strange and random happenstance

Rebecca
Based on the Book by Daphne Du Maurier
Starring: Emilia Fox, Charles Dance, Faye Dunaway, John Horsley, Jonathan Stokes, Diana Rigg, Tom Chadbon, Geraldine James, Denis Lill, John Branwell, Jonathan Cake, Kelly Reilly, Anthony Bate, Ian McDiarmid, Timothy West, and Lucy Cohu
Release Date: April 13th, 1997
Rating: ★
To Buy

The gregarious Mrs. Van Hopper has hired herself a mousy little companion to accompany her to Monte Carlo. Yet she's put out that the old crowd aren't around and then laid up with a sniffle. Her young companion uses this time to become close to the one person in Monte Mrs. Van Hopper is fascinated with, Maxim de Winter, the inconsolable widow and owner of the great house Manderley. When Mrs. Van Hopper decides to decamp Maxim gives the little mouse a choice, go to New York with her employer or come to Manderley with him as his wife. It isn't a hard choice to embrace being the second Mrs. de Winter, a choice that even Mrs. Van Hopper approves, because at least someone bagged him. Back at his luxurious estate in England Maxim's young new wife feels that the shadow of his first wife, Rebecca, looms large. But even despite the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers, and her doom and gloom, nothing can stop the newlyweds love for each other. That is unless Maxim is still in love with Rebecca... the discovery of Rebecca's scuttled boat in the bay will try their relationship, destroying everything or bringing them closer together.

The 1996-1997 season of Masterpiece Theatre was rare for me in that I caught it entirely. I was taking a year off before college and therefore had time to luxuriate in my much loved passions of reading and watching miniseries. The adaptation of Nostromo starring Colin Firth and A Royal Scandal starring Richard E. Grant were highlights that year. In fact when I recently learned A Royal Scandal was an extra on The Queen's Sister I instantly bought the DVD, despite my dislike of The Queen's Sister. Now if they'd just release Nostromo on anything other than VHS I'd be set because I'm seriously dying with only my old taped copy. But what I wasn't looking forward to was the season ending remake of Rebecca. This was at the height of my Hitchcock fanaticism, having taken film classes in high school and planning on taking more in college, and I couldn't comprehend why anyone would remake a classic.

Yes, Hitchcock didn't get it 100% right, but you can not deny that Laurence Olivier IS Maxim de Winter. It won best picture at the Oscars! So I planned to boycott the remake. The problem when living with your parents is that they have their own opinions on what they want to watch and seeing some of Rebecca turned out to be unavoidable. What little I saw made me instantly withdraw from the television room. My mom didn't last very long either, despite her love of Diana Rigg. For almost twenty years I have shunned this adaptation shuddering from the memory of those few glimpses. So I thought perhaps I should give it a second chance. Maybe Diana Rigg could be a superior Mrs. Danvers? Perhaps the beauty of Manderley would be done more justice in color with it's lush abundant floral growth? Or perhaps I should have trusted my gut reaction and avoided this piece of crap entirely.

What is striking about this adaptation is they have assembled some of the most talented actors in the British Isles and beyond and somehow sucked the life out of them. If it weren't for Faye Dunaway and Jonathan Cake I don't think a single line would have been uttered above a dull monotone. Rebecca is full of emotion and passion, both repressed and on full display, and yet here it comes across as the most flat and emotionless story ever. It should be turbulent and forceful like the sea, not fake and false like that shitty shack that was slapped together on the beach. After the first episode my dislike became more and more audible. Three hours and nothing went right. I was visibly cringing at all that they got wrong. The second Mrs. de Winter isn't just shy with a can do attitude but meek! Oh the rage! But even if I hadn't been comparing it to the book, it was awful. I kept making myself step back and think, if I hadn't read the book would I enjoy this? The answer was no time and time again.

While the heavy-handed foreshadowing might have been driving me loopy, if Du Maurier was still alive I know what she'd hate most... they made this adaptation into a romance. Yes, there are romantic elements in Rebecca, but that is NOT what the book is. The moniker of "Romance Writer" hung around Du Maurier's neck like a millstone her entire life. To have her greatest novel reduced to being nothing more than a romance? No. She would have snapped. Plus, I like Charles Dance very much, don't get me wrong, his performance of himself in Jam and Jerusalem, Clatterford stateside, is one of my favorite cameos on TV ever; but to see him groping and pawing awkwardly at Emilia Fox's cheek and sucking her face so that it looks like he's eating her. Eww. The book STRONGLY hints that the de Winters had a sexless marriage and yet here the demonstrative affection is overwhelming. It's the exact opposite of the book, yet oddly passionless. And that lame excuse made for their lack of children? Like Maxim would run into a burning building to save Mrs. Danvers? NO!

Yet, I have to give props where props are due. These go to Diana Rigg and Jonathan Cake, Mrs. Danvers and Jack Favell, Rebecca's maid and blackmailing cousin, respectively. I think these two actually read the source material, which Arthur Hopcraft obviously didn't when adapting this because who would purposefully change the famous introductory chapter and slap it into an upbeat coda? But enough about Arthur Hopcraft because this obviously ended his career if you check out IMDB. As for Hitchcock he proves that even the greats can get it wrong and he just didn't get Mrs. Danvers, and went camp and over the top. Diana Rigg nails it. The sadness that is behind that stiff facade. As for Cake, I don't think I can pay him a higher compliment than saying I really thought he WAS Favell. Rigg and Cake got the menacing down perfectly. Yet they also had the depth Du Maurier demanded of these characters. While they had the menace, they also had the vulnerability, and ultimately the patheticness of these two and how hollow their last act, destroying Manderley, really is.

But in the end, seeing as this miniseries was called Rebecca, you'd think they'd at least get her right? Yet they didn't. It's almost as if Rebecca is an afterthought. She should be front and center, there, oppressing Maxim and his new wife every single second of their time at Manderley, but she's oddly not there. It's like Mrs. Danvers and Jack Favell are the only ones who remember and it's only when they are around that Rebecca still lives. Otherwise it's as if she's long dead and long gone, not "haunting" them as should be the case. But this couldn't very well have been a romance if they concentrated on the Gothic nature of the book with Rebecca haunting Manderley now could it? As for when Rebecca actually appears... she's impressionistic and the camera is just too fucking close to her face. I wouldn't know it was Lucy Cohu, an actress I quite like who stared in the aforementioned movie The Queen's Sister, if it wasn't for the credits. Therefore we can say that like the book, there's a problem with Rebecca. Here it's her irrelevancy, there it's her possession of you body and soul. Let the book possess you and avoid this catastrophe. 

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Adaptation, Charles Dance, Daphne Du Maurier, Diana Rigg, Du Maurier December, Emilia Fox, Hitchcock, Jonathan Cake, Lucy Cohu, Manderley, Masterpiece Theater, Mrs. Danvers, Rebecca, Richard E. Grant, Romance

Bookstore: Strand Bookstore

Location: New York, New York

Why I Love Them: The Strand is like Mecca for book lovers who journey to New York. In fact, if you ask someone about bookstores in New York the only store they're likely to mention by name is the Strand. It took me several trips to New York, including one trip where I ate lunch ACROSS THE STREET, before I was finally able to sneak away from friends, family, and other obligations to take in all this store has to offer. What's odd is when I walked through those doors I was simultaneously overwhelmed and unimpressed. Yes, they supposedly have eighteen miles of books but I will tell you any day, a better curated store is worth more than a store that has everything. In fact I'd go so far as to say I really prefer my local stores to this much lauded one. You'd think the New York Times would be a little more careful giving away the title of "the undisputed king of the city’s independent bookstores" but then again, I've been known to disagree with that publication occasionally. The three areas of interest to me were the basement, the labyrinth of review copies, the rare books floor, aka those you dare not touch, and a lovely display right near the entrance of leather bound limited editions and signed books. Yes, the main floor with it's shelves and shelves offered me nothing really to latch onto, I only saw books that were already adorning my shelves. The books in the basement were in bad shape. The books on the rare floor were too few and too precious, being up there made me nervous that I'd sneeze and owe someone a million dollars. The only section I really spent any time with was that display near the entrance...  

