Un film del 2009, regia di Kai Wessel, con Heike Makatsch / Dan Stevens / Johanna Gastdorf / Hanns Zischler. Prodotto da (136min)

Drammatico

Una biopic sulla vita dell’attrice tedesca Hildegard Knef.

When I first heard about this revival I was more than a little excited (as evidenced here), one of my favourite actors, in my favourite play. I’d almost given up hope of ever being able to see a fully staged professional production and here it was, right now. With a few reservations, this revival is almost as good as I hoped it would be, I’m accepting the possiblity that I over hyped it for myself and my expectations were too high and to be fair it’s only in a couple of areas that those expectations were not met. The most obvious of these, and I’m afraid the one that came close to ruining the experience for me was the performance of Jessie Cave as Thomasina. I’m actually finding it difficult to offer any positive comment, to begin with (and this isn’t the actress’s fault) I felt she was physically miscast and lacked chemistry with the (as usual most wonderful) Dan Stevens. Coupled with this I felt she completely failed to demonstrate any kind of growth throughout the performance and still seemed the same thirteen year old girl we’d scene at the beginning of the play in her final waltz with Septimus on the eve of her seventeeth birthday. Her total failure to demonstrate the transition from precocious child to young woman lent this scene a strange awkardness that detracted from the power of the ending. Also i just don’t think she’s any good as an actress, every line reading felt forced and stilted and I just didn’t get the impression she understood what she was saying, or that any coherent thought had gone into the performance. Perhaps this is just a subjective view, I’ve noticed mixed reactions from other reviewers, she is young and untrained perhaps with time she will improve, but I really can’t see how she was ever cast in this role at all. Other than that my only other critiscisms would be that occasionally the pacing is a little uneven, and the curtain coming down on the final waltz so quickly felt a little abrupt. Most of the other performances are actually very good, notably Dan Stevens as the befuddled Septimus and Nancy Carroll with a show stealing performance as Lady Croom. However, I felt the production lacked the emotional pull the play requires, for me the final moments fell a little flat and left me curiosly unmoved. I’d still highly recommend this production to anyone and everyone because the material is just so fantastic, but for me it didn’t (quite) reach the giddy heights I had hoped for.

I’d also highly recommend the Radio 3 broadcast of the original 1993 National Theatre production, starring Rufus Sewell, Emma Fielding, Felicity Kendal, Bill Nighy and Sam West.

oh and Ralph Fiennes was sitting in front of me again! I have a new celebrity stalker :O

Ich war ziemlich faul in letzter Zeit und habe das Blog wieder sträflich vernachlässigt – dabei habe ich eine Menge interessanter Sachen angeschaut, wobei mir die Hälfte davon gerade nicht einfällt.

Auf jeden Fall habe ich meine Liebe für Veronica Mars wiederentdeckt (und ein neues Ship gefunden WeeVer – dazu gibt’s weiter unten Clips) und auch endlich Fanboys mit Kristen Bell (die jetzt auch auf Twitter zu finden ist) angeschaut. Fanboys hat mir überraschender Weise sehr gut gefallen – damit hätte ich nicht gerechnet.

True Blood und Kings sind die einzigen Serien, die ich gerade verfolge. Kings ist mir sehr ans Herz gewachsen und ich bin wirklich sehr traurig, dass es keine 2. Staffel geben wird.

Ich habe inzwischen auch einen LiveJournal Account eröffnet und finde mich (nach anfänglichen Schwierigkeiten) dort auch gut zurecht und das Format mit den Freunden und Communities sehr praktisch.

Über die Richard Armitage und Toby Stephens Boards (bei den Links zu finden) habe ich Carte Noire kennen- und liebengelernt. Dominic West, Greg Wise und Dan Stevens lesen Ausschnitte aus bekannten englischen Büchern – genau richtig für eine schöne, entspannte Tasse Kaffee oder auch gut geeignet als Hörgenuss zum Einschlafen.

Zu Torchwood und anderen Seh- und Hörerlebnissen kommt in ein paar Tagen ein neuer Beitrag.

Well, you can’t get much more seductive than the new ten-minute videos from Carte Noire. It’s Jackanory with sex appeal! The Carte Noire Readers features gorgeous hunks Dominic West (from The Wire), Greg Wise (Cranford) and Dan Stevens (Sense & Sensibility) reading favourite literary love scenes from a mix of classic, modern and emerging novels.

The campaign, described by The Guardian as perhaps the thinking woman’s equivalent of the Diet Coke break hunk, aims to give women a diversion when they want to relax over a cup of coffee.

I can certainly recommend these seductive interludes ;0) Dominic West reading the proposal scene from Pride and Prejudice is wonderful, as are all the others. Good thing there will eventually be 30 to choose from.

So, make yourself a rich, velvety mug of Carte Noire coffee and, when you’re sitting comfortably, then he’ll begin (click on the photo above to follow the link and enjoy *g*) …

This Tom Stoppard play cleverly juxtaposes the modern world with the early nineteenth century, and in particular modern literary scholarship and mathematics with the earlier emphasis on literary creativity, classical study and scientific enquiry. In the early period we have a very clever girl of 16 named Thomasina, played by Jessica Cave, and her tutor Septimus Hodge, wittily played by Dan Stevens, along with a poet, and others. These early nineteenth century characters are juxtaposed in the modern world by a dreadful literary academic named Bernard Nightingale, played by Neil Pearson, along with an author named Hannah, wittily played by Samantha Bond, and a clever but rather intense mathematician named Valentine, very ably portrayed by Ed Stoppard.

Hannah is doing a book about the history of the Derbyshire country estate where all the action takes place, and Bernard visits with questions about Byron staying there in the early nineteenth century, and some slightly daft and ultimately irrelevant ideas about was going on at the time. While Bernard and Hannah plumb the past, those in the past enquire about the future. Thomasina hits on the idea of the second law of thermodynamics to explain the arrow of time, whose direction is entirely absent from Newton’s laws of motion, which are the same going backwards or forwards. As she points out, you can stir jam into a rice pudding, but you can’t stir it out again, and the three laws of Thermodynamics have often been wittily stated as: you can’t win, you can’t break even, and you can’t get out of the game. The second law says that available energy gradually becomes unavailable, so that in the long run everything will be at ‘room temperature’ and the universe will die out. Thomasina also discusses mathematics with her tutor, and devises an iterated algorithm that Valentine, in the modern world with his Apple laptop, is able to use to create beautiful shapes of nature.

