Okay, the thunder stopped again so I’m still connected. The movie ended rather badly for all concerned — if not for their actual physical bodies I thought everyone’s character was rather well trashed and that includes what I assumed to be the more-or-less hero — he gets the girl and his kid, but only if he pays her husband to go away? I don’t know, I was underthrilled, perhaps mostly due to the fact that I wasn’t impressed with the protagonist. Perhaps it was because he was blond. I’ve never been into blonds, Peter Davison’s version of the Doctor being a rare exception. (And: you know, period filmmaker people, I know what you’re up to when you give Hitler hair to a character we are supposed to be against.)
Oh yeah — and Fenella Woolgar (however you spell her name, can’t be bothered to look it up, too dull-making, good Lord I talk like the characters now) has a really huge fucking chin. I mean it’s gigantic. Scary.
(Psst: one thing — this movie was directed by one of Blighty’s professional gays, Stephen Fry, so half the time all the male characters are looking at each other like they want to jump each others’ bones or something. For example, I thought David Tennant’s character — the “rich cad” who stole the “hero’s” girl — was actually making the moves on the “hero” with that coin trick scene. I recall that I saw Stephen Fry play Oscar Wilde and in that film a minor gay character is shown trying to pick up a dude with a somewhat different coin trick, so that’s probably why the scene gave off that sort of atmosphere. There’s actually only one Real Gay character in Bright Young Things, and he’s in none of these scenes.)
Oh hell, I suppose we could just revert to the comments on this post over at Ace of Spades.
3 Responses to “Maybe one more”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:12 am
Yeah, I remember watching Bright Young Things and winding up just being very annoyed at the characters. They reminded me, to a certain extent, of the dissipated rich kids in the town where I grew up – kids who were basically going to do nothing and be nothing because they had no motivations.
I went into the movie thinking I’d really enjoy it, as I find Edwardian Britain pretty fascinating and it seems a place I wouldn’t mind living. But I guess if I actually lived there, I’d have to be a country schoolteacher or a vicar’s wife or something, because I’d probably start knocking heads together if I wound up hanging with a crew of people like those Bright Young Things.
And yes on Peter Davison, though I’m more familiar with him from “All Creatures Great and Small.”
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I think part of the problem with the movie is feeling I got that the filmmakers couldn’t seem to decide whether we should have sympathy for these characters or regard them as bugs under a microscope. Sometimes this ambiguous attitude can be made to work, but it needs a better script than this movie had. For example, I never got why exactly Woolgar’s character, Agatha, went nuts. Maybe the scene worked better in the novel. And then the “redemptive” war experience scenes seemed tacked hastily on at the end, as if they realized they had better give the audience some reason to care about this flighty couple beyond the fact that they were young and cute. Even the gay characters were cardboard, surprising considering Stephen Fry was the director.
Even the acting wasn’t as good as I expect from these British things. The parts all seemed underwritten, and all the actors seemed to have been told to act decadent and useless but not much else. There was actually quite a bit going on in British society between the wars, but you wouldn’t get that from this movie.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 pm
“And then the “redemptive” war experience scenes seemed tacked hastily on at the end, as if they realized they had better give the audience some reason to care about this flighty couple beyond the fact that they were young and cute.”
Yes. I felt that as well, and I wasn’t sure whether it was just because it was poorly done, or if it was something about ME – in that I tend to WANT redemption of less-than-appealing characters; I WANT people to grow up and take on the necessary yokes of responsibility instead of remaining eternal teenagers.
(And yeah, I never got why Agatha lost it. I think that was part of my annoyance – I interpreted it as, “Oh, here’s this woman who doesn’t know what to do with herself, so she’s going to have a Mad Scene in order to get attention.”
Actually, a lot of what the characters did seemed largely motivated by a desire to get attention, rather than their doing what really made them happy. No one in the movie really seemed very happy, which, I guess was part of the message, but, I don’t know…if I had that kind of money I think I’d be better at being happy than they were.)
I had thought of reading the book before I saw the movie but I’ve never read it yet; maybe it’s better than the movie is but I have a feeling I’d still get annoyed at the characters.