The Wings of the Dove

The Wings of the Dove (1997) directed by Iian Softley stars Helena Bonham Carter as Kate Croy, Linus Roache as Merton Densher and Alison Elliott as Millie Theale. These are the three central characters around which the story spins. In the supporting cast you will find Michael Gambon as Lionel Croy, Kate’s father, and Charlotte Rampling as Kate’s Aunt Maude.

Set in the early 1900th century, the story takes us from London, to the English country side to a ridiculously pretty Venice, complete with gondolas and rainy piazzas. Kate is trapped in an impossible situation, peniless and subject to the questionable mercy of her wealthy relatives she has to basically pimp herself out to any weathly aunt who can help support her. It was not uncommon for unwed poorer relatives to attach themselves to the household of some aunt or other who was willing to take them on, usually in some token situation as companion or governess. Or, perhaps hoping to be married off to some rich friend of the family.

Kate is in love with the working class journalist Merton who does not seem to understand why this lack of money should weigh so heavily on Kate’s mind. At one point in the story we are introduced to Kate’s opium smoking father (played by Gambon) who expostulated on why his own marriage failed – blaming it on the lack of money, rather than his habit.

Into this mix of interpersonal politics and money comes the young, wealthy and very pretty American girl Millie. She has money. Lots of money. And a short life expectency. Kate quickly befriends the girl, and on learning that Millie has a crush on Merton tries to arrange matters so that Merton and Millie to start a relationship, fully expecting Millie to die and leave all her money to Merton.

It’s your basic femme fatale menage a trois. The story based on the novel by the same name by Henry James. Because of the skill and passion with which the actors take on their characters this is one of those movies that deliver what so many costume pieces only promise. Beautiful sets, costume and attention to detail cannot help a movie tha merely goes through the motions losing its main purpose, which has to be to devliver a story. Helena Bonham Carter is briliant as the young lady in desperate straights, walled in on all sides by her family’s history and her own fears. Even if her motives can be said to be driven by love, if you are feeling charitable, her actions are all unbelievably cynical. She is a gold digger and a social parasite, but she walks a razor’s edge in gaining the viewer’s sympathy. Linus Roache, in the role of Merton Dencher, is so obviously under Kate’s spell that he is wiling to go along with her plan to some extent.

The beauty of this particular film is that nothing is simple. There are no good guys or bad guys in the usual sense, everyone’s motives are explored and shown to have more than one point of origin. It makes it all the more heartbreaking that Kate realises her biggest worry is that Merton will fall in love in earnest and then watch him do just that. Kate overplays her hand, but the punishment is blatantly obvious, even to herself. She sets her plan in motion knowing what she has to risk and still thinking it has to be worth it. Merton lets himself be persuaded, using a little emotional blackmail along the way. Subtly played and well thought out this story is both beautiful and sad and it manages to take it all the way without resorting to simple clichées. The inevitability of fate, and the consequences of your actions – that is what we are left with at the end of the movie. No easy answers are given.

And on top of that it is absolutely gorgeous.

MULE

Being Julia

Being Julia (2004) directed by István Szabo has an all star cast consisting of Annette Benning as the ageing theatre star Julia, her manager/husband Michael (Jeremy Irons) and she is sort of haunted by the ghost of her first director Jimmie Langton (Michael Gambon). The movie is based on the W. Sommerset Maugham novel “Theatre” and if there is one thing Maugham is really good at it is depicting the life style of the rich, indolent and frivolous.

Set in a gorgeous 1930’s London theatre world the lead actress Julia is coming to an age when she can no longer play perky 25 blond ditzes and she is not old enough to play the mother/crone/hag/queen. She takes a young lover, Tom (Shaun Evans), to break the tedium and rejuvenate herself, and in part it works. There is no angst here about infidelity or anything like that, everyone agrees it is marriage of convenience and as long as nothing happens that can break up that happy arangement, everything is fine.

Julia is a drama queen – in a literal sense. The ghost of her first director sometimes argues with her that only the theatre is real, everything else is incidental. And she seems to agree with him, especially when her young lover is revealed as an opportunist, gold digger and general cad. The problem with seeing all the world as a stage and evenryone around you as a player is that nothing ever really reaches beyond surface values. You are only as good as your last performance and even if the audience loves Julia that kind of love is famously fickle. We get to see how she carries her personal turmoil with her to her performance on stage, which is typical 1930’s stage acting, something actors can’t get away with today – not after method acting and realism took over.

The young man, Tom, finds himself a younger, blonder wanna-be actress to bed and manages to talk Julia into getting her a part in the new play about to go on. Julia hides her feelings, agrees and takes the backseat only to completely upstage the poor ingenue on opening night. It is a petty, cruel and complete revenge.

Annette Benning is brilliant in this role. She giggles, cries, loves and hams it up like nobody’s business. A real tour de force. Jeremy Irons is brilliant as her ageing, vain husband and Michael Gambon is at his best… as usual. The younger actors and actresses are aptly beautiful and good at what they do, despite being completely upstaged. Sumptuous costumes, beautiful sets … everything is surface in that indulgent way that this kind of period film can get away with.

The only problem is that it is all surface. You never get the sense that any of Julia’s emotions are real in any important way. I don’t mind. Surface about surface with a lovely veneer and lots of eyecandy. Only occasionally do we get a glimpse of something that could be called real feeling – which Julia’s son calls her on as well. But it is an artificial world we are seeing and it never makes the claim to wish to depict any kind of actual reality. And that makes it one of those movies you watch and like and think nice things of… and then promptly forget the plot, the idea behind it and what it was all about. You will remember the actors and actresses, the performance, and the look of the thing, though.

Mule