Best Buy: Because all good bookstores are smart to put leather bound books near entrances, because these are books that proclaim they are books. They are what we long to fill our libraries. They are the evolutionary end of books. You start with a manuscript, work your way up through paperbacks, hit hardcovers, and finally reach leather bound loveliness. And yes, I agree that it's odd that it's almost the complete reverse of how books are released, but that's just the way it is. They had Franklin Library and Easton Press limited editions, so many books that I just wanted to hold. But there was one book that stood out. My family has always been a huge Masterpiece No Longer Theatre Family. Even before I was born this was my parents favorite show, so I guess it makes sense that they indoctrinated me when I was young. Alistair Cooke and Russell Baker were icons in my family. Their introductions brought depth and human interest to the shows that followed. I will still never understand why PBS did away with these introductions and closing remarks, they MADE the show. But then again, they edit for time now, so suck it PBS. Now back to that book that caught my eye, it was Alistair Cooke's The Patient Has the Floor. And it was signed. This book is a collection of talks Cooke had given over the years and I thought my father would just love to have it. Oddly enough this might be the only "best buy" that no longer is with me. Or my father for that matter. While it was a great gift at the time, the truth is we love Russell Baker more and an Alister Cooke signed book resells quite well... so yes, sometimes books I once loved go away to make room and provide money for other books. Such is life.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Alistair Cooke, Easton Press, Franklin Library, Masterpiece Theater, New York, New York Times, PBS, Russell Baker, Signed, Support Your Brick and Mortar, The Patient Has the Floor, The Strand

Bookstore: Browzer Bookshop

Location: Downtown Madison, Wisconsin

Why I Love Them: Browzer Bookshop didn't start out as a cavernous bookstore made labyrinthine by all the shelving above the UW Credit Union at the bottom of State Street. Originally it was at the exact opposite end of this iconic street, right at the top overlooking the state capital. Of course this location, romantic in outward appearance by it's turn of the century Midwestern town square vibe, had the misfortune of being badly lit and a bitch to park near. Therefore when they decided to move from top to bottom and go from Shakespeare's Books to Browzer Bookshop, I didn't lament the decision. Though I did become fascinated for awhile with the store that moved into their old location. They were never open and had arresting displays of taxidermy lions and British Empire ephemera where once books had filled the storefront. Then one day they were gone. But Browzer Bookshop remains. The new location showed just how much they were jamming into all the nooks and crannies of their old location. Mercifully brightly illuminated the bookstore goes back for days. Through the center of the store there are large glass display cases showing some of the most wonderful editions of books sadly at a reasonable, though out of my reach, price range. While the inventory doesn't turn over that frequently if you are a fan of the big doorstop books and Masterpiece Theater tie-in editions that your grandmother read in the 70s and 80s, then this is the store for you.

Best Buy: Before I state my best buy, here's a little fact about me that you should probably already know, and that is that I love the author Lauren Willig. I love her books, and I love her book recommendations; so therefore, whenever she says "read this book" I do it. I believe it was around when she started to work on her first standalone novel, The Ashford Affair, that she was talking about M.M. Kaye's work that isn't The Far Pavilions, such as her "Death In" series, but most importantly her book Trade Wind. A book set in 19th century Zanzibar was instantly what I wanted to read next. Of course it just so happened that at the time I desperately wanted to read this book it was out of print. But then I searched my memory for what used bookstore might just have this book I was looking for and I instantly thought of Browzer Bookshop! It wasn't just that this book fit perfectly into the genre of most of their fiction stock, it's that I actually remembered seeing The Far Pavilions there in hardcover, and while I had my own paperback edition of that book I had my fingers crossed that they would have other M.M. Kaye books... and indeed they did! I went to the far wall and then skirted the little jag until I hit the straight shot of fiction that's on the wall opposite the door all the way to the back of the store. When I hit "K" not only did they have Trade Wind but they also had one of the "Death In" books, Death in Zanzibar... it was turning into quite the day for M.M. Kaye books set in East Africa! I continued browsing for awhile and eventually made my way to the register and these two books made their way into my library.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: 19th Century, Browzer Bookshop, Death in Zanzibar, Lauren Willig, M.M. Kaye, Masterpiece Theater, Shakespeare's Books, Support Your Brick and Mortar, The Ashford Affair, The Far Pavilions, Trade Wind, Zanzibar

The Pursuit of Love by Nancy Mitford
Published by: Vintage
Publication Date: August 10th, 2010
Format: Paperback, 240 Pages
Rating: ★★★★
To Buy

Fanny's mother is known throughout the family as "The Bolter." Leaving your child behind to be raised by your siblings isn't that odd in a family that uses children instead of foxes in hunts, has their own distinct argot, and lives in such an old house that only one closet has the warmth to be bearable in cold weather. It is in this "Hons" closet that Fanny and her cousin Linda spend all their time dreaming of true love. Because love is what life is all about. As they grow up their thoughts turn less from the fantasy of marrying the Prince of Wales and more towards any decent chap that can be lured to Alconleigh for their debut ball. Linda, growing up at Alconleigh, has not had the luxury of the education that Fanny has had living most of her time with their Aunt Emily in London. Linda therefore is so desperate to fall in love that she mistakenly falls for the first man who comes along. The wrong man, Tony Kroesig. While Fanny happily settles down with an Oxford don and starts having babies, Linda's marriage to Tony becomes nothing more than a sham. They have one daughter, whom Linda can't stand, but she keeps up the pretense of happy families, until one day she throws off her Facist husband for a Communist Christian. But yet again Linda has misstepped, thinking that she is in love when really she is just in love with being away from Tony. Always wanting so desperately to be in love Linda mistakes any male attention for the real deal. Could she be turning into Fanny's mother, The Bolter? Or will her desperate search for love pay off in the oddest of ways?

I remember one winter day when I first picked up the Vintage omnibus of The Pursuit of Love and Love in a Cold Climate. The selling point to me was the big silver sticker they had put on the cover for Masterpiece Theatre. I covet those PBS tie-in editions of yore with the beautiful artwork and here was a brand new one waiting for me to buy it. I have mentioned this before, but I am the book dork who must always read a book before watching the show, so I set to reading this before the miniseries was to air. This was a hard time in my life, I had just temporarily dropped out of college because of multiple deaths in the family and I took solace in this little escape. While I enjoyed the book, I was really looking forward to watching the miniseries more than anything. Of course, nothing goes to plan. My main problem was I was living with my family and we had only two tvs. This was to air on a Monday night, which meant one of the TVs was designated for my little brother watching Monday Night Wrestling, which meant I had to negotiate for the second TV with my mother. My mother agreed to watch it, so long as it was good. She lasted less then five minutes before she claimed boredom and changed the channel, to Two and a Half Men, to add insult to injury. I was so fed up with everyone else getting what they wanted when all I wanted to do was watch one episode of Masterpiece Theatre that I went into my room and cried. I had waited months and my mom had let me have five minutes. I had to wait more than four years to finally see the series... so logically enough, my memory of the book faded because of the incident and the emotion that followed.

Therefore a re-read was in order! I had remembered very little in the years that followed my initial reading, many of my memories were tied up in the aforementioned incident and in the second volume of the book, so I was pleasantly surprised by what I had forgotten and what I had remembered. The odd thing about this book is, truthfully, there really isn't a plot. Instead it is about the yearning and desire for love and how that can go unexpectedly right and horribly wrong. Of all the love stories told, the two that I enjoy the most were Jassy's and Linda's final love. Jassy, Linda's younger sister, has spent her entire life saving up money to run away, finally she does so in order to go to Hollywood and court an actor she has fallen for, who played a background artist in a pirate movie. The media sensation that follows is almost more entertaining than the end of the courtship, with her father viewing the reporters trying to sneak into his house as the first real and formidable enemies since he killed Germans with his entrenching tool in The Great War. While Linda's love of Fabrice is so unexpected when they meet at the train station as she is leaving her second husband, it is their banter and their easy natural conversation that makes you realize that it's not the money and it's not the looks, it's how you click that matters. Linda and I learned that love can be found in the most unexpected of places when you least expect it.

Yet, what I found most interesting about this book is how it was a mirror for the Mitfords themselves. The first time I read this book I knew about them in the vaguest of terms. Sisters, writers, one or two hung out with Hitler, whatever, it wasn't of concern to me, this was fiction. But as Nancy's sister Jessica points out in the introduction "we all know [Nancy's] got no imagination" because "there we were, larger than life, Mitfords renamed Radletts, reliving our childhoods as seen through Nancy's strange triangular green eyes." And this was a trait shared by all Nancy's books, just look to the controversy surrounding Wigs on the Green, therefore the more you know about the Mitfords the funnier her books are. Here Nancy revels in lampooning herself and her family. Her sisters Pamela, Diana, Unity, Jessica, and Deborah, and brother Tom are all fair game, from what they did to even how they spoke, Hons being the family argot for their honorable titles and here lovingly given to a closet. Let's look as to what happened in real life that was included in this book? Jessica running off to Spain with a communist, yes times two. Diana up and leaving her catholic husband for a fascist, yes, but in reverse. Nancy's affair with a Frenchman, thankfully showing she is willing to lampoon herself, also happens. But it's not just the big things, the life changing events that are mirrored, it's their love of animals, that weird language all their own, a million things that made up this family.

