SHORT REVIEWS: AMAZING GRACE, THE PAINTED
VEIL, MISS POTTER, and THE GOOD GERMAN
Reviewed by Joel Johnson
AMAZING GRACE
Directed by
Michael Apted; written by Steven Knight; director of photography, Remi
Adefarasin; edited by Rick Shaine; music by David Arnold
With: Ioan
Gruffudd, Romola Garai, Benedict Cumberbatch, Albert Finney, Michael Gambon,
Rufus Sewell, Youssou N’Dour, Ciaran Hinds, and Toby Jones. Rated PG.
Running time: 120 minutes
Director Michael
Apted (Coal Miner’s Daughter and Enigma) tells the story of
the British abolitionist movement and its efforts to end British
participation in the slave trade that provided African labor for the New
World. Although the film does introduce us to several players—such as Thomas
Clarkson (Rufus Sewell) and Oloudah Equiano (Youssou N’Dour)—in this effort
in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the focus of the film
is on William Wilberforce (Ioan Gruffudd), who repeatedly brought the issue
before Parliament. We learn that he was a passionate Christian and, after
learning of the cruel brutality of slavery, felt that this was an injustice
that he was called by God to oppose. He was well acquainted with John Newton
(Albert Finney), the slave ship captain-turned-preacher, who wrote the hymn
“Amazing Grace.” Learning about slavery and then teaching his fellow
countrymen was a priority for this effort to succeed. Although Britain had
many ships involved in the trade, there were only a few slaves or former
slaves in England. The cruel realities of slavery were very definitely out
of sight and out of mind.
And there were
opponents in Parliament who wanted it to stay that way. They included the
Duke of Clarence (Toby Jones) and Lord Tarleton (Ciaran Hinds). If that name
seems familiar, it’s probably because before he began his parliamentary
career, Lord Tarleton had a leading role in trying to suppress the American
Revolution and keep Britain’s North American Empire intact.
The film doesn’t
provide us with a linear narrative, though its jumps in time are relatively
easy to track. These jumps do afford us the opportunity to appreciate
Wilberforce’s world, to understand the importance of his faith, and to learn
of his relationship with his wife Barbara (Romola Garai). The love story
steals the opportunity to provide greater depth to the story of the
abolition movement. While sticklers for historical accuracy will be
unsatisfied, most audience members won’t notice. The film does provide an
opportunity to remember how individuals felt compelled to band together to
oppose a widespread practice of systematic injustice. It gives us a window
into Britain during this time when it was reverberating from first the
American Revolution and then the French Revolution.
Films based on
history need to be approached with a degree of skepticism, as the filmmakers
frequently need to change the story to give the film its dramatic tension.
Yet these films do provide a powerful impetus for people to learn more about
the events and people portrayed. One place to look for more information is
in Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's
Slaves by historian Adam Hochschild. Hochschild’s book is devoted to
telling the entire story of the British abolitionist movement. There has
also been a link between the telling of this story about a past victory over
slavery to draw attention to the growing problem of contemporary slavery.
Humanity’s capacity to cravenly exploit other human beings for profit has
not dimmed in two centuries. Apted and screenwriter Steven Knight (Dirty
Pretty Things) have crafted a story that flows and provides
entertainment even if it never achieves greatness. There is good work by all
members of the film’s large cast. The film’s music probably could have been
more inspired. Some critics have pointed out pejoratively that the film
would easily fit into the long-running PBS program Masterpiece Theatre.
I wouldn’t entirely disagree, but I like Masterpiece Theatre, and
this certainly would be among the best programs in that series.
THE PAINTED VEIL
Directed by John
Curran; written by Ron Nyswaner, based on the novel by W. Somerset Maugham;
director of photography, Stuart Dryburgh; edited by Alexandre de Franceschi;
music by Alexandre Desplat
With: Naomi Watts,
Edward Norton, Liev Schreiber, Toby Jones, Anthony Wong, and Diana Rigg.
Rated PG-13. Running time: 125 minutes
1/2
This
underappreciated gem from the recent award season is John Curran’s (We
Don’t Live Here Anymore) filmed version of W. Somerset Maugham’s novel.
Screenwriter Ron Nyswaner (Philadelphia) adapted the 1925 novel for
the screen. In brief, it is about a troubled English marriage adrift in the
exotic Far East. Naomi Watts is Kitty, the pampered daughter of a family on
the fringe of the upper crust, and Kitty is the story’s central character.