The ability to make this into theatre is Stoppard’s genius, and while the main passion is intellectual, he sprinkles sex into both periods. The women are keen for some fun, and in the early period a poet’s wife, whom we never see on stage, along with Lady Croom, elegantly played by Nancy Carroll, breathe sexual allure into the proceedings. In the modern world Hannah shows desire for the dreadful Bernard, and the young Chloë Coverly, charmingly played by Lucy Griffiths, shows a bright interest in things sexual as did her earlier incarnation as Thomasina, who starts the play off by asking her tutor what carnal embrace means. In the end she desires more than words from her tutor, but when she goes to bed with papers and a candle we realise this is where her room goes up in flames and her genius is lost forever.

This revival is by David Leveaux, with sets and lighting by Hildegard Bechtler and Paul Anderson, but on the Duke of York’s stage it is unfortunately more cramped than when I saw it at the National in 1993, and the impression of extensive gardens behind the house is lost. The acting was very good, though I would have preferred more charm from Jessica Cave as Thomasina, whose high-pitched voice resonated sharpness, while Neil Pearson could have made Bernard less obnoxious and more smugly clever, which may have kept things in better balance. But Samantha Bond, Ed Stoppard and Dan Stevens were a delight to watch.

Arcadia 2009 poster

I had a chance to see a preview matinee of Tom Stoppard’s Arcadia yesterday at the Duke of Yorks Theatre London, directed by David Leveaux and starring Samantha Bond, Neil Pearson and Dan Stevens. (Those were the only actors I recognised from TV anyway although all were excellent!)

Arcadia concerns the goings on in a stately home in 19th Century Derbyshire, and also the family and guest academics of the home 200 years on as they attempt to uncover the truth. Throughout the play, scenes from both periods are set next to each other, as props introduced in the past are left on set to become the historical artifacts the academics rely on to piece the past together. As we are bounced backwards and forwards in time, scene by scene we gradually learn more about what happened in the past, while the follies and entanglements of the characters in past and present play out, with mathematics and personalities remaining the central concepts that life weaves around whatever the period.

Thomasina is a gifted 13-year old girl who continually badgers her tutor Septimus with questions about mathematics, philosophy and the meaning of ‘carnal embrace’, while he is in love with her mother but getting it on with a married (and unseen) friend of her uncle, and in constant jealousy of his friend, Lord Byron.

In the present the academics include an enthusiatic Byron researcher, another researching the gardens of the house and in particular, the mystery of the hermit that lived in the gardens for 20 years, and a mathematics student trying to derive iterative algorithms from the records of grouse shot in the grounds.

If the concept sounds confusing it doesn’t come across like that on stage – I’ve been more confused by Desperate Housewives flashback episodes – and all performances were spot on, although some of the minor parts were a little too minor to be completely satisfying. I thought Dan Stevens as Septimus was particularly good, especially at the comedic elements. A couple of script slip-ups were too dexterously covered-up to be significant, and the set (the play only takes place in one room) is realistic, adds to the atmosphere and feels like an extension of the theatre itself.

I’m not generally a theatregoer and so can’t critique as such, but in short I thoroughly enjoyed the entire performance and didn’t drop off once. My mum enjoyed it as well although she didn’t understand the mathematical bits so don’t let that put you off! Arcadia opens on the 11th June 2009 for a limited run.

How on earth can she be linking these two, I hear you ask? My son Sam Odiwe is UK Vagabond’s bass player – they are currently on tour with James Morrison which is very exciting. Last night I went to see them play a special showcase in London. It was lovely to see them all and catch up with Sam (he’s the one with the afro) and to see them play. Apart from my Sam, Alex is the singer (and songwriter) whose voice is amazing, and the other lovely, talented musicians are – Karl, who plays drums, Luke and Stephen who play guitar and Sam on keys. Click on the link below if you’d like to read more. Their Myspace page has lots of info plus the video of their single (Geffen label) due to come out on June 8th. They filmed the video in the Mojave desert – I was so envious that Sam managed to get to the States before me – he had a wonderful time. I’m going to see them when they play at Hammersmith Apollo, supporting James Morrison – I can’t wait!

On the way home who should get into our carriage on the tube home, but Dan Stevens – Edward Ferrars in the latest Sense and Sensibility adaptation. I have to tell you his eyes are every bit as blue as they are on television! I was very restrained – he was with someone – and I didn’t ask him for his autograph. I’m regretting it now…

Finally, a reminder that there’s a last chance to enter the competition to win a copy of Lydia Bennet’s Story and Effusions of Fancy by going to my re-vamped website Austen Effusions. E-mail me through the contact page to be entered. Winner announced tomorrow!

I think we’ve already established that I’m a sucker for all things Austen but especially Sense and Sensibility. And when I discovered that sexy Dan Stevens played Edward Ferrars in the new BBC adaptation, of course I had to watch it.

Plot (and quoting myself):
For those who don’t know, Sense and Sensibility is the story of two sisters, Elinor (Hattie Morahan) and Marianne (Charity Wakefield). The main focus is on Elinor, the older one. She’s rational, composed, intelligent and feels responsible for everything/one. Marianne seems to be her exact opposite – passionate, outspoken, spontaneous. Both fall in love, Elinor with Edward Ferrars and Marianne with John Willoughby. Of course, that isn’t the end of the story yet.

This 3 part mini-series is surprisingly different from what was done before and what I took from the book. Of course it doesn’t stray wildly from the path, but there are changes. I’m not sure yet whether that is a good thing or not. I still prefer the Ang Lee version, but that’s no surprise. Though Dan Stevens does much more for me than Hugh Grant ever did.

[SPOILERS if you don't know the story anyway]

The series opens with a sex scene. A very muted one, no doubt, but still – it’s a sex scene (a little bit disturbing because you see only the woman). Jane Austen probably would have fainted in the first minute. It’s pretty clear that it’s supposed to be Willoughby (Dominic Cooper) and Eliza (Caroline Hayes). But I found it pretty unnecessary.

