I went to see Pan’s Labyrinth a couple of weeks ago. It was all right. It meant to draw connections among fascism, machismo and orthodoxy, but did so with much less aplomb than Kiss of the Spider Woman, of which it was in some ways a magical realistic version. Some of the imagery was effective, and some of the acting very affecting, but on the whole the thesis that it presents is half-baked. Of course, the fact that it proffers a thesis at all is notable.
Better by far was the movie that I rented last night, Vanity Fair, starring Reese Witherspoon as Becky Sharp. She is presented as a much more straightforward heroine than in Thackeray’s great novel, and of course its complexity has been sacrificed for purposes of cinematic streamlining, but the dialogue preserves much of Thackeray’s more-astringent-than-Dickens wit, and the costumes (lots of lovely bodices) and settings are beautifully chosen. It seems, frankly, that Thackeray translates better into film (think Barry Lyndon) than Dickens, because Dickens’ errant wordplay, which provides much of the delight of reading his novels (and produces the Victorian version of a magical realism in some respects) is impossible to translate into film. Or perhaps Peter Jackson might be able to convey the grotesquery.
Witherspoon herself is a revelation, though. In a film whose central character has continually to represent herself with a calculated insouciance, Witherspoon manages to convey the difficulty of the artifice that is needed always to produce in public the impression of naturalness, and then manages to convey the strained personage beneath that mask when there is no audience available. And she has a magnetic presence, good teeth, and an estimable cleavage. The supporting cast is very strong.
The director does manage to reproduce Thackeray’s ability to seduce us into comfort with our prejudices, only to turn the tables on us, again and again. What is lost is the wonderful way in which Thackeray makes us admire Becky Sharp even in the face of her supposedly unappealing qualities. Despite his subject matter, he is rather demotic in this respect, though Dickens generally garners the props by being more overt about it.
At any rate, it does not presume to lecture one, and that is a great relief.
I too thought very highly of Vanity Fair. It is a fiction rich in insights about the human and social conditions.
Tried the book but lost interest – too much magazine serialization to hold my interest and the humor was a bit less understandable in print.
I’d even recommend the movie to my daughters aged 14 and 10. Might as well prepare them for the complexities of real life.
Try the novel again, Whitehall, in the summer, when you can read it outside in bites, with a bottle of Valpolicella–preferably by a waterfall.
Dan – if you’ve got Netflix, Guillermo del Toro’s The Devil’s Backbone (2001) is a really nicely done work that uses a very similar backdrop. I haven’t seen Pan’s Labyrinth yet, but from what I’ve read I wonder that the two films might not find a synergy when viewed as companion pieces.
The importance of Reese Witherspoon can’t be overstated – again on the Netflix – check out 1996’s Freeway for an early glimpse of her fearlessness.
Thanks, happyfeet. I’ll do both.
It’s so nice to see an actress who actually relishes playing older than she is. In context, that’s fearless in and of itself.
I love Reese Witherspoon and Mira Nair, but I didn’t like what Nair did with Vanity Fair’s Becky. Too much of a feminist spin. I liked Thackery’s Becky- wicked and manipulative for her own pleasure. Mira made her a more of a victim, manipulative because that was the only path left to a woman not of a certain social class.
There is something quintessentially American about Becky Sharp. I can accept the artifice as a response to the utterly stultifying hell she would otherwise have been sentenced to. I admire her so much I named my only child after her. She thinks it was Becky Thatcher, though. Please don’t tell her. I’ll do it when I’m ready (not her, me).
The movie was OK but the book was great.
Excellent point, commander.
Hmmm…trying to decide whether this one is really artsy enough for me.
Did she get naked?
I saw Pan’s Labyrinth. I’ve already posted this at rec.games.frp.dnd but I’m assuming that you haven’t read it yet (given that this isn’t Ace.mu.nu
)
*The subtitles were a big offputting at first but then I got used to it. It helped that I was able to tell myself that it was adding to the “storybook” flair to the thing.
