"The King's Speech" (2010) -- Initial Thoughts

I nearly got to see this in the theater with a friend when Cowboy and I were searching for an apartment before we moved to Virginia.  But we went to see the True Grit remake instead.  I have to say, I'm kind of glad we made that choice, not because I liked True Grit better, but because that had some sweeping shots of lovely western landscapes that really benefited from the big screen. The King's Speech, on the other hand, is an extremely intimate movie, very character-focused, limited both in scope and scenery.  There are only a handful of outside shots, very few that are shot from far enough away that you can see anyone full-length.  Perfectly fine to watch in the living room.

The King's Speech concerns King George VI (Colin Firth) of England, beginning when he's just a spare heir with an ailing father and a playboy older brother who is set to inherit the throne.  He also has two beautiful daughters, a very supportive wife (Helena Bonham Carter), and a dreadful stammer.  Oh, and his name isn't George at all, it's Albert.  Got it?

Albert (Colin Firth) and Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter)

Right, so his wife convinces him to try this new speech therapist named Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), who has unorthodox methods but gets Albert speaking more clearly.  Then King George V (Michael Gambon) dies, and Albert's older brother becomes King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce) but insists he wants to marry this twice-divorced woman, which totally can't happen since as king he's also head of the Church of England and they won't hear of it, especially the Archbishop (a perpetually affronted Derek Jacobi).  Edward abdicates and Albert takes the name George and is king, king, king!!!

Except he doesn't want to be king, he's scared out of his bowtie, and he still stammers dreadfully.  Oh, and did I mention there's this dude named Hitler trying to take over the universe?  Let the good times roll.

Colin Firth deserved his Oscar, I will say that.  He's conflicted and sad and sometimes pathetic, but also brave and intelligent and so horribly, horribly aware of his speech impediment.  I can't imagine what it must be like to turn in such a brutally bare performance, and I don't want to -- I spent the whole movie feeling extremely sad for Albert, and to play him, much less be him?  Ouch.  This is not a comfortable movie to watch, though it does have a triumphant ending.  But I don't think I'll be rewatching it, at least not for many years.

Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth

I wanted to see this mainly because I was eager to see Helena Bonham Carter playing a character who wasn't Miss Havisham with a hairspray addiction.  And I absolutely loved her!  She was hands-down my favorite character -- her Elizabeth was supportive without being pushy, affectionate without being saccharine.  Wonderful.

Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush)

Who but Geoffrey Rush to play a rough-and-ready therapist?  Not much to say about him, other than that he did not disappoint.  Does he ever?  Not one of my favorite actors, but definitely one I respect.

Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall)

There was only one actor that I couldn't quite accept in their role, and that was Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill.  And that was partly because I couldn't rid my mind of his performances as Peter "Wormtail" Pettigrew in the Harry Potter movies.  Plus, his only resemblance to Churchill was his balding head and the way he pushed his lower lip out all the time -- he looked more like Alfred Hitchcock to me, but whatever, he had a tiny role anyway.


I love everything about the WWII era (well, everything except all the horrible death and destruction), so I found all the costumes here so delightful!  This is the eve of WWII, of course, but close enough.  This is the one costume I remembered most now that it's been a few days since I watched this:

It struck me at the time as being very much a costume -- and I don't mean the movie kind, exactly.  I mean that he was quite obviously dressed up to look the way everyone expected the new king to look, wearing all sorts of traditional male frippery.

I loved this one, though, mostly cuz I have a thing for suspenders:

And I love this shot of Elizabeth pouring tea:

She has a lot of furs, and some of the most magnificent hats.  This one was particularly striking, but she wore all of them with great panache:

Lionel Logue mostly wore very tweedy, fade-into-the-background clothes, as befitted his role as the man behind the king's speech improvements:

Right, so this is rated R because Lionel discovers Bertie doesn't stammer when he curses, so he gets him to shout out every single curse word he knows, yelling obscenity after obscenity in an emotionally relieving torrent.  There are a couple other moments where he tosses off a few obscenities to get into the flow of speaking, so you can't just skip that one scene and be safe.  Best to either find a Bowdlerized version or watch with a trusted friend who knows which bits to mute, if you are adverse to hearing some completely out-of-context but very strong swear words.  Other than that, there are a couple mentions of people enjoying a woman's favors (using that exact phrase), and that's all that I could find objectionable.

At any rate, a lovingly crafted movie, meticulously recreating the world as it once was.  Blissfully, deliciously acted.  Worth the praise it has acquired, in my opinion.