The other thing that was kind of weird that Colonel Brandon (David Morrissey) and Willoughby actually had a fencing!!! duel!!! Did I miss something? Or did I forget that it was in the book? Or did they just feel the need to show Dominic Cooper beaten?

A change I really liked: they created an equivalent for the Mr-Darcy-jumps-in-the-lake-scene! A Edward-Ferrars-chops-wood-in-the-rain-scene:

Nice!

Well, other than that: I really liked that they kept Anne Steele around, because she is a really funny character.

The performances were fine, nothing spectacular, nothing bad. The girls – Elinor  and Marianne - did very well, though I did think that Charity Wakefield didn’t look much like I imagine Marianne. But probably just because Kate Winslet pwned that role. I did like Hattie Morahan very much, though.
Dan Stevens gave Edward quite a different spin, he was much more emotional and not as shy as you’d expect.
Casting Dominic Cooper as John Willoughby was kind of weird - he’s not much of a looker in my opinion, but John Willoughby should be a good looking man…

Summarising, I thought it a fine adaptation, though I don’t know why they found it necessary to have a new one…

Hilde is the story of Hildegard Knef (or Hildegard Neff as she was known for a while), who was an actress and singer. It’s a German movie, starring Heike Makatsch, Dan Stevens and Monica Bleibtreu and it’s directed by Kai Wessel.

Plot:
The movie starts with Knef’s [Heike Makatsch] acceptance into acting school in Nazi Germany. It then chronicles her life and her career up to a concert in the 60s, at the height of her success.

The movie was pretty mediocre, altogether. While I don’t mind having watched it, I don’t think that it’s necessary to see it in the cinema and spend money for it.

It seems pretty clear why the movie was financed. ”Marion Cotillard and La Vie En Rose were so successful, let’s do a German edition! Hmm… who could we do our movie about? Let’s see… Ah! Yes! Hildegard Knef! Her life was rather interesting, she died not long ago AND she sang chansons! The titles of  ”La Vie En Rose” and ”Für mich soll’s rote Rosen regnen” sound moderatly similar, let’s do it!”

Unfortunately, this movie has several issues. First is the script – I felt like the most interesting parts of Knef’s life were glossed over or not shown at all.
Apparently, her mother abused her as a child (it was mentioned that she broke Hilde’s nose) and their relationship at first was portrayed as rather problematic. And suddenly, her mother lives with her and everything seems to be alright.
Knef had an affair with a married Nazi film officer. (His family, btw, is never shown.) He arranged for her to have a role in a movie, which was never finished. In 1945, towards the end of the war, he was conscripted and Hilde pretended to be a man and followed him. There are a few kind of non-sequitur scenes of them fighting, or being shot at, before they get captured by Russians. They are seperated and Hilde finally goes free. How? I don’t know, it’s never shown.
The man is later executed. Does Hilde know? How does she react? On the basis of this movie, we’ll never know.
The whole Nazi thing is not really illuminated at all. Hilde was a child when the Nazis came to power in Germany, yet she never was a member of the party. She has no problem fighting for them, but when asked about it, she says that she doesn’t know anything about politics and never cared about it. But later she gives rather political statements. What’s going on there?

It may well be that this is all a question of time – the movie’s already more than two hours long. But I think that these are rather essential things in her life and should have gotten more attention.

The other big problem the movie had was Heike Makatsch. While she vey much looks the part, her acting was uneven and mostly wooden. When she tries to sound like Knef laughing, I wanted to cringe out of my seat. Plus, she plays Knef from 18 years old to Knef 40 years old and the only change you notice is the hair cut and the make-up. Neither does she get younger or older looking, it’s also not visible in her acting.

Monica Bleibtreu, who is a wonderful actress, appears only a few times and then mostly to say only a couple of words and disappear again for a few years.

The most exciting thing, though, might be Dan Stevens who plays Knef’s second husband David Cameron. His acting is good, going from soft to enraged in seconds and lending his character, who doesn’t get much introduction or motivations, a fine depth. Plus, despite being a “pretty boy”, he still manages to be sexy, which is also quite a feat. And his German is really very good.

Stanley Townsend plays David Selznick. Although his accent is off a few times, he manages to paint a convincing picture of Selznick as a slimy asshole. I don’t kow if he actually was one, but I guess chances are pretty high.

What surprised me was that there was very little singing. In fact, In the first 3/4 of the movie, the only mention singing ever got (with one exception, a nice little scene with Roger Cicero, who is a very talented German singer) was that Hildegard Knef couldn’t sing and wouldn’t sing. Then suddenly, she had a very successful Broadway show and she writes her own songs, which she wants to record. It’s a kind of “when did that happen?” moment.

(And you can think of her singing what you like, I think she had a very expressive voice and she wrote wonderful songs.)

Summarising, the movie has multiple issues, but it is still rather entertaining. Just don’t spend much money on it.

I watched the lovely BBC adaptation of Sense and Sensibility yesterday for the umpteenth time. I really love this version quite as much as the Emma Thompson/Ang Lee version. Colonel Brandon played by David Morrissey, gets it just right, I think, and I like the way that Andrew Davies, the writer of the screenplay, shows us little windows into his character, showing him as a suitor prepared to wait for Marianne’s affection, hinting at their shared interests, and giving Marianne some very good reasons to fall in love with him.
Jane Austen really glosses over the last stage of their courtship, which has left some of us wondering how on earth she managed to end up with him. There is something a little unsatisfactory, for me, in the way this is wrapped up.

Marianne Dashwood was born to an extraordinary fate. She was born to discover the falsehood of her own opinions, and to counteract, by her conduct, her most favourite maxims. She was born to overcome an affection formed so late in life as at seventeen, and with no sentiment superior to strong esteem and lively friendship, voluntarily to give her hand to another! – and that other, a man who had suffered no less than herself under the event of a former attachment, – whom, two years before, she had considered too old to be married, – and who still sought the constitutional safeguard of a flannel waistcoat!

But so it was. Instead of falling a sacrifice to an irresistible passion, as once she had fondly flattered herself with expecting, – instead of remaining even for ever with her mother, and finding her only pleasures in retirement and study, as afterwards in her more calm and sober judgment she had determined on, – she found herself, at nineteen, submitting to new attachments, entering on new duties, placed in a new home, a wife, the mistress of a family, and the patroness of a village.