This book is the Mitfords as seen through a slightly wobbly magnifying lens and I love the book for this more than any other reason. It brings these people to life in a way a thousand biographies never could, though granted I've only read a few. And Nancy continued these characters stories in Love in a Cold Climate and Don't Tell Alfred. But here's the rub, Don't Tell Alfred is often forgotten and pushed aside. Albeit it is set twenty years later, and was written eleven years after Love in a Cold Climate, I find it odd that it's so often omitted. The first two books in this trilogy are often released as an omnibus and have even been dramatized twice, once in 1980 with Judi Dench and again in 2001, which was the version I mentioned above. Yet where is Alfred? I could be cruel and say it's because it's a far inferior book, which is my personal truth, but I just find it odd that Nancy Mitford only wrote a handful of books in her life, only eight "fiction" books, and of those so many were purposefully pushed aside. As I mentioned before her book Wigs on the Green had a bit of a to-do, which resulted in it never being reprinted until recently, and not many people rhapsodize about The Blessing, which overly romanticizes the philandering ways of French men, but it is my belief that we can't just omit something because it doesn't reach the heights attained by it's predecessors. For someone who so ruthlessly portrayed the painful truths of her family it's odd to me that Nancy would willingly excise parts of her own history. But that is the beauty of being the one who writes down the history am I right? You can make of it what you will. Or in this case you can just go read one of the books written by her sisters for another opinion.   

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Alconleigh, Diana Mitford, Hitler, Jessica Mitford, Love in a Cold Climate, Masterpiece Theater, Mitford March, Mitfords, Nancy Mitford, PBS, Sweet Reads, The Bolter, The Great War, The Pursuit of Love

Emma
Based on the book by Jane Austen
Release Date: October 4th, 11th, 18th, and 24th, 2009
Starring: Michael Gambon, Jodhi May, Robert Bathurst, Tamsin Greig, Valerie Lilley, Romola Garai, Jonny Lee Miller, Dan Fredenburgh, Poppy Miller, Blake Ritson, Veronica Roberts, Louise Dylan, Jefferson Hall, Laura Pyper, Rupert Evans, Liza Sadovy, and Christina Cole
Rating: ★★★★★
To Buy

Emma Woodhouse grew up motherless, raised by a father always expecting the worst. Yet she made the best out of what she was given and dotes on her anxious father and never strays too far from home, unlike her sister who moved an unacceptable distance, less than 15 miles away to London! Therefore Emma's little community of Highbury is her entire world and they view her as their queen. Yet one might pity those in Highbury for an active imagination like Emma's trapped in a small circle of friends they have become the beneficiaries of her schemes. Even if they don't want to be her playthings. Emma thinks she excels at matchmaking, which Mr. Knightly says isn't matchmaking so much as wishful thinking that sometimes comes true, as in the case with their respective siblings and Mr. Weston and Emma's governess Miss Taylor. She will prove him wrong though with her new project, Harriet Smith. Harriet Smith is the natural daughter of who knows whom Emma plans to marry to the Reverend Elton. But Mr. Knightly is right and she doesn't really know people well and Mr. Elton has another wife in mind, Emma herself! Trying to extricate herself from this mistake and the harm it's caused to Harriet leads Emma into more mistakes. The worst might be a lack of propriety when Mr. Weston's son, Frank Churchill, finally returns to Highbury. Emma knows that he has been marked out for her. If she were the marrying sort Frank would be whom she would marry to make everyone, except her father, happy. Therefore she is more open with her feelings, more cutting with her words, all in the pursuit of a good time with Frank. But Frank has hidden motives, reasons for his being in Highbury other than paying his respects to his new mother and his old home. If only Emma would take a moment to stop and look inward versus outward she might see the world in a whole new light.

With every prior adaptation of Emma I had strong reservations, be it an oddly healthy and robust Jane Fairfax to an overly creepy Mr. Knightly, yes I'm looking at you Andrew Davies. Though in some fairness to Andrew Davies I don't think anyone could have succeeded in doing Emma any kind of just given only ninety minutes to tell the tale. Therefore when it was announced that a new miniseries of Emma was on it's way and me having just started my blog, I went a little overboard with the blog posts about the actors and the new adaptation. With four hours there was a far higher chance of them getting it right or at least keeping in everything that needs to be there in order to be moderately faithful. Four glorious episodes, four glorious hours so that they don't relegate Mr. Woodhouse to a chair and only vaguely reference him (which once you cast Michael Gambon you'd be hard pressed to do!) And while I've enjoyed it every time I've watched it, this time it just struck me harder. I adored it. Yes, it has pacing problems with the plot not clicking until Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax arrive, but that's the same problem the book has! In my initial review I was lenient on changes, because it's an adaptation so of course they're going to fiddle with it. The best adaptations aren't word perfect, look to the Harry Potter franchise for proof. But this time there were some little things, little shifts that got to me. All of them to do with Frank Churchill. My main gripe is actually one against all adaptations of Emma, why can't Frank be introduced just as Austen wrote it? Instead there must be some amusing confusion, some meet cute that is just wrong in my mind. In the Gwyneth Paltrow version Emma is driving a carriage!?! What nonsense is this? She would NEVER do this and her father would never allow it. But what I really objected to here was Frank being viewed as a resident of Highbury. No. This changes too much to be allowed. His father settled there long after Frank was off with the Churchills it was NEVER his home. This makes Emma and Frank's meeting some sort of predestination a lifetime in the making instead of just a few months. Frank doesn't deserve any more importance, he's full enough of himself already.

But anyone who's anyone has issues with Frank Churchill, it's the fatal flaw of Emma. Therefore I should console myself with what they got oh so right, and that's the inclusion of Emma's family, the extended Woodhouse clan. They are the first to go as being "extraneous" when time is considered in most Emma adaptations. But you can't really understand anyone unless you see them with their family. Their family is who forms them and whom they either surround themselves with or run away from. To omit Emma's family is to omit a true understanding of her. I can remember actually fuming in the theater watching Gwyneth Paltrow quickly showing off her slumbering father to visitors to Hartfield because that was his only real scene. No dialogue due to being unconscious! Emma's father is the central figure in her life, the figure around which everything happens and is decided! To push him to one side is unacceptable. But then again most people would be even more surprised from the aforementioned Gwyneth Paltrow version as to the importance of Emma's elder sister Isabella and her brother-in-law, Mr. Knightly's younger brother John, and all their children. Because while Emma is set apart in her community, she has love. She has a bustling family with all its pros and cons. Nephews paying extended visits and nieces to comfort her in her old age. Which makes her situation sadder. Her love has made her make sacrifices that others, especially her sister, haven't had to make. Isabella is like a mirror image Emma. That is what Emma's life could have been. And while we have the knowledge that Emma will get her happily ever after and perhaps daringly visit the seaside, when we meet her, when we get to know her she might be the queen of the castle, but it's a sad castle with a shut-in she loves dearly, but a shut-in none the less. You feel Emma's pain, Emma's loneliness amongst the bustle and familial love. This brings a little humanity to Emma by showing her as coping bravely with the loneliness of her life by being outgoing and scheming. A lonely existence no matter how little there was to distress or vex her is still lonely.

Though to bring this all across, to show the joy in the sadness, the humor in the everyday, the right actors were needed. It must be said, Gwyneth Paltrow was too haughty, too cold, and the less said about the poultry and pervy Kate Beckinsale version the better. Romola Garai though is perfection. She brings that joy that Jennifer Ehle did to Pride and Prejudice. An infectious smile that couples well with Emma's scheming and mischievous nature. As for Jonny Lee Miller? He's the perfect balance! He himself is quite goofy with his laying about in chairs, his eye rolls, his sighs. His comedic timing is perfect. The two of them form a very good double act which makes their romance believable. Because, the thing with Mr. Knightly and Emma is that if not properly cast they come across as just a convenient not a realistic couple. They just get married because Emma doesn't what her nephew to lose out on his inheritance to a child of Harriet Smith's and well, what's good for her sister is good for her, so how about a Knightly! Here you actually believe it. Yes, there's a beautiful dance and lots of swelling music to help sell it, but what's interesting is that those aren't the moments that make my heart hurt. It's when he scolds Emma about her behavior or when she is just sitting and looking at his usual chair now empty. Their being apart or fighting or just not talking physically hurts me. And while I could easily believe Romola Garai capable of this, loving her in everything from Daniel Deronda to I Capture the Castle to The Hour to The Crimson Petal and the White, the only thing Jonny Lee Miller had in his favor was Trainspotting. But the negatives were stacked against him, Plunkett and Macleane anyone? Dark Shadows? The most boring Sherlock Holmes currently around? Yes, he was passable in Dracula 2000 and that Byron movie, but the biggest negative was that he'd been an Austen hero before. Yes, our Jonny Lee Miller was Edmund Bertram in the horrid 1999 version of Mansfield Park, which is not only a bad adaptation but it is distinguished as being one of my most hated films ever. So to have this depth, this humor, this snid perfection that would give Emma perfect happiness? A delightful surprise indeed!