*The monster at the banquet table reminded me of the “Silent Hill” movie (which I liked).
*Juxtaposition with Franco’s Spain: probably the most interesting part. But… interesting does not always help.
My problem with movies like this (and “Starship Troopers”, and “Fight Club”, and most recently “Idiocracy”) is that my suspension of belief falls off and then I start pondering The Point of the flick.
In the movie, a pagan Providence acts through the girl to bring Franco’s head minion to justice. (Not *Divine* Providence, because the Catholic
Church in Spain was in bed with the Generalissimo; as the movie makes clear enough.) This goes on while the Allies land in Normandy to bring hope to the
free men of Spain; meanwhile the anti-Franco partisans in the hills are pure
of heart and valiant.
In real life: Stalin subverted the Republic, Franco won, the democrats chickened out, and there wasn’t a credible resistance movement in Spain
again until the 1970s. (The Maquis doesn’t count. c.f., innumerable books on the Spanish Civil War; of which I particularly recommend George Orwell’s “Homage to Catalonia”)
It just reminded me that the good guys in the movie – fawns, faeries, and brave supporters of
constitutional representative government against fascism – are all figments of the European self-image, which never existed in that continent.
The movie was basura. Bridge to Terabithia, even Silent Hill were better. (IMO.)
My take on Pan’s Labyrinth: Beautiful movie, superbly made, written, and acted. I never, ever want to see it again.
Heartily agree with Vanity Fair the movie. I thought it did a great job of stripping down the book while not completely destroying it.
Becky Sharp is well hot. And English to the core.
All right, furriskey, but her mother was a French opera singer.
You were actually able to stay awake for Barry Lyndon?
The bit I liked in Vanity Fair was when the wicked Ambassador seduces our heroine in the front seat of his convertable and she reveals that she is a super secret agent and pulls out her AK47 and blows his fucking head off.
I don’t thnk the movie should reveal her real name was Becky though. They could have just used code name Val.
Geezer–
I love that movie. I dunno. I was, what, maybe 15 when I saw it at the theater. I enjoyed it a great deal then.
A little OT, but I saw Zodiac today. Damn good; if nothing else Fincher knows how to create atmosphere. And Barry Lyndon is my favorite Kubrick movie. The history major inside me loved it.
You were 15? Must have been the breasts.
Oh, God, I managed a theatre that showed Barry Lyndon for WEEKS.
Who knew Kubrick was going to film the 18th century in real time?
If it wasn’t for the drunks looking for someplace to sleep, we’d have closed by nine every night…
I have been a Witherspoon fan since I saw “Election”. She was great in that, but then, she had a great script to work with.
Speaking of Trollope, back in 1991, when Censorship was Censorship and Men were Men, my little sister in England sent me a tape recording of the entire Barchester Chronicles. Must have run to about 9 hours.
Some Singapore policeman had to sit through the whole thing looking for the dirty bits, and then they released it to me on payment of a $30 fee “for watching it”
It was worth it. In fact, the thought still gives me pleasure to this day.
My apologies, we were peaking of Strumpets, not Trollops.
Can’t think what came over me.
It’s a crime that Hollywood keeps releasing crap like this when Zapped! III: The College Years goes unproduced…
Agreed maybee. I loved the wickedness that was Becky in the book. That is completely gone in the movie, and as you say she was painted as a victim.
A few other changes from the book that stood out to me (for better or worse):
The contrived ending(s), with Becky marrying Jos. And her reconciliation with little Rawdon.
The addition of all things India…a nice reminder of how much a part it played in British life.
The biggest disappointment for me regarding changes in the movie was the confusion or blurring between “vanity” and Vanity Fair. The original term from Pilgrim’s Progress and what Thackeray showed was a much deeper and broader human weakness than just the vanity shown in the movie (with tons of symbolism–peacocks anyone?–to hit you over the head just in case you’re trying to sleep).
But overall an excellent movie despite the flaws. I know it would be difficult to boil this down to a 2 hour movie and was very pleasantly surprised with how well it was done.