Colonel Brandon was now as happy as all those who best loved him believed he deserved to be; – in Marianne he was consoled for every past affliction; – her regard and her society restored his mind to animation, and his spirits to cheerfulness; and that Marianne found her own happiness in forming his, was equally the persuasion and delight of each observing friend. Marianne could never love by halves; and her whole heart became, in time, as much devoted to her husband, as it had once been to Willoughby.

This is what Austen says about Marianne’s description.
Her form, though not so correct as her sister’s, in having the advantage of height, was more striking; and her face was so lovely, that when, in the common cant of praise, she was called a beautiful girl, truth was less violently outraged than usually happens. Her skin was very brown, but from its transparency, her complexion was uncommonly brilliant; her features were all good; her smile was sweet and attractive; and in her eyes, which were very dark, there was a life, a spirit, an eagerness which could hardly be seen without delight.

Finally, Dominic Cooper was the epitome of bad boy Willoughby, and in this production I liked the way you could see how Marianne was going to be attracted to him, whilst also knowing right from the start that he is not to be trusted. Dan Stevens as Edward Ferrars was a little too good looking, but hey, who’s complaining? I think the inclusion of scenes that Austen did not expand on was inspired – I particularly liked the scene where Willoughby takes Marianne around Allenham. I’d already written this scene as a flashback in my new book, Willoughby’s Return, and though not quite exactly the same, it’s very similar – a scene which shows us Marianne’s vulnerability and naivity. It was a joy to write.
All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable production and DVD, which I know I shall wear out before too long!

The rebroadcast of episode two of the 2008 mini-series Sense and Sensibility concluded last night on Masterpiece Classic and I am duly satisfied, not only with this production but with Jane Austen’s amazing story. You can catch up on my thoughts on episode one here.

Sense and Sensibility has really grown on me over the years. It is quite amazing to think that Austen wrote the first draft entitled Elinor and Marianne in 1796 at age nineteen. The original draft no longer exists so we will never know how much she changed between the first manuscript and what was revised for publication in 1811. It has been speculated by scholars and Austen enthusiasts that the storyline contrasting the divergence of personalities of two sisters is loosely based on the author and her sister Cassandra; Austen inspiring the emotional and romantic Marianne and her sister Cassandra as the tempered and wise Elinor. Who can say if this is true, but it seems to fit, and makes a pretty story! 

Watching this film a second time brought out some new experiences for me as I began to enjoy director John Alexander’s treatment of Austen humor with the minor characters and plot pacing of peaks and valley’s of emotion and resolution with greater sympathy. There were several key moments of surprise and embarrassment that ran through this episode and here are a few of my favorites. 

Lucy Steele (Anna Madeley) has just confided in Elinor Dashwood (Hattie Morahan) that she has been secretly engaged to Edward Ferrars (Dan Stevens) these past four years. The look of astonishment on Elinor’s face is priceless. Morahan’s composed underplay really sells this moment.

Marianne Dashwood (Charity Wakefield) has just received a dear John letter from Willoughby (Dominick Cooper) apologizing for any misconception by her as to his feelings for her.  As she relays her anguish and despair to her sister Elinor, we come to understand Marianne’s emotional torment and the depth of her profound disappointment in the loss of her love Willoughby. Wakefield really knows how to tie on a good crying jag. 

Mrs. Ferrars (Jean Marsh) is as hard a soul as that nut she’s trying to crack. Screenwriter Andrew Davies did take liberties with his interpretation which I was not always in agreement of, but the added scenes and dialogue given to Mrs. Ferrars were an improvement to the plot. Marsh really made Mrs. F. into a scary scheming old bat. 

When Anne Steele’s (Daisy Haggard) mouth gets ahead her mind revealing to Mrs. Ferrars her son Edward’s secret engagement to her sister Lucy we are treated to one of the best comedic scenes in the mini-series as Anne realizes her error and tries to back peddle, but does not have the composure and fortitude to pull it off! Haggard’s performance as Anne was perfection. 

As Edward arrives for an unannounced visit to Elinor, the jaw dropping moment as he walks into the room is classic. Here he is faced with Lucy his secret finance talking with Elinor the woman that he truly loves and he did not even know that they knew each other. You never saw three people so uncomfortable and want to leave a room so quickly before. 

Elinor is beside herself with joy upon Edward’s declaration of love and his proposal of marriage. After waiting, waiting, waiting, her patience is rewarded by the man she loves. 

Another happily-ever-after in Austenland!

Read my previous reviews

• Withstanding Sense, or Sensibility: Episode One
• Sense and Sensibility: Conflict of Heart over Head: Episode Two

The Masterpiece Classic season continues with a new adaptation of Charles Dickens Oliver Twist airing on Sundays February 15th and 22nd on PBS.

They say that time and distance are the best healers. After revisiting the 2008 miniseries of Sense and Sensibility last night on Masterpiece Classic, I have to agree. This controversial new adaptation by Andrew Davies which premiered last March has mellowed for me, and the rough edges that I wrote about in my initial review of part one, seem not as sharp. Or, I may be just so comfortable to be back in Austen territory after a tumultuous month of Victorian melodrama with Tess of the d’Urbervilles and Wuthering Heights, that all faults are happily accepted as trifles! 

What stands out in this second go round for me are the superior production values; the filming locations, costumes, carriages, the cinematography and the sweeping music. Hattie Morahan’s performance as Elinor Dashwood is beautifully tempered and even like a precision timepiece just ticking along; constant, stoic and precise to the minute. Dan Stevens as Edward Ferrars has actually (and forgive me dear Jane Austen) improved upon the character that we experience in the novel. Here, any annoyance of Edward’s weak and indecisive nature has been replaced with more emotional depth and a bit of humor, which is always a great remedy for characters defects. Even creepy Satan’s spawn Dominic Cooper as Willoughby has grown on me. He is still ill suited in the role (no charm, no sex appeal) but I value his acting and commend him for his reserve. And, the final turn-about for me was my new reaction to the sexing up of the script which had really annoyed me to distraction before. It’s still there, every pulse pounding heartbeat and heavy breathing moment in the opening scene, but who cares? Since I have seen this production all the way through and know director John Alexander’s powerful conclusion, it is an easy two minutes to overlook.