Then again, this adaptation was full of surprises. Mainly because it understood that the purpose is to adapt the story, make it true in feeling if not in word. While Austen purists might say "but that's not in the book." There is nothing done in this adaptation that isn't supported by the text if not directly than in supposition! Personally I hate Austen purists, and I'm sure she would have hated them too. She wrote for fun so if you have fun reading the book or watching the adaptation I'm sure Austen would be happy. As I say again and again if you question what adaption means look at the first two Harry Potter movies which are really horrid and how slavishly Chris Columbus tried to stick to the books, then look at Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and the mood is so perfect the film switched the franchise up a notch and made it not just viable but enjoyable, not something you just watched to pretend Harry Potter was real but you knew wasn't very good deep in your heart. Back to Austen, what struck me most in this adaptation was the visual imagery of dolls used throughout. This works so well because Emma basically treats those around her, especially Harriet Smith, as her playthings, and therefore to have doll imagery is a natural extension. This isn't something Austen would explicitly spell out but seems like something she'd love. The implications are all there, Emma's very nature makes it logical, so therefore it just makes this adaptation feel right. And it's not just Emma playing with her dolls under a table as a young girl in one of the best time lapse scenes with Miss Bates ever, it's that the dolls appear again when she's scheming about Isabella, then Mr. Elton, and then later Mr. Knightly even references them in passing. The adaptation has created a through line that is perfection. Added to this is the delightful opening credits that depict famous scenes from the book in silhouette, or, as they look to me, in paper dolls! But I wouldn't expect less from Sandy Welch who did two of my favorite miniseries ever, Jane Eyre in 2006 and North and South in 2004.

Yet this review can't all be glowing... there is a flaw. Now it's time for my rant against PBS. PBS, you treat your British shows and by extension your viewers like shit. You hack the shows up, aka "edit for time" and speed up the frame rate so that you can show more ads for cruises no one watching the show will ever go on. As a viewer you can only see the "original UK broadcast" by buying your DVDs. And it's your DVDs I want to talk about, in particular THIS DVD. How could you release such a wonderful show with such a sub-par release? The transfer is abysmal! What the fuck is with this transfer! I mean, seriously, WHAT THE FUCK! It's grainy and horrid. The first fifteen minutes was me trying to come to terms with having actually paid money for something that was barely a step above a bootleg VHS tape you'd buy of some lost Doctor Who episode or Red Dwarf special at a science fiction convention. The first disc has a constantly flickering weird green bar in the lower right corner of the screen. Plus there was some weird shift that made the right edge of the screen vibrate on both discs. I thought, well, it's not Blu Ray so now that I'm into Blu Ray I could upgrade, but guess what? There is no upgrade! This is the only version they released in this piss poor quality. I'm not joking when I say that the winter scenes looked like they were from a nature documentary from the 70s. I expected some Brit with out sized specs and corduroys to appear screen left and start talking about the mating habits of some birds or fluffy field vermin. I mean, I don't want to piss on PBS, they offer so much, but compared to how the channel used to be, with lovely long intros to these shows that were well researched and presented versus Alan Cumming just coming on at the beginning of only one episode of Wallander to complain about how dull and dark he was? I mean, yes, I agree about his bitching about Wallander, but I could at least use a little more Alan! Masterpiece No Longer Theatre isn't even repeated and where are the lovely old British comedies on late at night? All that is gone and instead we have shitty overprice DVDs and edited sped up shows. Not cool PBS. Not cool at all. So while I adore this miniseries, just stream it, don't give them money for this shitty treatment of their consumers.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Andrew Davies, Bicentenary Ball, Edmund Betrum, Emma, Emma Woodhouse, Family, Gwyneth Paltrow, Harry Potter, Jane Austen, Jonny Lee Miller, Mansfield Park, Masterpiece Theater, Mr. Knightly, PBS, Romola Garai

February is a tricky month. People just really don't feel like doing anything. We're sick of winter, we're sick of holidays, we just want to ignore whatever the groundhog says and just keep hibernating. With this in mind I've tried to make February on my blog about comforting reads and what makes me happy. For three years now that's been Downton Abbey. While I could continue this tradition, I feel that with the end of Downton Abbey* I should likewise end this tradition and move onto something new. But I still had a need to make it British, because this is the season of Masterpiece No Longer Theater... and this is where Benedict Cumberbatch comes in. Unlike most of the world who hadn't heard of Benedict until Sherlock popped up on our screens in 2010, I was a fan for many years previously. Of course being the omnivorous Anglophile that I am I had seen many things with Benedict for years and years without knowing who he was, he is a chameleon, Atonement anyone?

That all changed in 2006 when I watched To the Ends of the Earth. It was raw, it was gritty, but it also had the most magical ball scene I've ever watched. I was sold. Benedict Cumberbatch was were it's at. What's great about him, aside from his sense of humor and his celebrity impersonations and his ability to morph into any character and his looking occasionally like an otter, is that he stars in so many movies, television shows, plays, and miniseries, that are adapted from fiction. This is perfect for my purposes! This could go on for years! (Though seriously, someone stop me if I start reading Hamlet for fun.) I LOVE reviewing adaptations, and therefore I have an excuse to read books I haven't gotten around to AND watch Benedict Cumberbatch movies. It's win win in my mind and I hope it is in yours as well; because February is now all about Benedict. He's here to bless us with his presence. We're getting a Benediction!

*Please, under no circumstances make a Downton Abbey movie! Everything ended perfectly and all a movie would do would muck things up, complicating our beloved characters lives only to have to uncomplicate them. What's wrong with leaving well enough alone! Downton Abbey movie rant end.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Adaptation, Atonement, Benedict Cumberbatch, Benediction, Downton Abbey, Downton Denial, February, Hamlet, Masterpiece Theater, Miniseries, Movie, Plays, Sherlock, Theme Month, To the Ends of the Earth

Rebecca
Based on the Book by Daphne Du Maurier
Starring: Emilia Fox, Charles Dance, Faye Dunaway, John Horsley, Jonathan Stokes, Diana Rigg, Tom Chadbon, Geraldine James, Denis Lill, John Branwell, Jonathan Cake, Kelly Reilly, Anthony Bate, Ian McDiarmid, Timothy West, and Lucy Cohu
Release Date: April 13th, 1997
Rating: ★
To Buy

The gregarious Mrs. Van Hopper has hired herself a mousy little companion to accompany her to Monte Carlo. Yet she's put out that the old crowd aren't around and then laid up with a sniffle. Her young companion uses this time to become close to the one person in Monte Mrs. Van Hopper is fascinated with, Maxim de Winter, the inconsolable widow and owner of the great house Manderley. When Mrs. Van Hopper decides to decamp Maxim gives the little mouse a choice, go to New York with her employer or come to Manderley with him as his wife. It isn't a hard choice to embrace being the second Mrs. de Winter, a choice that even Mrs. Van Hopper approves, because at least someone bagged him. Back at his luxurious estate in England Maxim's young new wife feels that the shadow of his first wife, Rebecca looms large. But even despite the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers, and her doom and gloom, nothing can stop the newlyweds love for each other. That is unless Maxim is still in love with Rebecca... the discovery of Rebecca's scuttled boat in the bay will try their relationship, destroying everything or bringing them closer together.

The 1996-1997 season of Masterpiece Theatre was rare for me in that I caught it entirely. I was taking a year off before college and therefore had time to luxuriate in my much loved passions of reading and watching miniseries. The adaptation of Nostromo starring Colin Firth and A Royal Scandal starring Richard E. Grant were highlights that year. In fact when I recently learned A Royal Scandal was an extra on The Queen's Sister I instantly bought the DVD, despite my dislike of The Queen's Sister. Now if they'd just release Nostromo on anything other than VHS I'd be set because I'm seriously dying with only my old taped copy. But what I wasn't looking forward to was the season ending remake of Rebecca. This was at the height of my Hitchcock fanaticism, having taken film classes in high school and planning on taking more in college, and I couldn't comprehend why anyone would remake a classic.