"The Cardboard Box" (1994)

This is the very last episode of the very last Sherlock Holmes series starring Jeremy Brett -- he died a year later of a heart attack.  My husband and I have been watching our way through all of them in order, but I decided to watch this one out of order because Joanna David guest stars, and since I'd just watched her opposite Jeremy Brett in Rebecca, I thought it would be nice to see them play opposite each other again.

I'd seen "The Cardboard Box" before, back when we lived in Wisconsin and watched nearly all the Brett versions thanks to the lovely library system there.  I remembered the basic plot, but not the particulars.  And I was pleasantly surprised to find that Ciaran Hinds also guest-stars in it!  He turned in the sort of nuanced performance you would expect, elevating his character from a simple sailor and wronged husband into someone very sympathetic.

Okay, without giving too much away, here's the plot:  Miss Susan Cushing (Joanna David) consults Sherlock Holmes (Jeremy Brett) about the disappearance of her sister, Mary Browner (Lucy Whybrow).  She thinks Mary has run away with a man their other sister, Sarah Cushing (Deborah Findlay) pushed Mary into having an extramarital affair with.  Holmes says he can do nothing for her.  Later, at Christmas, Susan receives a horrible present:  a cardboard box containing two human ears.  Holmes is consulted by the authorities, and he and Dr. Watson (Edward Hardwicke) solve the mystery, of course.  Ciaran Hinds plays Mary's husband, Jim Browner.

Holmes and Watson

I was sad to see Jeremy Brett looking so old and tired in this because we've been in the middle of the second series, filmed eight years earlier, and he's in much better health there than here.

 

 I honestly don't know that much about period costumes, so I'll just say that the clothes in these Sherlock Holmes series have always matched my idea of Victorian styles. 

Is this particular episode family-friendly?  Pretty much -- it involves an extra-marital affair and murder, but neither are discussed or shown in detail.  Not appropriate for small kids, though.

A Realization and a Revelation

A few months ago, my dear friend Deborah Koren, her sister, and I were ruminating on just what makes us like certain movies, TV shows, and books, and what makes us either not care for or actively dislike others.  Was there a common denominator, we wondered?  A discernible pattern that could explain our tastes, maybe even predict whether or not we would like something.

We came to what we now fondly call the Realization.  There IS something for each of us that draws us to one story and repels us from another.  And every person has their own particular thing!

For me to really like a movie/show/book, I have to want to be friends with several characters.  Not all, necessarily, but if I have a desire to hang out with some of them, I'm going to like it, maybe even love it.  It holds true for every single story that I'm drawn to.  And if there are no characters I want to befriend?  I can recognize the story as well-told, well-acted, etc, but I am not going to like it, certainly not love it.  I am not going to want to watch or read it over and over.

Deborah, on the other hand, needs there to be at least one character that she would like to be.  Someone she identifies with or can imagine herself being.  Totally, completely different thing, and this explains so clearly why a movie that I adore will leave her cold, and something that has her all fired up will make me shrug my shoulders.

We started applying the Realization to everything we ran across, and it has not failed us yet.

Just in the last few days, however, we have had a Revelation that sharpens the Realization just a bit.  That helps us figure out not merely whether we will like a movie/show/book, but which characters we will like best.  It turns out that each of us is drawn to characters that share one particular trait with ourselves.

Me?  I am completely drawn to helpful people.  If someone needs help, and another character steps in to assist them, I'm going to like that helper.  If they turn the other way and don't help, I'm not going to like them at all.  Doesn't matter if they help willingly or with a mutter of annoyance, they just need to be helpful.  You line up every single character that I love unreservedly -- Sgt. Saunders, Angel, Sawyer, Wolverine, Thor, Han Solo, Agent Seeley Booth, Jim Craig, Willow Rosenberg, Heath Barkley -- every single one is helpful.  And I am all about helping!  If I can't be helpful or useful, I get kind of annoyed with the world.  (This doesn't mean I like every helpful character -- Jack Shepard comes to mind -- but every character I do like is helpful.)

Deborah, on the other hand, loves characters who protect others.  And she says that, as an older sister, she grew up with a great need to protect her younger sister and also anyone else who might need it.

We've shared the Realization with several friends, and so far, every single friend has figured out their own common denominator for stories, and been delighted to see how it explains what had previously seemed like crazy, random happenstances.

So now I'm sharing this with you, gentle readers.  If you feel like getting to know yourself a bit better, see if you can figure out what trait your liked movies/shows/books share.  What is it that draws you to the story, to the characters?  What repels you?  And what is the make-or-break reason you like or dislike a character?  If you have your own Realization and/or Revelation, please comment here, because I find this completely fascinating.