Even though it has only been ten months since we last enjoyed this production, it is still rich, poignant and visually stunning the second time. I do still miss the humor and wit though. Nobody seems to get Jane Austen right in this regard on the screen, though the Emma Thomson version of Sense and Sensibiliy1996 and Pride and Prejudice 1940 have their hilarious moments. Yes, even Laurence Olivier’s line “every Hottentot can dance.” makes me laugh! Not Jane’s prose, but close. 

Be sure to catch Masterpiece Classic next Sunday, February 8th on PBS for the dramatic conclusion of Sense and Sensibility. I’m rooting for both of the Misses Dashwood.

This early Noel Coward play is about a young man, Nicky Lancaster, convincingly played by Dan Stevens; and his glamorously insecure mother Florence, played rather too frenetically by Felicity Kendal. He has entered a vortex of cocaine use, now compounded by the loss of his fiancée, Bunty who rejects him in favour of Tom, an old flame, who is also the lover of Nicky’s mother Florence. This mess leads to histrionics between mother and son, in her bedroom, and there the play ends, with the son pleading to be mothered. Cressida Trew as Bunty seemed too unappealing to be pursued by two men, and it was hard to see why Daniel Pirrie as Tom was so attractive to the two women, but Phoebe Nicholls as Helen, the close family friend and confidante, was entirely convincing. Like most of Coward’s plays this is trapped in its own time and society, in this case the roaring twenties of the upper middle classes. Good designs by Alison Chitty, with direction by Peter Hall.

A Accurately Advertised running time for once. 65 minutes long.

B Brevity. The Whingers approve.

C Coughing. Had the National imported the audience from Oliver! wholesale?

D Don’t people bother with cough sweets theses days?

E Every Good Boy Deserves Favour is a play for actors and orchestra (Southbank Sinfonia) by Tom Stoppard and André Previn. It’s a rarely performed curiosity. An extravagance. But is it worth the effort?

F Feet. Andrew does not like them at all and did not enjoy sitting so near to Joseph Millson’s large bare feet and for your sake hopes that the costume department can come up with some shoes for him.

G Good performances. Dan Stevens is very funny as the doctor.

H Herrmann (Bernard) – a name that both Whingers scribbled in their notebooks when listening to Previn’s tunes. If only it had been the work of the wonderful film music composer; at times it nearly was. The Whingers had brought along some classically informed companions (Mark and Roy) who insisted that the score was actually a pastiche of Russian composers such as Tchaikovksy and Mussorgsky.

I Ivanov is the name of two of the characters. That’s three we’ve seen on the stage in a matter of months. What are the chances?

J Jimmy Krankie. The Whingers were reminded of that iconic star by the bizarre casting of Bryony Hannah as Sacha Alexander’s son. A late entry (or an absurdly early one) for the panto season. Curiously “playing a boy” is not listed as one of her special skills which are actually Stage Combat – Distinction (BASSC); Alto saxophone (Grade 8); Full driving licence.

K Klunk. A person taking their seat behind the Whingers managed to hit them and their party all on the backs of their heads with their bag as they barged through. No apology. What ever happened to manners? Now no one even says “oops” when they’re passing their gas.

L Lighting Designer goes under the wonderful name of Bruno Poet. Did a good job.

M Mnemonic. Every Good Boy Deserves Favour is used by music students to remember the notes on the lines of the treble clef.

N Nemonic. How mnemonic should be pronounced, apparently.

O Only the National could afford to stage something on this scale.

P Plot. Dissident, Alexander Ivanov (Joseph Millson, bottom, superb) won’t be released from is a Soviet mental hospital unless he admits that his statements against the government were the result of a (non-existent) mental disorder and that he is cured. He is sharing a cell with a genuine schizophrenic, also called Ivanov (Toby Jones, top, also superb), who believes he has a symphony orchestra.

Q Queen’s Silver Jubilee, as part of which celebrations EGBDF premiered in 1977 at the Royal Festival Hall with a cast that included Ian McKellen , John Wood and Patrick Stewart and the London Symphony Orchestra playing the tunes under Previn’s baton.

R Rare event (see below).

S Schism. (Or as Harry Hill would say FIGHT!!!) Andrew thought it all rather wonderful, Phil wasn’t nearly as convinced and thinks Andrew was seduced by its running time.

T Triangle. A first for the Whingers. How often do you see this undervalued instrument feature so significantly on stage?

U Ultimately unsatisfying. Phil thought the orchestra got in the way of the play and the play in the way of the orchestra. A curious experiment that now feels strangely dated.

U Utterly absorbing. To Andrew – who is too young to remember theatre in 1977 – it all seemed rather dashing and clever and audacious and he was captivated from beginning to end.

V Vladimir Bukovsky there’s an interview with him in the programme and the play is dedicated to him and another former Soviet political dissident Victor Fainberg.

W Witty word play in the early scenes. So this is the famous Stoppardian wit people bang on about. Though Phil thought some of it to be not as clever as he thinks Stoppard thinks it is. “Apparently coughing the diminuendos” drew resonance from this consumptive audience but when one character says “He’s a good boy he deserves a father” Phil groaned.

X X-rated. A friend of a friend the Whingers ran into after the play had some very potty-mouthed things to say about EGBDF, Carousel and Lesley Garrett, none of which will be repeated on these pages. But for the price of a drink…

Y “You do realise you’re not seeing all the set? (designer Bob Crowley) It hasn’t all arrived yet.” Phil overheard this conversation in the loo just before it began – but what did it mean?

Zzzzzzs, lack of. Andrew stayed awake, which is a recommendation of sorts.

It isn’t just London Marathon runners that need to train if they are to avoid injury or death on the big day; the Whingers also need to work up their stamina in order to prepare for major feats of inhuman endurance.

With the rather alarming prospect of tonight’s four hours of Gone With The Wind – The Musical! hanging over their heads like a dead albatross, it seemed wise to warm up with a dry (not in every sense, obviously) run – something with a distressing number of intervals.

So these two avid advocates of interval-free theatre courageously plumped for Peter Hall’s warmly received production of Noel Coward’s The Vortex at the Apollo Theatre. Andrew and Phil feared the worst – two intervals!