Yes, Hitchcock didn't get it 100% right, but you can not deny that Laurence Olivier IS Maxim de Winter. It won best picture at the Oscars! So I planned to boycott the remake. The problem when living with your parents is that they have their own opinions on what they want to watch and seeing some of Rebecca turned out to be unavoidable. What little I saw made me instantly withdraw from the television room. My mom didn't last very long either, despite her love of Diana Rigg. For almost twenty years I have shunned this adaptation from those few glimpses. So I thought perhaps I should give it a second chance. Maybe Diana Rigg could be a superior Mrs. Danvers? Perhaps the beauty of Manderley would be done more justice in color with it's lush abundant floral growth? Or perhaps I should have trusted my gut reaction and avoided this piece of crap entirely.

What is striking about this adaptation is they have assembled some of the most talented actors in the British Isles and beyond and somehow sucked the life out of them. If it weren't for Faye Dunaway and Jonathan Cake I don't think a single line would have been uttered above a dull monotone. Rebecca is full of emotion and passion, both repressed and on full display, and yet here it comes across as the most flat and emotionless story ever. It should be turbulent and forceful like the sea, not fake and false like that shitty shack that was slapped together on the beach. After the first episode my dislike became more and more audible. Three hours and nothing went right. I was visibly cringing at all that they got wrong. The second Mrs. de Winter isn't just shy with a can do attitude but meek! Oh the rage! But even if I hadn't been comparing it to the book, it was awful. I kept making myself step back and think, if I hadn't read the book would I enjoy this? The answer was no time and time again.

While the heavy handed foreshadowing might have been driving me loopy, if Du Maurier was still alive I know what she'd hate most... they made this adaptation into a romance. Yes, there are romantic elements in Rebecca, but that is NOT what the book is. The moniker of "Romance Writer" hung around Du Maurier's neck like a millstone her entire life. To have her greatest novel reduced to being nothing more than a romance. No. She would have snapped. Plus, I like Charles Dance very much, don't get me wrong, his performance of himself in Jam and Jerusalem, Clatterford stateside, is one of my favorite cameos on TV ever; but to see him groping and pawing awkwardly at Emilia Fox's cheek and sucking her face so that it looks like he's eating her. Eww. The book STRONGLY hints that the de Winters had a sexless marriage and yet here the demonstrative affection is overwhelming. It's the exact opposite of the book, yet oddly passionless. And that lame excuse made for their lack of children? Like Maxim would run into a burning building to save Mrs. Danvers! NO!

Yet, I have to give props where props are due. These go to Diana Rigg and Jonathan Cake, Mrs. Danvers and Jack Favell, Rebecca's blackmailing cousin, respectively. I think these two actually read the source material, which Arthur Hopcraft obviously didn't when adapting this because who would purposefully change the famous introductory chapter and slap it into an upbeat coda? But enough about Arthur Hopcraft because this obviously ended his career if you check out IMDB. As for Hitchcock he proves that even the greats can get it wrong and he just didn't get Mrs. Danvers, and went camp and over the top. Diana Rigg nails it. The sadness that is behind that stiff facade. As for Cake, I don't think I can pay him a higher compliment than saying I really thought he WAS Favell. Rigg and Cake got the menacing down perfectly. Yet they also had the depth Du Maurier demanded of these characters. While they had the menace, they also had the vulnerability, and ultimately the patheticness of these two and how hollow their last act, destroying Manderley, really is.

But in the end, seeing as this miniseries was called Rebecca, you'd think they'd at least get her right? Yet they didn't. It's almost as if Rebecca is an afterthought. She should be front and center, there, oppressing Maxim and his new wife every single second of their time at Manderley, but she's oddly not there. It's like Mrs. Danvers and Jack Favell are the only ones who remember and it's only when they are around that Rebecca still lives. Otherwise it's as if she's long dead and long gone, not "haunting" them as should be the case. But this couldn't very well have been a romance if they concentrated on the Gothic nature of the book with Rebecca haunting Manderley now could it? As for when Rebecca actually appears... she's impressionistic and the camera is just too fucking close to her face. I wouldn't know it was Lucy Cohu, an actress I quite like, if it wasn't for the credits. Therefore we can say that like the book, there's a problem with Rebecca. Here it's her irrelevancy, there it's her possession of you body and soul. Let the book possess you and avoid this catastrophe. 

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Adaptation, Charles Dance, Colin Firth, Daphne Du Maurier, Diana Rigg, Du Maurier December Deux, Emilia Fox, Hitchcock, Jonathan Cake, Manderley, Masterpiece Theater, Mrs. Danvers, Rebecca, Richard E. Grant

My Family and Other Animals by Gerald Durrell
Published by: Penguin Books
Publication Date: 1956
Format: Paperback, 273 Pages
Rating: ★★★
To Buy

Gerald Durrell, the famous naturalist, zookeeper, and conservationist, recounts when at the age of ten his family moved to the island of Corfu because they couldn't deal with yet another cold and damp English winter. Gerry and his three siblings, Lawrence, Leslie, and Margo, all fall for the island in different ways. For Gerry it's the abundance of creatures that he can capture and observe, many making their way into the family residence and causing quite a kerfuffle. With the help of their self-appointed guardian, Spiro, they start to view Corfu as their true home, even if they have to move house several times to accommodate Larry's parties or in order to escape more relatives. One thing is clear, if they could they would never leave.

Before the explosion of British television shows onto our screens in recent years Masterpiece Theatre was where you got your Brit fix and, inevitably, added books to your reading list. Almost ten years ago I was transfixed by the Sunday late night showings of Masterpiece Theatre which started around midnight. This is how I discovered some of my favorite shows, from Bleak House to He Knew He Was Right. On the lighter side I discovered My Family and Other Animals. It stared Matthew Goode from He Knew He Was Right and Downton Abbey as the only Durrell I had heard of at that time, Lawrence. The movie was funny and exotic, and even if the music occasionally grated on you, there was something magical about it. At about the same time Peguin was re-releasing several of Gerry's books with gorgeous new covers by Mick Wiggins, so needless to say they all came to join my library, and have sat waiting for me to have the time to read them even since.

I recently added a second book club to my monthly activities, yes, what can I say, I'm a sucker for reading and love to have someone to talk to about a book once I finish. At my mother's suggestion for post holiday blahs My Family and Other Animals was chosen as a respite from reality and the dreary nonfiction suggestions of other members of our group. The book does provide a lovely escape to warm climates and happier carefree days that one needs to be reminded of during the bleakness of a Wisconsin winter. But at our discussion I felt as if I was the only one who was transported to another place and time. Everyone was hung up on little nonessentials, like where the Durrells got their money and why a friendship with an older father figure was encouraged for Gerry. They were unable to escape their reality for a moment and inhabit another place and time.  

Though in fairness to my other book clubbers, the book does have an unevenness to it that almost inhibits you being able to engage with it for quite a few chapters. The problem is that Durrell doesn't quite grasp how to balance his family and his "other" animals. He struggles to reconcile the two and therefore much of the beginning of the book is two parallel narratives, that of his family and that of his animals. Durrell at this time had actually written five previous books but they all dealt with his expeditions and his trips collecting animals. These books were popular, but it wasn't until My Family and Other Animals that he wrote a book that became an instant classic. By adding in the eccentricities of his family the reader has someone to relate to versus just observations of the natural world.

And while Durrell's observations of Corfu can at times leave you breathless with it's beauty, it needs the juxtaposition of something relatable for us readers. And oh my, his family is relatable. From the vain sister, to his two brothers, either concerned with artistry or how much he can kill in a day with his guns, everyone can find something or someone in his family to sympathize and relate to. In fact the turning point for me in the book is when Durrell moves from just observing the animals to treating them as members of his family in their own right. While Larry might bemoan the anthropomorphism of the animals in their household, it is this very thing that made the book click and took it from mediocre to nearly marvelous. The animals being treated as humans, as family, is one of the reasons the book starts to succeed, it's the interaction between these newly "human" animals and Durrell's very human family that result in comic gold.