Period Drama Tag

Here at the end of the first month of the Period Drama Challenge, Miss Laurie has asked a few questions that I'm going to answer quickly

1. What period dramas have you watched in January? 

To Have and Have Not (1944) and Rebecca (1979).  I've also watched half of the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, but my copy quit working!  So irritating.  That'll have to be saved for later, I guess.

2. Do you prefer period dramas peppered with humor or laced with dark emotions?

Both!  Sometimes in the same movie.  On a whole, I prefer drama over comedy, but mostly because a lot of comedies just don't fit my personal tastes.  Something that mixes the two is most delightful.

3. What was the first period drama miniseries (two episodes or longer) that you ever watched? 

Ever in my life?  Most likely The Blue and the Gray -- I can't actually remember the first time I saw it.

4. How many Jane Austen adaptations have you seen? 

Five:  Pride and Prejudice (1940), Sense and Sensibility (1995), Pride and Prejudice (1995), Emma (1996), Pride and Prejudice (2005).

5. What period drama, that you haven't seen before, are you most looking forward to seeing in the future?

The King's Speech -- I'm planning to see it next month, at long last!

"Rebecca" (1979) -- Initial Thoughts

I didn't even know this version of Rebecca existed until a couple of weeks ago, when I read a comment on an old post over at Old-Fashioned Charm that mentioned Jeremy Brett playing Maxim de Winter.  I quick searched YouTube, and lo and behold, you can watch the whole movie right there.  It's a TV version, and has not be released to DVD, so the YouTube version is not very good resolution, but it seems that it and grey-market copies are all that are available right now.  This is why most of my photos here are pretty crummy.

But who cares?  I have loved Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes ever since my junior year in college, when my boyfriend (now husband) introduced me to the Granada Television series.  A dozen years on, we own the whole series, and I'll be blogging about some of the eps for the Period Drama Challenge over the next few months.  Anyway, I couldn't wait to see Brett play Maxim de Winter, as I was quite sure he would be delicious.  And I was right!

Jeremy Brett as Maxim de Winter

Brett's Maxim is worldly, weary, and wonderful.  So Byronic I could bounce and giggle for joy.  Actually, I did just that several times while watching this.  You must understand that this character, in Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca, and Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre are directly responsible for my abiding love of Byronic Heroes.  Give a guy a dark past, have him brood, then offer him a chance at redemption (and possibly some romance), and I melt.

I keep digressing!  Sorry.  Been a long weekend, and I'm having trouble focusing.  Anyway, Jeremy Brett is about as perfect a Maxim de Winter as I can imagine.  Though I do really like Laurence Olivier in the 1940 version directed by Alfred Hitchcock -- it's my favorite Olivier role so far, and he has a far superior mustache to Brett, I must admit.  And it's been years since I saw that one, so I really shouldn't compare them -- I hope to rewatch that version again soon.

See?  Not focusing!  Argh!  Maybe I just keep getting sidetracked by thinking about Maxim's troubled, lonely gaze, or his anguished look when he tells his young bride the truth... sigh... swoon...

Right, need to focus.  Okay.  Let's talk about Joanna David as Mrs. de Winter, shall we?  She's very sweet -- many of you might know her from the 1995 Pride and Prejudice, where she played Lizzy's aunt, Mrs. Gardiner.  She's also in a Sherlock Holmes episode opposite Jeremy Brett, and I hope to watch that in a week or so, so I can see the two of them reunited.  She's very good as Mrs. de Winter, plain and awkward and uncertain, but so kind and thoughtful that you can see how a troubled soul like Maxim would be attracted to her.

Joanna David and Jeremy Brett

Okay, I'll stop here and explain the plot a bit to anyone who hasn't read the book or seen any version.  The protagonist, who never gets a first name, is a paid companion to a rich, boorish, middle-aged woman.  They're in Monte Carlo, sight-seeing, when she meets Maxim de Winter, who has recently lost his wife, the beautiful Rebecca.  Maxim marries her and whisks her off to his wonderful home in Britain, Manderley.  There, the new Mrs. de Winter meets the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers, who keeps telling her how inferior she is compared to Rebecca.  Eventually, the new Mrs. de Winter learns truth about how Rebecca died, and... no, I can't spoil it.