Limbering up with glasses of wine in their hands they breezed through the front of house displays sporting heavily airbrushed photos of its star, “TV and stage icon” (their publicity not ours) Felicity Kendal.

As it happens Ms Kendal, 61, looks surprisingly good – tons of slap may be helping this illusion but the Whingers were impressed and totally believed in her as the glamorous socialite Florence Lancaster.

The Vortex was Coward’s first major success as both writer and performer and it’s not quite the usual Coward concoction. Married Florence has had a string of toy boy lovers. When her drug addict son Nicky (Dan Stevens) returns from a year abroad to introduce his fiancée Bunty he not only has to deal with the fragile relationship between himself and his mother but meet her latest trophy lover Tom (Daniel Pirrie – rather wooden but sporting a rather splendid Brendan Fraser jawline). For Florence Nicky’s engagement forces her to start confronting the fact that she is no longer as young as she acts.

The light comedy of the opening act isn’t Coward’s best (either that or the prolific Peter Hall’s production failed to bring it out) There was scant laughter in the stalls, but the play does contain the odd gem such as “You utter cad!” and “It’s never too early for a cocktail” which the Whingers have inadvertently been passing off as their own for years.

And when Florence moans about “the utter foulness of growing old” and “an empty, endless craving for flattery” Phil glanced at Andrew who was looking out the corner of his eye at Phil and nodding gravely.

When Nicky accused his mother with the words: “I’ve seen you make a vulgar and disgusting scene in your own house with a man half your age” it was Phil’s turn to look at Andrew and nod.

But when The Vortex takes a turn midway through the middle act and becomes a drama it comes into its own.

By the third act Florence is a mess. Phil hadn’t seen such such an impressive display of tear streaked tantrums since he revealed Gone With the Wind’s running time to Andrew.

Phil was having problems with the set. The mainly black-walled first act room is described as “too colourful”, the second act country house sees them partying in the hall (Andrew explained that that’s because the piano was in the hall). And why didn’t the door at stage left shut and why wasn’t it screened off so you couldn’t see the actors after they’d passed through it (other doors were so presumably it wasn’t a metaphor) ? And in the third act Phil had issues with Florence’s brass bed which due to the rake of the stage wasn’t parallel to the door frames. Couldn’t they have built one side of the bed up to avoid this? Very distracting.

Andrew noticed none of this.

Embarrassingly, both Whingers had seen the Maria Aitken/Rupert Everett version a terrifying 19 years ago. Phil remembered it as being much better than this, but then his memory does play tricks on him. The past may be a foreign country, but to Phil it’s often another galaxy these days.

Anyway, it’s easy to see why it was considered shocking in 1924, what with its drug-taking and hints of homosexuality. No wonder Coward had to use all his powers of persuasion to get the Lord Chamberlain not to ban it.

All in all, it was a passable evening, but even Ms Kendal’s enthusiastic performance and the presence of the wonderful Annette Badland (Dr Who’s Margaret Blaine) never really lifted the Whingers spirits much beyond the level of “meh”.

And as endurance training it proved about as useful as Jade Goody’s marathon preparation as The Vortex comes in at a nippy 2 hours (including the breaks) which is merely half of the current running time of tonight’s show.

Phil even made it home in time to see the last brilliant episode of Damages. Tomorrow will be another day.

Footnotes

Previously at The Glass Menagerie in this very theatre, the Whingers had commented on the huge prices charged for their beverage of choice.

Forewarned, Andrew knew which answer to give when asked whether he wanted the “light or the full bodied red”, “Oh, the house”, he said airily, knowing the cost of the full-bodied.

This drew blank looks from the woman behind the bar. “We don’t do a house wine”

Andrew (hissing): “‘House’ is just a polite way of saying ‘cheapest’”

Woman behind bar: “None of the wine here is cheap.”

Which is admirably direct of them.

This took place, of course in the Apollo Theatre’s “American Airlines Bar”.

But where, wondered the Whingers, was the British Airways Bar? Was lost it in Terminal 5 ? Had the wine been sent to Italy to be sorted? Were they afraid the Whingers would be reduced to sleeping in boxes, as opposed to their usual snooze in the stalls?

Minor note: The programme seems a bit confused about The Vortex’s history. First performed at the Everyman Theatre, Hampstead “It became the hottest ticket in town and eight managements bid to take it into the West End, where it opened at the Royalty Theatre ” – elsewhere it says was first presented at the Everyman, the Comedy and the Little Theatre. Confusing.

“I, and only I, knew your heart and its sorrows; yet, to what did it influence me? — not to any compassion that could benefit you or myself. — Your example was before me: but to what avail? — Was I more considerate of you and your comfort? Did I imitate your forbearance, or lessen your restraints, by taking any part in those offices of general complaisance or particular gratitude which you had hitherto been left to discharge alone? No; — not less when I knew you to be unhappy, than when I had believed you at ease, did I turn away from every exertion of duty or friendship; scarcely allowing sorrow to exist but with me, regretting only that heart which had deserted and wronged me, and leaving you, for whom I professed an unbounded affection, to be miserable for my sake.”  Marianne Dashwood,

 Sense and Sensibility, Chapter 46 

Musings on episode two 

Episode two of Masterpiece Classic’s presentation of Jane Austen’s novel Sense and Sensibility aired Sunday night, and it did not entirely disappoint, nor did it thrill. I always enjoy act two of an opera or play so much more than the openning act. All of the main character introductions have been made, the plot established, and now we can get into the heart of the story. Tonight, we met several new secondary characters that thankfully added to the humor, witnessed a manly duel, and learned more about the conflict of the heart over the head. 

As I mentioned in my review of episode one, the visuals of the film are quite stunning. The director John Alexander has added several touches that enhance the visual beauty and storyline nicely. I particularly appreciate the symbolism of the shell chime that appears in the opening credits, and later we learn that it was created by the younger sister Margaret Dashwood (Lucy Boynton) from her collection that she has crafted into a string of dangling shells suspended between driftwood posts on the beach. 