While everything from random birds to reptiles in the tub are sources of amusement, to me the two magpies that Durrell "rescued" result in some of the best moments in the book. Thanks to Spiro they become known as the magenpies and they develop a rather strong hatred of Larry. They spend most of their time flying around the house, indoors and out, but they long to see Larry's room. Much like my cat when he was a kitten, it's wherever they aren't supposed to go that they long to. Needless to say they destroy Larry's room when given the chance. But it's their life in the cage attached to the house that brings their personalities into true focus when they use their knack for imitation to taunt and tease all the family. Then there are the family dogs, Roger, Widdle, Puke and the bitch Dodo, whose going into heat sends the house into chaos, especially during a big dinner party. Marx Brothers levels of chaos ensues.

But as you close the covers of the book you are left with one question. What is the truth? Because if you look into the Durrell's lives, things don't quite add up. Larry was married during this time, so where was his wife? How much of this is autobiographical and how much is conflation to make the book more humorous and fun? Could anyone really remember things in such detail from when they were ten when writing it twenty years on? But, does it really matter? The truth is we make ourselves out of the stories we tell every day. I think Durrell said it best: "It was a wonderful story, and might well be true. Even if it wasn't true, it was the sort of thing that should happen."

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Animals, Bleak House, Corfu, Gerald Durrell, He Knew He Was Right, Lawrence Durrell, Magpies, Marx Brothers, Masterpiece Theater, Matthew Goode, Mick Wiggins, My Family and Other Animals, Penguin, The Truth

My Cousin Rachel
Based on the book by Daphne Du Maurier
Starring: Geraldine Chaplin, Christopher Guard, Charles Kay, Amanda Kirby, Bert Parnaby, John Shrapnel, John Stratton, and Richard Williams
Release Date: 1983
Rating: ★★★
Unavailable

Philip Ashley sees off his cousin Ambrose to winter in Italy for his health. Philip impatiently stays home and awaits Ambrose's monthly letters which are more infrequent then ever since he met a distant cousin of theirs, Rachel. Much to Philip's surprise he finally gets a letter from Ambrose saying the two are married. Shortly after, Philip gets a distressing letter telling him to hurry to Italy. On arriving Ambrose is dead and Philip is inconsolable by Rachel's servant and her dubious business associate Rainaldi. As for Rachel, she has left with all Ambrose's possessions, no one knows where. Philip returns home and soon Rachel is at his door, destitute. Philip soon develops feelings for Rachel and desires restitution be made to her for Ambrose never re-writing his will. But money flows through her hands like water, yet where is it going? Philip, blinded by love doesn't heed the warnings of others and is soon gambling with not just his heart but his health and his inheritance at the hands of Rachel.

I find it more then a little ironic that on the poster for this adaptation it says "to most men she was an angel - of death!" Why would I find this ironic? Well, for any movie or miniseries that is translated from a book there is the director's or writer's interpretation of what happens in the book and what it means. With a book written by Daphne Du Maurier you have even more room for interpretation because she lives in the grey areas with ambiguity being her friend. Yet this adaptation had a clear vision that Rachel wasn't a murderess or poisoner and that Ambrose died of a brain tumor, which was also the affliction that Philip suffered from. Therefore the poster is funny to me in that it is trying to shoehorn the adaptation to work with their programing. It was aired on Mystery, so therefore they must book it as mysterious, even if they don't hint at poisoning till the very end and then only half-heartedly. They would have been better off airing it on Masterpiece Theater for all the suspense it had.

But the nail in the coffin, so to speak, of why it is a brain tumor is what happens on Philip's twenty-fifth birthday. In the book he takes a late night swim in the ocean, despite how cold it is, and then drinks copious amounts of Rachel's tisane. Therefore his illness that is attributed to meningitis could conceivably be meningitis or poisoning, we are left with ambiguity. In this adaptation he spends a few days prior to his birthday clutching at his head, never goes for a swim, and then is seen in Rachel's room clearly NOT drinking his tisane. In fact I don't think we saw him drink his tisane once! So poison is definitely not the culprit. If anyone was a murderer it was Philip with his omission of the dangers of the sunken garden, which was far more obvious in this adaptation then in the book.

In focusing the story to the brain tumor versus the duality of the tumor versus the poison you see a paring down of the narrative. This was a very streamlined adaptation in many regards, despite being three hours in length. All the supporting characters who carry quite a bit of the narrative on their shoulders in the book are relegated to almost background artists status. The trio of Philip, Rachel, and Rainaldi are the only characters that matter here. By doing this the adaptation deprives us of great characters and depth that the book has. But in my mind all adaptations lose something in the translation no matter how hard you try. Here we are left with a story that doesn't quite work that decided to go for mood versus story. Instead of getting insight into Philip's change of heart we just see him on his horse, which he has a lot of trouble riding, watching Rachel from the bushes, like some kind of pervert. In fact, they turned the sex up to about eleven in this version, going so far as to show the implied sex between Rachel and Philip on his birthday.

Yet this mood over matter could have worked if the actors were better actors. Christopher Guard, who portrayed Philip, seemed to not have any range of emotion or facial expressions. Yes, he did conceited jackass well, which is basically all Philip is in my mind, but he had to have some range, because conceited jackasses do have mood changes. Him hating Rachel was the same look as him loving Rachel. It was very confusing therefore seeing when or why his feelings changed for Rachel as he was wooden throughout... As for Geraldine Chaplin as Rachel... she is an actor with mild talent and austere beauty that I think got the majority of her work because of her father, ie, Charlie Chaplin. Her accent is so odd in this that it's sometimes hard to make out what she's saying. This isn't helped by the bad sound quality either. At least I can say her accent was pretty consistently odd, but really, I don't know why she needed it. To make Rachel more mysterious? Sigh. I kind of wanted Rainaldi, played by the ever fabulous Charles Kay, to kill them all and run off to Florence with their fortune.

So you're probably wondering, why did she give this adaptation three stars (actually more then I gave the book) if it had all these issues? Aside from the fact that early BBC dramas hold a kind of special place in my heart for the bad sets, reused sound effects (yes, it's THAT ONE bird again), and great character actors, there is what I am now referring to as The Roday Factor. OK, so hopefully you all know who James Roday is. If you don't, shame on you! But I shall take mercy on you and do a brief explanation of the genius of James Roday. James Roday with Dule Hill starred on the much underappreciated USA show Psych, about a fake psychic who was a real detective, in a very unorthodox way. For eight seasons it was the perfect combination of mystery and comedy. Plus, for children of the eighties, it was a goldmine of Goonies references and random sing-a-longs. It was controlled chaos that would make me laugh more then any show out there and made me love James Roday.

About five seconds into this adaptation I voiced to my viewing companion that Christopher Guard looked remarkably like James Roday in certain lighting, to which he agreed. Sadly Christopher doesn't have the acting chops of James, but that's neither here nor there, because watching Christopher he was more and more James Roday's doppelganger. It was so freaky I could not stop laughing. Then I started imagining what this miniseries would be like if James Roday had done it inserting his humor and his acting skills, and this just entertained me more and more. The one scene where Rachel is baring her soul about the unsigned will of Ambrose, he looked so much like James I had to screencap it to show you a compare and contrast. A still image doesn't do it justice, but I think you can get the idea. Also, I think Daphne Du Maurier would adore this unexpected doubling. So in other words, watch this miniseries not for the acting or the interpretation, or anything else, watch it to see what it would be like if James Roday travelled back in time over thirty years ago to be a bad BBC actor.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Charles Kay, Charlie Chaplin, Christopher Guard, Daphne Du Maurier, Doppleganger, Dule Hill, Geraldine Chapline, Goonies, James Roday, Masterpiece Theater, My Cousin Rachel, Mystery, Poison, Psych, Tisane

The Pursuit of Love by Nancy Mitford
Published by: Vintage
Publication Date: August 10th, 2010
Format: Paperback, 240 Pages
Rating: ★★★★
To Buy

Fanny's mother is known throughout the family as "The Bolter." Leaving your child behind to be raised by your siblings isn't that odd in a family that uses children instead of foxes in hunts, has their own distinct argot, and lives in such an old house that only one closet has the warmth to be bearable. It is in this "Hons" closet that Fanny and her cousin Linda spend all their time dreaming of true love. Because love is what life is all about. As they grow up their thoughts turn less from the fantasy of marrying the Prince of Wales and more towards any decent chap that can be lured to Alconleigh for their debut ball. Linda, growing up at Alconleigh has not had the luxury of an education that Fanny has living with their Aunt Emily. Linda therefore is so desperate to fall in love that she mistakenly falls for the first man who comes along. The wrong man.

While Fanny happily settles down with an Oxford don and starts having babies, Linda's marriage to Tony Kroesig is a sham. They have one daughter whom Linda can't stand, but she keeps up the pretense of happy families, until one day she throws off her Facist husband for Communist Christian. Yet again Linda has misstepped, thinking that she is in love once more, when really she is just in love with being away from Tony. Always wanting so desperately to be in love, Linda mistakes any male attention for the real deal. Could she be turning into Fanny's mother, The Bolter? Or will her desperate search for love pay off in the most oddest of ways?