This is one of my absolute favorite novels.  I think it's the only story where I don't ever daydream that I'm part of the world and friends with the characters -- I daydream that I marry Maxim instead and handle everything perfectly and keep him happy forever.  It's the only story where I want to step in and replace a character, at least as far as I can remember.

(Random aside -- in the book, the girl tells Maxim her name, and he remarks that it's a lovely and unusual name.  In another of my favorite books, S. E. Hinton's The Outsiders, when Ponyboy Curtis tells Cherry Valance that Ponyboy is his real name, she also remarks, "That's an unusual and lovely name."  I love that connection.)

So anyway, where was I?  Unfocused and sleepy.  Right.  Well, the rest of the cast is quite good, particularly  Julian Holloway as Rebecca's loathsome cousin Jack Favell.  I also thought Anna Massey did a good job as Mrs. Danvers, though she seemed way too young -- Massey was 42, but I guess I've always pictured Mrs. Danvers as considerably older.

Anna Massey

(Interesting note -- Anna Massey was Jeremy Brett's ex-wife, and according to this website, they didn't speak to each other unless the cameras were rolling for the entire filming because they were disagreeing about a motorbike Brett had given their son.)

Okay, a quick note on the period costumes and things.  I think this is set in the 1920's or 1930's, based on the cars and clothes, and the fact that the book was published in 1938.  Most of Mrs. de Winter's clothes are simple, plain, and not elegant.  Maxim's clothes are expensive, but simple -- he wears mostly browns, a lot of suits, a couple of horrible turtlenecks (I happen to loathe turtlenecks), and some extremely wonderful hats.

Jeremy Brett in a snappy hat.

Here's a pretty good shot of the sorts of costumes this has.  Complete with a weird little fox-biting-its-tail thing, very period.

Mr. & Mrs. de Winter

One of the pivotal scenes involves a fancy dress ball, where Mrs. de Winter dresses up to match a painting of a long-dead de Winter ancestress.  She looks lovely, with her hair up and an exquisite dress -- and I can't manage to screencap anything that looks better than this image I found online, blast it.  At least it gives you some idea.

Mrs. de Winter and the painting she copied.

Anyway, because this is almost 4 hours long, it is able to follow the book a lot more faithfully than the 1940 version, putting in a lot of character development and detail that had to be glossed over earlier.  I very much recommend it, even though there aren't any good, clear copies available right now.  To whet your appetite, here's the proposal scene, which I find totally delicious:

When he says, "You still haven't answered my question," that's when I dissolve into a rather large puddle all 'round the computer desk.  Jeremy Brett's voice -- like buttered toast, salty and a little scratchy and delicious :-9

EDIT:  I forgot to mention whether or not this movie is family-friendly.  There are a few of the more traditional curse words, and since I'm trying not to spoil the plot, I'll just say that there are discussions of a couple of mortal sins, but not in such a way as to make the viewer blush.  Does that make any sense at all?

"To Have and Have Not" (1944)

(Spoiler warning -- I do discuss some plot details here, but I do NOT give away the ending.)

Although released in 1944, To Have and Have Not is set in 1940, shortly after France fell to the Nazis. It takes place on Martinique, a French island in the Caribbean.  Harry Morgan (Humphrey Bogart) owns a fishing boat, and some Free French patriots want to rent his boat to smuggle a freedom fighter onto the island.  At first, Harry says no -- he's an American and wants to stay neutral because he needs the local Vichy-controlled government's permission to do business.

But then, the Gestapo haul Harry and newcomer "Slim" (Lauren Bacall) in for questioning, which makes Harry mad, so he decides to do the people-smuggling job after all.  He says he's doing it for the money, but he clearly has anti-German (or just anti-bully) sentiments.  Plus, he wants to use part of the money to get Slim a plane ticket home.

But by now, Slim is obviously in love with Harry, and she decides to stay in Martinique to be near him.  She gets a job singing in the cafe where Harry lives, thanks to the cafe's piano player, Cricket (Hoagy Carmichael).  As Harry gets more and more embroiled in the resistance movement, so does she, and so does Harry's "rummy" friend, Eddie (Walter Brennan).

Walter Brennan needs a nap.  And a hug.

The film bears precious little resemblance to Ernest Hemingway's novel by the same name, other than that they both have a central character named Harry Morgan who owns a fishing boat.  But I'm okay with that, because you can imagine this is a prequel to the book if you want.  Or just consider them as two separate entities, which is what I do.