Even though the privileged, but now impoverished Dashwood ladies have very few possessions after the death of their husband and father, Margaret’s shell chime represents the reconstruction of the family; the ladies as bits of natural beauty dangling and blowing in the wind. Their fate is uncertain, but they are together. 

Their new rustic home at Barton cottage on the Devonshire coast also adds to the drama, mirroring their perilous situation financially and socially. The remote location and the crashing waves on the stark rocky coastline are disconcerting. We truly understand how far they have sunk from the grandeur and comfort of their Norland Park manor house. Austen authority Barbara Larochelle described it beautifully in her review on the blog, Jane Austen Today. 

“Once the Dashwood ladies are settled at Barton cottage, frequent scenes are intercut of angular, craggy, jagged rocks jutting up at angles through turbulent crashing waves. There seems to be something wildly romantic about it; sensibility crashing up against sense, over and over again, if you will.” 

Director John Alexander’s choice of shoreline is important. If the waves crashing represent Marianne’s wild untamed sensibility, and the jagged rocks on the shore Elinor’s solid sense, there does not appear to be much erosion by the pounding waves over the centuries! Is sensibility prevailing here? Is this foreshadowing? 

My previous concerns about the male actors continued. Sadly, Dominic Cooper and David Morrissey’s portrayals of John Willoughby and Colonel Brandon did not improve as the story continued. Cooper is just miscast physically and emotionally, lacking the charm and charisma that Willoughby should exhibit. I never believed for one moment that he could win Marianne’ affections, or those of the fifteen year old girl that he seduced in the opening scene of episode one. He is evil incarnate from the get go! Run young ladies, and very fast from this Cretin. 

Pensive and sullen David Morrissey as Colonel Brandon is another story, and since I have seen him alive in other productions, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and blame the director for not understanding Jane Austen’s intensions for the character. They tried to hook into the tortured, forsaken in love dogma that can appeal to the female need to save and fix broken men, but it backfired, and turned him into a giant Milk Dud, that deceptively looks like appealing eye candy, but just gets stuck in your teeth and pulls out your fillings. Torture. Pure torture! 

The lack of humor that I lamented in episode one reclaimed its rightful Austen irony with the addition of some of the secondary characters in the Steele sisters, and the expanded role of Mrs. Ferrars. The standout comedic performance of the entire production is by Daisy Haggard as the ditzy Anne Steele! Not only did she have the best lines, her delivery and timing was superb. We are in no doubt of her desire to locate and attract prodigious beau, because it is the very core of her being. If Mrs. Dashwood’s daughters do not ‘set’ their caps for gentleman, then Anne Steele can certainly take up the slack from their abstinence. No man in England is safe from her consideration! 

One interesting character who deserved further expansion in the novel is the officious and imposing Mrs. Ferrars. Screenwriter Andrew Davies seizes the opportunity and runs with it, creating scenes and dialogue for the sour wealthy widow, emphasizing her desire to socially climb over anyone to advance her family. Accomplished actress Jean Marsh, who has delighted us for years on the BBC and in major movies, brings out all of Mrs. Ferrars nasty qualities by her forced stately pomp. Just remember Mrs. Ferrars in her regal parlor, sitting upon her settee like it is her throne loudly chomping on nuts, and you know that if her children do not follow her wishes, their legs will be next! 

There is a lack of compulsion in this version that I found wanting. Since I did not appreciate the performances of Marianne’s two love interests, half of the story just dissolved for me. Happily the storyline of Elinor (Hattie Morahan) fueled the plot, but even she and Edwards (Dan Stevens) long withheld romance could not entirely redeem the holes and missteps taken by the screenwriter and director. After close to three hours of love conflicts and plot twists, we finally have our hero Edward Ferrars arrive at Barton cottage unannounced, – the ladies thinking that he has married Lucy Steele (Anna Madeley). When we learn that Lucy has transferred her affections to Edward’s brother Robert (Leo Bill) and married ‘that’ Mr. Ferrars, we are relieved and anxious like Elinor. When Edward finally does propose, it seemed anti-climatic. I was not moved to tears like the same scene in the book, or the 1995 Ang Lee/Emma Thompson movie. They could have erased all of their blunders if they could have hooked me into the relief and joy of their future life together! Sigh.

Oh, and they also jipped us out of a wedding scene. Colonel Brandon carrying Marianne in front of his Delford manse is no substitute for a church wedding Mr. Alexander, even if Jane Austen did not actually include the scene in her novel. Don’t you know that whatever happens in the last two minutes is what everyone remembers most about the movie? Naughty, dirty beau!

It was a fun ride while it lasted Janeites. As The Complete Jane Austen series on PBS concludes, let us say a prayer of hope that it does not take another ten years for the next series of adaptations. 

Have you noticed how dark the new adaptation of Sense and Sensibility seems? Every time I took a screen shot, I needed to use photoshop to lighten the scene, as with these images of Barton Cottage before and after. It rained almost the entire time that the production crew filmed the movie. “We were filming in Devon for a fortnight and filming was plagued by constant rain storms,” recalls Charity [Wakefield.]“That’s fine for the days when we needed it to rain, but I learned that normal rain doesn’t show up on screen. So, even though it was raining, we still had to have these massive rain machines. We were drenched. By the end of the day, you’ve been out in the rain for so long you’re soaked through and exhausted.” The two photographs show the actresses wearing rain hats and thick coats in between scenes. Brrrr.

It also rained throughout the scene in which Dan Stevens as Edward chopped wood. I got chilled merely thinking about how cold Hattie Morahan must have felt wearing only a dress and holding a shawl over her head. At least Dan had the opportunity to warm himself up through the exertion of chopping wood. However, I found nothing romantic about these scenes, which made me shiver despite our own early warm spring weather.

Whoever said that film making was glamorous, evidently never shot a movie on location during a rainy spell in Devon!

Read more here about the film and locations:

• Charity Wakefield Interview: Manchester Evening News
  



• Review of the film
• Ellen Moody noted a few rain-soaked scenes in S&S 1995

NEW! Click here to read Kaye Dacus’s comparison between Sense and Sensibility 2008 and S&S 1995!