I remember one winter day when I first picked up the Vintage omnibus of The Pursuit of Love and Love in a Cold Climate. The selling point to me was the big silver sticker they had put on the cover for Masterpiece Theatre. I covet those PBS tie-in editions of yore and here was a brand new one waiting for me to buy it. I have mentioned this before, but I am the book dork who must always read a book before watching the show, so I set to reading this before the miniseries was to air. This was a hard time in my life, I had just temporarily dropped out of college because of multiple deaths in the family and I took solace in this little escape. While I enjoyed the book, I was really looking forward to watching the miniseries more than anything. Of course, nothing goes to plan.

My main problem was I was living with my family and we had only two tvs. This was to air on a Monday night, which meant one of the tvs was designated for my little brother watching Monday night wrestling, which meant I had to negotiate for the second tv with my mother. My mother agreed to watch it, so long as it was good. She lasted less then five minutes before she claimed boredom and changed the channel. I was so fed up with everyone else getting what they wanted when all I wanted to do was watch one episode of Masterpiece Theatre that I went into my room and cried. I had waited months and my mom had let me have five minutes, a trait that more or less continues to this day. I had to wait more than four years to finally see the series... so, logically enough, my memory of the book has faded because of the incident that followed.

Therefore when finally getting around to planning Mitford March for my blog, I was excited for the re-read. I remembered very little in the years that followed my initial reading, many of my memories where tied up in the aforementioned incident and in the second volume of the book, more on that later, so I was pleasantly surprised by what I had forgotten and what I had remembered. The odd thing about this book is, truthfully, there really isn't a plot. Instead it is about the yearning and desire for love and how that can go unexpectedly right and horribly wrong. Of all the love stories told, the two that I enjoy the most is Jassy's and Linda's final love. Jassy, Linda's younger sister, has spent her entire life saving up money to run away, finally she does so in order to go to Hollywood and court an actor she has fallen for, who played a background artist in a pirate movie. The media sensation that follows is almost more entertaining then the end of the courtship, with her father viewing the reporters trying to sneak into his house as the first real and formidable enemies since he killed Germans with his entrenching tool in The Great War. While Linda's love of Fabrice is so unexpected when they meet at the train station as she is leaving her second husband, it is their banter and their easy natural conversation that makes you realize that it's not the money and it's not the looks, it's how you click that matters. Linda and I learned that love can be found in the most unexpected of places.

Yet, what I found most interesting about this book is how it was a mirror for the Mitfords themselves. The first time I read this book I knew about them in the vaguest of terms. Sisters, writers, one or two hung out with Hitler, whatever, it wasn't of concern to me, this was fiction. But as Nancy's sister Jessica points out in the introduction "we all know [Nancy's] got no imagination" because "there we were, larger than life, Mitfords renamed Radletts, reliving our childhoods as seen through Nancy's strange triangular green eyes." And the more you know about the Mitfords the funnier the book is. Nancy lampooning herself and her family. Jessica running off to Spain with a communist is both Linda and her little brother's fate. Up and leaving your husband, just like Diana did. Nancy's affair with a Frenchman. The families love of animals, their weird language all their own. This book is the Mitfords as seen through a slightly wobbly magnifying lens, and I love the book for this more then any other reason!

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Alconleigh, Diana Mitford, Hitler, Jessica Mitford, Love in a Cold Climate, Masterpiece Theater, Mitford March, Mitfords, Nancy Mitford, PBS, The Bolter, The Great War, The Pursuit of Love

Today marks the 40th anniversary of Masterpiece, no longer, but still thought of as Theatre. Masterpiece Theatre brought the best of British Broadcasting and period dramas to the United States, long before technology allowed us to have easy access to, what I view, as the best television in the world. Today, over at The Daily Beast, Jace Lacob is talking about those shows polled as the best, Upstairs Downstairs, Prime Suspect, Downton Abbey, Bleak House, Sherlock, Jeeves and Wooster, Cranford, The Politician's Wife, The Forsyte Saga, House of Cards, Our Mutual Friend and Traffik. I of course, happened to notice, that this did not actually coincide with the poll which I eagerly watched when Derek Jacobi counted it down, not least of all cause some of these shows came way after the poll and were inserted to show their continuing excellence. Because I voted in this poll and, probably ended up being the one who rigged The Forsyte Saga into winning second place, I want to set the record straight. I also want to say a few things about these beloved shows, but first a little Masterpiece rant. PBS used to be the only place that showcased these fine shows, that is no longer the case. From BBC America to cable channels willing to spotlight British Broadcasting, the American love of all things British has never dwindled, yet PBS has. They now edit shows for content and time, Downton Abbey being a case in point. Instead of having the show naturally develop over seven weeks they hacked and slashed it to make it four episodes. No matter if these are "improvements" according to them. This show was written in 45 minute arcs, no more, no less. PBS has become a joke. In a day and age when technology makes these show available sooner and other outlets are moving with the times they need to step it up. BBC America has same day airing of Doctor Who but we have to wait YEARS for shows to make it to PBS. They have become lazy and all the greatness of these shows is due to the BBC, not Rebecca Eaton, who is hanging onto their coattails trying to make it look like she has made a contribution. They may show the best, but it's a paired down best that lacks the greatness of Russell Baker and instead relies on "star value" to sell these shows with little quippy intros of no depth or historical bearing, this doesn't apply to you Alan Cumming, I love you. But enough about my rant, which doesn't even touch on the fact the old Mystery intro needs to be brought back... here are the top twelve shows as counted down by Derek Jacobi, not inaccurately reported by Jace Lacob.

12) Jeeves and Wooster: Sheer brilliance. Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry were MADE to play these roles.

11) Wives and Daughters: One of my favorite miniseries ever. There is just one flaw, in that Roger and Molly don't have a romantic kiss... but I'll overlook that, most of the time. Andrew Davies is a genius and this is even better than Pride and Prejudice. Yep, you heard me right! Better than P and P, yes, Michael Gambon, take that victory lap.

10) Moll Flanders: Alex Kingston is awesome in the fun frolicking romp, too band the really bad music detracts from the awesome. Also Daniel Craig in a long flowing wig, so funny.

9) Reckless: I admit, I haven't watched it all, because my DVR messed up, but what I saw was really great, how could it not be with this cast? Francesca Annis, Robson Green and Michael Kitchen!

8) House of Cards: You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

7) Poldark: Cornwall and shipwrecks!

6) Jewel in the Crown: After Brideshead, this set the standard for what could be done with period drama willing to move outside the studio.

5) Prime Suspect: What made Helen Mirren a star, and rightfully so. Also, the first instance of PBS editing for content. The first of the slippery slope.

4) Bleak House: Which I have made my peace with. I will no longer be bashing it, yes it is awesome, as long as you don't watch the last episode. I mean WTF! It's dark, it's atmospheric and then, happy ever after garden party time.

3) I, Claudius: Not really my thing, but made some many stars.

2) The Forsyte Saga: The best miniseries ever hands down. It's almost too painful to watch with it's raw emotions and superb acting. Just be prepared to cry. A lot.

1) Upstairs, Downstairs: The standard. What BBC television is, was and shall ever be. If you haven't ever watched it, I feel sad for your pathetic little lives.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 5:00 PM 6 comments  

Labels: 40th Anniversary, Bleak House, Doctor Who, Downton Abbey, House of Cards, Jeeves and Wooster, Masterpiece Theater, Moll Flanders, Poldark, The Forsyte Saga, Upstairs Downstairs, Wives and Daughters

So, Masterpiece No Longer Theater announced there Classics line-up today, and it looks solid. Some expected, some known and some surprising. Those who liked Laura Linney will be pleased she's back, being the first host to be asked to return since the relaunch of Masterpiece. So... lets get to the lineup!

First up we have Return to Cranford (January 10-17) followed by Emma (January 24-February 7), as expected. After Emma they're throughing in some previously shown Austen to round out February with Northanger Abbey (February 14) and Persuasion (February 21). Next up we have the new adaptation of The 39 Steps (February 28). While I'm a huge fan of the star, Rupert Penry-Jones I find that this isn't such a "new" show to be showing, mainly because it was released in England in 2008... but alas, the time gap can be great between England and her colonies. Also I think that when Hitchcock does the original, even if it's based on a book like Rebecca, it just shouldn't be remade. Following that we get the two newest Sharpe movies, with Challenge (March 28) and Peril (April 4). Challenge is from 2006! So while we get the newer 2008 installment, I'm thinking most people who follow Sharpe have seen these already, especially cause it aired on BBC America already... Plus it's a hard series to just watch in installments, you need to be a watcher of the whole series to enjoy. Then we get the new adaptation of The Diary of Anne Frank (April 11), which boats a stellar cast and was made in 2009. The final installment is Small Islands (April 18-25), which hasn't even aired yet anywhere. This looks most promising with the tangled lives of two couples in post war Britain.