Watts captures the bored insouciance of a Jazz Age socialite looking for
something more from life than what her parents think she ought to be
seeking. They are anxious for Kitty to find a husband from the right sort of
background. She is anxious for excitement and passion. She finds neither in
Walter Fane (Edward Norton), a medical researcher back in England from his
job in Shanghai. Walter’s need to return to his work means he can’t conduct
a leisurely courtship in his quest to find a wife to share his life in the
Far East. He has, however, found allies in Kitty’s parents, and they all but
put a gun to her head so that she becomes more willing to accept a marriage
proposal—any marriage proposal.
Walter and Kitty
Fane arrive in Shanghai a mismatched couple. It is probably helpful to
understand that foreign powers like Britain had established numerous zones
in China where they had favorable terms for doing business. The Fanes join
the social swirl of the colonial enclave even though the serious Walter
finds the society events too trivial, and bored Kitty finds them too formal.
Kitty does find a kindred spirit for her pursuit of excitement and passion
in charming Charlie Townsend (Liev Schreiber), the vice consul who also
happens to be married. When an outbreak of cholera happens in a faraway
village, Walter is put in charge of the medical effort to bring it under
control. Kitty is given another ultimatum—either join her husband for the
trip to Mei-tan-fu or face an ugly divorce. The film that has largely been
told in interior settings opens up for the trip through rural China. It is
on this medical mission that each of them undergoes change and their
relationship changes as well. While novels can take the reader into a
character’s thoughts, these subtle interior changes are challenges for
films. However, the film does a fairly good job in setting the signposts for
the changes. It helps that the film has brought along Diana Rigg as the
Mother Superior of Mei-tan-fu’s French convent and Toby Jones as the local
British deputy commissioner. They provide wisdom and insight on the local
situation and the human condition. The tinge of Chinese resentment on the
British colonial exploitation is provided by Colonel Yu (Anthony Wong) of
the Nationalist forces. Eventually, Walter and Colonel Yu achieve a grudging
and essential rapprochement understanding each other’s perspective.
The film does a
fantastic job in taking the audience to a different time and place, which is
beautifully captured in the cinematography. Edward Norton delivers a flat
performance as the dour and disappointed man who failed to become the man
that his wife wanted. However, it is helpful to see much of this portrayal
as less the actual Walter than as Kitty’s view of Walter. Interestingly, it
is only when he stops trying to be what he thinks she wants that she begins
to see who he is. Naomi Watts is perfectly cast and delivers a terrific
performance. This is a film about relationships and the relationships of
people who don’t easily talk about relationships. There are lots of emotions
roiling under the surface but few histrionic fireworks. Likewise there are
few action sequences in this village dealing with a major health crisis.
This is not a film with a visceral emotional kick, but it is a thoroughly
engaging piece of literate and historical cinema.
MISS POTTER
Directed by Chris Noonan; written by
Richard Maltby Jr.; director of photography, Andrew Dunn; edited by Robin
Sales; production designer, Martin Childs
With: Renée Zellweger, Ewan McGregor,
Emily Watson, Barbara Flynn, Bill Paterson, Matyelok Gibbs, Lloyd Owen,
Anton Lesser, and David Bamber. Rated PG. Running time: 92 minutes
1/2
This is the tale
of Beatrix Potter (Renée Zellweger), the author and illustrator of the
popular children’s stories that usually began with The Tale of
….(e.g., The Tale of Peter Rabbit). Beatrix Potter is one of the most
popular children’s authors of all time, with her work being continuously in
print for more than a hundred years. Though her name and the characters of
her books are familiar to a great many adults and children, few of us know
much about her life. Chris Noonan’s delightful film from Richard Maltby’s
clever screenplay intends to redress this situation. We first meet Beatrix
in 1902—the year after the death of Queen Victoria, yet the focus on
propriety to which she gave her name is still very evident. Reaching her
early thirties unmarried after rejecting a slew of prospective husbands from
the correct social strata, Beatrix has clearly reached spinster or, less
charitably, old-maid status. Her mother (Barbara Flynn) is especially
frustrated with her daughter’s disdain for the marriage game. Her mother’s
needling that her father (Bill Paterson) will not be able to support her
forever fails to make Beatrix more eager to find a husband but does
galvanize her into making her heretofore avocations of painting and
storytelling—a flashback shows young Beatrix telling stories for her younger
brother Bertram—into something that could produce a modest income so that
she could support herself.