Marianne began now to perceive that the desperation which had seized her at sixteen and a half, of ever seeing a man who could satisfy her ideas of perfection, had been rash and unjustifiable. Willoughby was all that her fancy had delineated in that unhappy hour and in every brighter period, as capable of attaching her; and his behaviour declared his wishes to be in that respect as earnest, as his abilities were strong. Marianne Dashwood, Sense and Sensibility, Chapter 10

Musings on Episode One

As Masterpiece Classic presents Sense and Sensibility, its final installment of their 2008 Austenpalooza of films of Jane Austen’s six major novels, I am feeling a bit melancholy; – like it’s all over for another ten years until the next cycle of Austenmania traditionally erupts. Watching episode one of the John Alexander/Andrew Davies adaptation tonight, I am both charmed and annoyed. Overall, this is nice stuff, but why can’t these movie makers ever get it right? Is Austen to be forever editited, misinterpreted, misapplied, rewritten, and in this case sexed up?

First off, it is very hard not to compare this version to the Ang Lee/Emma Thompson acclaimed and highly awarded 1995 movie of the same name. I have my qualms about that one also, but it still resounds in my not too distant memory as a very enjoyable Austen pastiche. Pastiche you question! Well yes, since adaptor Emma Thompson chose to only include four of Austen’s original lines in the script. Hard to believe, but there it is. The script was almost entirely her own invention. Andrew Davies took the same approach in rewriting Austen for this new film, and then took it to another level by creating new scenes and sexual situations and implications that Jane Austen would never have deemed worthy of inclusion in her novels. Tisk, tisk!

Since this film aired in the UK in January, I was prepared by the advance flak on the sexual stuff, and it existed as more of a nuisance than a hindrance. I knew it was coming, so I just ignored it. Visually the film is beautiful, stunning actually. I must send my compliments to the design trio of James Merrifield (Production), Paul Ghirardani (Art), and Michele Clapton (Costume) for making it so believable and realistic to Regency times. You can read additional insights into the production at the Masterpiece Classic website. Their sensitivity and creativity is the backbone of this production, but the real mastery is from Cinematographer Sean Bobbit, who captures all the grandeur of the privileged comfort and ease of life at the Norland estate, and then throws us and the Dashwood’s into the cold reality of their new bleak rustic cottage on the Devonshire coast; - with howling wind, crashing waves and pouring rain. Burr… I shuddered at the stark contrast, and am reminded how different this cottage is to that fairy-tale enchanted home of the Dashwoods in the 1995 film. Honestly, I would have moved into that cottage in a heartbeat.

The cast is promising for the most part. Stoic and realistic, Elinor Dashwood is well matched to Hattie Morahan. Thankfully, she is physically appropriate. I love actress Emma Thompson, but she was about fifteen years too old to play the role in the 1995 film. Impetuous and free-wheeling Marianne Dashwood is aptly played by Charity Wakefield, but I still prefer Kate Winslet’s energetic and emotional interpretation. At times, I think that director John Alexander has laid a heavy hand on the two main female characters by making them such extreme polar opposites; – Elinor incredibly too sensible, to the point of implosion, and Marianne frenzied, and bitter to the point of nastiness in defense of her romantic way of opposing propriety. Austen was much more subtle in her approach, and I miss that touch of irony and humor that play off the reality of the desperate situation that the Dashwood ladies are thrown into.

My biggest disappointment so far is in the male characters. David Morrissey who some say is a appealing, is duller than dishwater to me as the long suffering Colonel Brandon. Where is the honorable, distinguished war hero, and elegant ‘gentle’ man portrayed by Alan Rickman in the 1995 version? This Brandon may very well wear flannel waistcoats under his costume to keep warm, because he is icy cold, and generates no heat for me. Dominic Cooper as dashing cad John Willoughby is just scary. I distrusted him from the first moment, and expected horns to sprout out of that thick black mop of hair! Where is the smooth, affable charm and physical presence of the 1995 Willoughby Greg Wise? One is puzzled what attractions Marianne saw in either of these two suitors? A big disappointment to me, really. They are the weakest link in the film so far.

The highlight of episode one was the performance of Dan Stevens as Edward Ferrars. He is what Edward ought to be, sensitive, caring, level-headed, and fun; not the foppish weakling that Hugh Grant turned him into in the 1995 film. Sorry Hugh, but Ang Lee did not direct you correctly, or let you do what you wanted too unfortunately, and it came across all wrong. Dan Stevens on the other hand, is quite promising as Edward. He shows the inner conflicts honestly, without apology, like a real man, and we are endeared. We also see the attraction that Elinor feels for him. He is believable and appealing, two important characteristics for a hero.

There are many favorable reviews about that I found of interest. One actually credits Andrew Davies script for the success of the film. I must agree, sort of! Even though I do not like all of his choices of interpretation of Jane Austen intensions, and dislike his sex scenes, he has not done any real harm, so far. My biggest gripe though, is the lack of humor. Let’s hope that episode two shows us Austen’s real talent at irony and humor. The Steele sisters may just redeem it for me.

Sense and Sensibility continues next Sunday, April 6^th on Masterpiece Classic at 9:00 pm on PBS. I am really looking forward to the introduction of some of my favorite characters; the dotty and crafty Steele sisters, the acerbic and droll Mr. Palmer, and Mrs. Ferrars in all her regal sourness.

The Line of Beauty, 2006, Storbritannien

Homosexuella Nick Guest (Dan Stevens) flyttar in hos sin rika heterosexuella kompis och dennes politiskt involverade familj. Han får i uppdrag att ta hand om den manodepressiva dottern Catherine när de är bortresta. Alla vet om att Nick är homosexuell, men det är inget man pratar om. Han börjar dejta den vackra miljonärssonen Wani (Alex Wyndham) som är en vän till familjen, och även där får han lära sig att man inte är öppen med sin läggning – det är mycket som står på spel. Den rika familjen får mer och mer förtroende för Nick och låter honom bo i deras hus hela tiden. Det blir mycket yuppies, rädsla för AIDS och brittisk 80-talspolitik (som inkluderar även den ickesexuella formen av ass-kissing) . Serien börjat gott och öppet och slutar som man är van vid att gayhistorier slutar: mörkt. Ljusglimtarna är dock de vackra skådespelarna och en hel del sexscener. Och serien är faktiskt jättevacker och bra, baserad på en roman av Alan Hollinghurst./Imdb

/Johnny