquetoast, with Daniel Day-Lewis, a man who always seems seething with desire. The whole point is that the guy never felt passion until meeting the Countess, and she's not beautiful! She has an earthy sensuality; Wharton understood about pheromones before the science. Once I found a book-on-tape called THE BRIDGE, a superb Wharton-on-film candidate.
Gegen die Wand (2004)
Avoid!
My class and I watched HEAD-ON, truly expecting some illumination of the Turkish subculture co-existence with the German community. Other than Germans mixing it up at clubs, little interaction remained. Indeed, after the promising opening, things started downhill at the hospital where the main characters met. This film was not upsetting in a heartfelt nor philosophical way, but was crude and tedious. Some students of many years left our cinema society never to return! I'm writing this because I felt absolutely duped by the positive reviews I encountered before putting this film on the semester syllabus. In terms of my teaching role, this was the most embarrassing selection I ever picked.
Brokeback Mountain (2005)
Age of Innocence (Wharton novel) recycled
I cannot grasp why film-goers consider BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN genre- breaking except that it's a big budget movie with famous stars. The material just reminded me of other literature (the play THE CHILDREN'S HOUR) and early films (MADCHEN IN UNIFORM) that dealt with gay themes as well or better many decades ago. THE LARAMIE PROJECT (play version) blows this away without even needing landscape cinematography, which Ang Lee deliberately photographs like a Cinemascope western of yore. Sitting through the slowest parts of BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN reminded me of Lee's previous ICE STORM, another film greatly overrated whereas his SENSE AND SENSIBILITY, if anything, is under esteemed.
Perhaps because I see around six gay-themed films a year, I found the predictable qualities to this period picture harkened back to not other "buddy movies" or even westerns (except for the cattle-drives of BIG RIVER), but the unlikely counterpiece of THE AGE OF INNOCENCE, with Ennis substituting for Edith Wharton's Newland Archer in several key ways.
The quiet, laid-back, and already engaged Archer fulfills societal expectations, without any ambition to do more than successfully fit it; he never has a creative thought nor a passionate yearning until he meets the Countess; suddenly, his life feels vital but he fears social condemnation so he closets his emotions; he is offered several chances to declare his passion, bow out of his engagement and live with the Countess, but he denies himself the fulfillment of lust. Even at the pathetic close, when both are free, he will not act on his instincts and hook up with the Countess.
The parallels lie in the main character, the object of lust (who has a looser past and is quite willing to deny social dictates), the repressive period (whether an limited circle or limitless skyline), the failure to act, and the failure to amount to much otherwise (love goes to no greater sacrifice). The 1990s film of THE AGE OF INNOCENCE miscasts Daniel Day-Lewis as Archer (the guy should appear bland and well-fed) and the gorgeous Michelle P. as a flawed, earthy woman (who should possess a sensual chemistry rather than breath-taking beauty). Just as Jack in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN is far more well-traveled than Ennis, Wharton's outsider has traveled extensively. Although Wharton's work circles in a wealthier repressive society, plenty of lovers made choices to live outside that society as the Countess well knows; the impoverished Jack, too, knows alternatives exist, and takes risks in life (the way of the rodeo) and uses charm to gain power and prestige as she did, marrying rich.
Lost and Delirious (2001)
Three Kinds of Misery
It could be called THE THREE FACES OF ANGST.
Watching LOST AND DELIRIOUS zaps you into the utter miseries of adolescent anguish, and even those who haven't been to boarding school will relate.
Moreover, each lead teen exemplifies a different type of misery although all have identity issues. Take the narrator; Mouse is her dad's pet name for her. Mary Bedford, also known as Mary B., gets the label 'B for Brave' by her older, dashing dorm mate Paulie. But afraid to take on the Brave mantle, Mary calls tells the Indian landscaper she's 'In Transition,' a fitting name for a pubescent teenager. Mary represents the anguish of detachment, leaving home for the first time though only about fourteen. Her mother died of cancer three years earlier and stepmom is envious of the bond between Mouse and her father. Hence she arrives at school and awkward outsider. Not only does Mary exude the New Girl vibe, but she soon finds herself witness to an extremely passionate relationship between her roommates, the adopted Paulie (short for Pauline), and the religious Victoria. After awhile, Mary finds their mutual cooing comfortable, evidence of their confidence in her as a trusted friend. The girls also bond through imaginary letters written to their parents which purge their repressed feelings. For instance, Tory air-writes to her mother whom she both despises and idolizes.
Unlike Mary and Paulie, Tory has both an older brother in a nearby boy's academy and a younger sister here at Perkins. When the sister discovers Tory in bed naked with Paulie, Tory starts a campaign of disavowing her love. Yet this is no ordinary crush soon blown over. Tory, who initiated lesbian sex acts several times, continues to room with and unintentionally tease the despairing Pauline. Both girls are homophobic in both speech and attitude. They do not consider themselves gay at all, but sharing in a special unity. However, to squelch rumors of their homosexual behaviors, Tory starts dating Jake, her brother's friend, and bragging about it, blaming Paulie as the unclear, unrequited lover. Her misery stems from self-denial, and deep-seated fear of being gossiped about and labeled. Anyone who has come out of the political or sexual closet knows how labels stick. Above all, she fears being disowned by her family.
Paulie has no such fear because her birth mother wishes to remain unfound and her adopted mom has emptiness behind her smiling eyes. Even the teachers can see Paulie's torment. Her affection for Tory soars beyond all teenage crush. This is a pure passion which exceeds rationality. Reading Shakespeare and cavalier poetry turns Paulie into a knight of yore, and she challenges Jake to a duel for the love of her lady. Despite this and her other tomboy tendencies, she cannot accept the lesbian label, either, but she's willing to put up with whatever others say as long as she can continue the fleeting bliss known all-too-briefly. In Pauline we see the ultimate misery of desire denied. With the firm confidence of youth, Pauline cannot imagine ever loving so deeply, so freely again. A realism pervades the strong performances of LOST AND DELIRIOUS that echoes the depressing state of adolescent anguish. The clear delineation of separate but joined misery by the three young leads make this film not a downer, but a celebration of truth--and film-making at its most intimate and revelatory.