Publishers Harold
and Fruing Warne barely offered that. The Warne brothers were so dubious of
the profitability of Beatrix’s little book that they entrusted it to their
younger brother Norman (Ewan McGregor), who had just joined the family
business. Though both quickly became aware of the low expectations that were
anticipated from their collaboration, they bravely and wisely stuck with
each other. Beatrix’s “little book” (The Tales of Peter Rabbit) for
children became a huge success, and a series of successful books would
follow. The relationship with Norman would extend beyond a business
partnership. He would become her friend and introduce her to his sister
Millie (Emily Watson), another single woman of like mind. Norman eventually
expresses his desire for more than simple friendship.
The story of this
romance is the centerpiece of the film, yet the film also shows her role in
the preservation of thousands of acres in England’s beautiful Lake District.
The film’s magic comes from the actors’ creation of engaging yet fully-human
characters and the filmmaker’s vivid portrayal of Beatrix’s relationship
with the characters that she created. Animation is used to breathe life into
the animals that she portrayed in two-dimensional watercolor paintings. The
film is quaint and sweet. Sometimes a bit too sweet as the film’s score
occasionally slips into hyperglycemia-inducing riffs. The art direction is
superb in making the film look totally authentic to the period portrayed. It
may not enhance my reputation as a hard-nosed film critic or be particularly
manly to admit this, but I found this movie to be thoroughly endearing.
THE GOOD GERMAN
Directed by Steven
Soderbergh; written by Paul Attanasio, based on the novel by Joseph Kanon;
music by Thomas Newman
With: George
Clooney, Cate Blanchett, Tobey Maguire, Beau Bridges, Tony Curran, Leland
Orser, Jack Thompson, Robin Weigert, and Ravil Isyanov. Rated R. Running
time: 105 minutes
Start with the
best-selling novel by Joseph Kanon; then add in Oscar-nominated screenwriter
Paul Attanasio (Quiz Show and Donnie Brasco) and Oscar-winning
director Steven Soderbergh (Traffic); and finally stir in major stars
George Clooney, Cate Blanchett, and Tobey Maguire. What do you get?
Unfortunately, the answer is not a neoclassic international intrigue film
noir that harkens back to great films of the 1940s, like Casablanca
and The Third Man. Soderbergh, who also did the cinematography and
editing, has worked hard to seamlessly match the contemporary film’s look to
archival film taken in 1945 Berlin after the German surrender when this
story unfolds. The result is a muddy black and white. Thomas Newman has
succeeded in writing a film score that recaptures the overwrought soaring
and swooping characteristic of many 1940s films. The themes in the story are
dark: war results in an inevitable moral chaos as people do whatever they
need to do to survive, others are willing to do whatever it takes to enrich
themselves, and nations will take whatever moral expedience may benefit them
for the war yet to come.
George Clooney
plays uniformed war correspondent Jake Geismer returned to Berlin to cover
the Potsdam conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin. The three big
leaders of the allies do appear in archival footage, but most of the film’s
action is far away from the conference. Within hours of his arrival in
Berlin, Jake learns that his opportunistic driver Tully (Maguire) is pimping
Jake’s former girlfriend and news protégée Frau Lena Brandt (Blanchett),
whose most vivid characteristic is a deep red-turned-black slash of a mouth.
The mystery starts to take form when Jake happens onto Tully’s body—complete
with a thick wad of German marks—being recovered from a lake just a short
stroll from the conference site. No one seems very interested in how this
happened except for Jake. Eventually, the film will employ Lena’s reportedly
dead SS husband Emil as a human “McGuffin” (to use Hitchcock’s term for the
object that provides the impetus for action in a suspense film).
The film has some
serious coherence problems that will keep the audience off-balance.
Occasionally the film uses voice-overs to let us inside the head of key
characters, but one may ponder—as I have—whether these were more in need of
explication than other sequences that were bereft of voice-over. Former
lovers Lena and Jake have virtually no chemistry together. While several
years and a lot of water have passed under the bridge since their prewar
romance, one would expect more from this relationship in the hands of such
accomplished actors. Likewise, the sequence with—my wife’s
description—“Ingrid Bergman’s plane” (see Casablanca) fails to
provide any chemistry. There is no “hill of beans” speech, no “round up the
usual suspects,” and no “this could be the beginning of a beautiful
friendship.” There is only the sad realization that the images we hold of
others may not match the reality once the cruel forge of war begins to
reshape morality. While it has weighty themes, the film seems much more an
exercise in style rather than the substance of a story. What began as an
attempt to make a film that could stand with 1940s classics has resulted in
making a 1940s B-film—and a disappointing one at that.