I kind of feel like, after the success of Casablanca in 1942, the studio wanted another anti-Nazi movie about a reluctant hero and an unlikely romance for Humphrey Bogart to star in, and this is what they came up with.  Like Rick Blaine, Bogie's character in Casablanca, Harry Morgan pretends to be selfish and materialistic, only interested in making money, not in doing what's right or what's patriotic.  But while Rick had people pretty convinced he would stick his neck out for nobody, everyone knows Harry is a softie who "carries" drunk Eddie on his ship so Eddie will have some sort of job, who buys plane tickets for stray girls to go home, who will probably be willing to rent his boat to desperate resistance fighters.  Accordingly, while I like Rick Blaine okay, I absolutely love Harry Morgan.

Just threw in this lovely shot of Bacall because she's so spunky here

This is Lauren Bacall's first film, though she'd done some acting on stage in New York.  Just in case you didn't know this already, this film was where she and Bogart met and fell in love.  The chemistry between the two of them is legendary, the stuff dreams actually are made of.  Watching them here, you can almost feel the attraction pulling them together.  I've never seen Bogie look and behave sexier than he does here -- his weather-beaten face takes on a roguish charm, his eyes glow with hope and wonder and desire.

Puppy eyes

Part of why I love this movie is the great use it makes of its supporting cast.  Hoagy Carmichael's Cricket is sympathetic and friendly, but with an air of reserve that makes me want to sit down beside him and ask him for his life's story.  Walter Brennan's Eddie is sweet, pathetic, and seemingly harmless, but he's got more gumption than he lets on.  Then there's Marcel Dalio's Frenchy, who owns the hotel/bar where much of the film is set, and who gets Harry involved with the freedom fighters.  He's nervous and sad-eyed and earnest, but also very good at persuading people to help him while looking harmless and helpless.  All three characters could have been caricatures or just warm-blooded scenery, but instead are vital, fully-realized, and intriguing.

Hoagy Carmichael, Lauren Bacall, and loads of extras

I first saw this when I was in high school, so probably about 15 years ago.  I recall also watching it in college, once with my dear friend ED, and once with my then-boyfriend, now-husband Cowboy.  And I know I watched it when we lived in WI.  So this was my fifth viewing, and the first in at least 5 years.  Each time I see it, I find new layers, new nuances I'd never noticed or considered before.  For example, when I first watched it in high school, I didn't pick up on most of the innuendo in the scenes between Bogart and Bacall.  It wasn't until this viewing that I noticed the similarities between Harry and Casablanca's Rick.  I could go on, but this review is long enough as it is.




Because this is my first entry into the Period Drama Challenge, I will take a moment to remark on the costumes and general period-ness of this film.  Because it's both set and filmed in the 1940s, I kind of assume the costumes are pretty accurate for the era.  I absolutely love Bacall's checkered suit.

Bogie and Bacall

She pulls off the slinky, midriff-baring dress for her debut as a lounge singer too, though I don't like it quite as well.

Rrrrrrrrow

But my favorite of her costumes is her striped bathrobe, simple and homey, looking kind of worn and well-traveled, like it's something that reminds her of the home she ran away from, ugly but beloved.

Sizzzzzzzzzzle

Bogart spends most of the movie in some variation of the same outfit, a white button-down shirt with the cuffs rolled deliciously to the elbow, a black kerchief rolled and tied around his neck, a jaunty captain's hat, and either denim-looking pants with enormous back pockets or else off-white trousers.

Aboard his boat

Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to work he goes

I don't know much about Martinique during WWII, so I don't know how historically accurate this movie is, but of course, the Vichy government and the Free French were definitely real. 

I absolutely recommend this film!  It does contain a lot of cigarette smoking, alcohol drinking, and some violence, though it's mostly implied violence, not at all gory or bloody.  And there's a lot of flirty, innuendo-laden dialog, which progresses to a bit of kissing, nothing more.  Oh, no bad language either!  It probably moves too slowly for a lot of younger viewers, but otherwise is pretty appropriate for all audiences.

Old-Fashioned Charm's Period Drama Challenge

One of my new favorite blogs, Old-Fashioned Charm, is hosting a challenge that I absolutely have to take up, namely, to watch -- and review -- as many period dramas as you can in the next 6 months.  I'm signing on board to watch at least 10, which makes me a "Devotee" -- though I'm going to ask if she considers episodes of TV shows to count, because if she does, then I'll bump up to the "Fanatic" category and try to watch 12-15.

I'll be tagging my posts with "Period Drama Challenge" for easier finding.

Let the costumed fun begin!

EDIT:  Miss Laurie says eps of worthy TV shows count, so I'm aiming for Fanatic!