So what's my take on the coming season... I'm interested that they chose such a wide gap of time periods, ranging from Regency to Post War Britain... But overall it's not that exciting. Real BBC nuts will be sad that it's not newer material and those who long for the costume drama won't be seeing too many Empire waists but more modern fair. Also, I know this isn't their fault because the BBC has been blamed... no Dickens!?! He's become the mainstay and the reason for PBS's Renaissance and to leave him out seems foolish. What had I hoped to see might be the logical question as to why I'm disappointed? Desperate Romantics for example? The new movies Enid and Gracie? Starring Helena Bonham Carter and Jane Horrocks... They've never shown Fanny Hill yet... perhaps that is too racy... The new Garrow's Law? Land Girls? I could keep listing... but I just have a feeling they'll never listen.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 4:05 PM 3 comments  

Labels: Classics, Desperate Romantics, Emma, Masterpiece Theater, Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, Return to Cranford, Sharpe's Challenge, Sharpe's Peril, Small Islands, The 39 Steps, The Diary of Anne Frank

What's that I hear? Could it be really good news for those Cranford devotees out there? Why yes it is. Due to the overwhelming popularity of Cranford, PBS is astonishingly doing something that benefits us viewers. Since when has PBS ever done this? But in a move worthy of a chess master...to appease the masses starting on December 20th Cranford will be repeated till... wait for it... Return to Canford airs on January 10th! Kicking off the new Masterpiece No-Longer-Theater Classics season! Mere days after airing in England we will get the new season, thankfully no longer called Cranford 2. I hate being patient... and luckily for us stateside, PBS is granting us our Christmas wish!

Posted by Miss Eliza at 3:22 PM 3 comments  

Labels: Cranford, Masterpiece Theater, PBS, Return to Cranford

I have, for awhile now, been inspired by Nick Hornby. In particular his columns from The Believer magazine. Of course I'm always a little miffed that they make him only write the positive and not really lay into a book. If you don't like a book I think you should be allowed to rail against it all you like. But what I do like is that at the beginning of his monthly column, he writes what books he bought versus what he was able to read. The theory, or at least my take on this experiment, is to get your buying habits in align with your reading habits. So that you aren't buying more than you need in a month and thus are saving money. I have been trying to align the two, buying and reading, but with being an admitted book addict, not wanting to seek help, and seeing as I troll a lot of used bookstores, where if you don't by it then it will be gone...it is hard. So I've decided at the begning of each month to itemize the best finds of the previous month. It will be bowdlerized, not to spare you from anything unseamly, but to make me look not as insane a book buyer....hey, Nick Hornby admits he does it to make himself look not as bad, so why can't I? And he is an extreme book addict! He actually believes the whole book buying process and the anticipation of reading your new purchase justifies buying it, even if in the end you never read it. (And I heard this direct from the Football Addicts mouth, as it were...was going to say horses, wouldn't work for him). So here I list, my best finds of October:

1) So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish by Douglas Adams - The only edition I didn't have with the weird floating orbs! Half Price Books, $2.

2) The Girl from Leam Lane, the Life of Catherine Cookson - Cool bio on the lady whose books have all been made into miniseries, making a star of Sean Bean and Robson Green. Frugal Muse find for $12.

3) The Daphne Du Maurier Companion - Virago Publishing, British Edition, that matches the rest of my Du Maurier set, found at Barnes & Noble of all places! $20 but worth it!

4) The Celestial Omnibus by E. M. Forster - GORGEOUS edition that I found at Half Price Books for $6, truly the most beautiful edition of any Forster book I yet have.

5) Never Slow Dance with a Zombie by E. Van Lowe - Perfect Halloweeny book found for $4 at Frugal Muse.

6) The Balkan Trilogy by Olivia Manning - The tie-in edition for Fortunes of War starring Emma Thompson and Kenneth Branagh. I found Manning's second series, the Levenant series tie-in edition years ago in Canada, and have been hoping to find this for years. $2 at the Friends of the Memorial Library book sale.

7) Decca, the Letters of Jessica Mitford by Jessica Mitford - True find! It's hard to find anything by the Mitford sisters stateside, but this lovely 1st edition was at Half Price Books for only $11.

8) The Mummy Case by Elizabeth Peters - Found the out of print (in this edition) 3rd Amelia Peabody book with the cover that matches my current editions. $3 at Half Priced Books.

9) Gaudy Night by Dorthy L. Sayers - Lord Peter Wimsey Masterpiece Theatre tie-in edition from 1987! I collect all Masterpiece tie-in editions I can, and this was a real coup! $2 at the Friends of the Memorial Library book sale.

10) Leviathan by Scott Westerfeld - New book I've been dying to read, found for $8 used! Who sold this like a week after it came out? Wackos...

These are my best finds of the month, of course I also got the new Terry Pratchett, the new Charlaine Harris, and a few others here and there...but you'll never know what they are unless you keep reading my site to get the reviews!

Posted by Miss Eliza at 3:54 PM 2 comments  

Labels: Catherine Cookson, Daphne Du Maurier, Dorthy L. Sayers, Douglas Adams, E.M. Forster, Elizabeth Peters, Jessica Mitford, Masterpiece Theater, Nick Hornby, Scott Westerfeld, The Believer

So today begins the boring part of Masterpiece (no longer theater). Or so that's how I always view the Contemporary section in my head. It doesn't have the lure of the costume drama that the Classic has, or the intrigue of what was once Mystery, or the length, usually being the shortest of the seasons. But I think I might reconsider all this seeing as David Tennant is the new host. Yes, I hate how they've done away with the old intros and I hate this rotating celebrity shtick they've got going, but with David Tennant they may be onto something. Aside from Alan Cumming that is, he's too perfect and the natural inheritor of the show from the likes of Vincent Price and Diana Rigg, bring back the Edward Gorey sets and I'm hooked for life. Back to David. He's got the classic training down, he's got that wonderful Scottish brogue and he's The Doctor for freakin' sake! The fact that I have David Tennant to look forward to on Sunday nights means I'm a little less pissed he quit Doctor Who...just a little...I mean he's so perfect and I know why he quit...but back to Masterpiece.

This season of only three shows (see I said short) looks to be stellar. We have Endgame, and no not the Samuel Beckett play, and while we're on it, why name a political thriller about apartheid after the most famous play by Beckett, after Waiting for Godot that is. This one is the show that fills the "political quota" that the Contemporary section seems to want to burden us with. After that we get Place of Execution. This aired in Britain last year, and I have to say, it's amazing! Starring Juliet Stevenson and Greg Wise this takes place around a girls disappearance 40 years earlier and the investigative journalist who has to uncover the truth, at all costs. This is based on the book of the same name by Val McDermid and made by Robson Green's production company that made McDermid's Wire in the Blood (it so needs to be uncancelled right now). So right there you are forewarned. It's dark, it's creepy, it's fabulous...and it's also totally a mystery, so it's in the wrong section, but I won't quibble, this means an intro by David Tennant. The final show, Collision, I know nothing about, apart from it's written by Anthony Horowitz of Foyle's War inception so it has to be good, he's never failed yet. It also stars that actor from Primeval who I hate cause he played Ned Lawrence mac two on The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles...but that's a personal hate...he has such creepy eyes!

So at least you'll be in good hands (they are the hands of a Doctor after all) until the best season ever returns. Gotta love the Classics! I'm sure we'll be seeing the new Emma, perhaps the recent miniseries on the Romantics? Desperate Romantics anyone? And of course Cranford! We can also hope that Lark Rise to Candleford gets bumped from random airings to full fledged Classic, as it should be! Have you watched season 1 yet? It's out on DVD now! A final thought...I do wonder who our host will be? Shall Laura Linney return or will she go the way of Gillian Anderson and Matthew Goode?

Posted by Miss Eliza at 6:36 PM 4 comments  

Labels: Alan Cumming, David Tennant, Diana Rigg, Dr. Who, Edward Gorey, Lark Rise to Candleford, Masterpiece Contemporary, Masterpiece Theater, Place of Execution, Robson Green, Val McDermid