Season 17 - Northanger Abbey (1987-1988)
This isn't Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey, despite her name being on it and the depiction of Bath as a cacophonous, nightmarish horror that might be the only onscreen depiction that accurately aligns with her opinions of the place. This is a Georgian Fairy Tale by way of Lewis Carroll and Kate Bush. An eighties fever dream that almost defies explanation or categorization. Music that literally breathes, synths and smoke machines aplenty, and is that an anachronistic sax solo? Why yes it is. Kenny G has been transported back in time to before the existence of saxophones to try to help Henry woo fair maiden. But is he wooing her in actuality or in fantasy? Because while I thought it was fun and unique in the 2007 adaptation of Northanger Abbey when they showed Catherine's fantasy life, it worked because it was used sparingly. Here the ratio of reality to reverie is heavily weighted to scenes of Robert Hardy washing his hands in baptismal fonts of blood. But then again, red is his color. As it is the color of all antagonistic characters, General Tilney, Frederick Tilney, and Isabella Thorpe, in her Wonderland finery. They even throw in a Carrollian Marchioness and her young black servant who leads Catherine into a garden to watch him do cartwheels. Though once we get to Henry spouting nonsensical verse; "since you have left the white rosebush has died of grief," I think we had definitely gone too far. But there literally was no looking back. The path out of the hedge maze had disappeared. Years ago when my most hated Jane Austen adaptation of all time came out, the 1999 Mansfield Park, my Mom's best friend said it helped if I pretended it wasn't based on the Jane Austen book. Advice I couldn't take, because no matter what rose-tinted glasses you are wearing they can't replace Francis O'Connor. So I tried that trick here, this is so weird, verging on historical fantasy, with all the insanity and nightmare inducing imagery of a film marketed to kids in the eighties, but I couldn't get beyond the Henry Tilney of it all. Even if I were to disconnect him entirely from Austen, the complete lack of chemistry and his attitude destroyed any chance of this becoming a weird cult classic for me. But if we do look at it as an Austen adaptation they are guilty of the greatest sin. They destroyed Henry Tilney. To me, Henry Tilney is the best of Austen's men. He is funny, he is self-deprecating, he is so alive. He's not just brooding, he's vital. Forget Darcy, I want Henry! Which is why it's such a sin what they do to him here. He is a condescending pompous prig. He's someone who totally believes in "teachable moments." Peter Firth's portrayal of Henry belittles Catherine. Why would she ever marry this insufferable twat who is so self-impressed he thinks he can sing Italian? Which he can't. Also, how does he have his own estate? He's supposed to be a humble clergyman, not running some estate that so wouldn't have gone to him because he has an elder brother. I mean, did anyone involved in this know anything about the Regency? Men and women sure as hell didn't bath together in the public baths that's for sure. It might make a nice scene, but it's all fantasy. Which, actually, yeah, that tracks for this production. It was all a dream. A very lucid fever dream. Cue the Kate Bush music.
Off the top of my head I can name half a dozen actors who have memorably played Churchill from John Lithgow to Gary Oldman. Yet these award winning roles in Lithgow's and Oldman's case didn't excite me nearly as much as the fact that Robert Hardy had portrayed Churchill. For over thirty years he appeared as Churchill in a variety of shows, including an episode of Marple if you can fathom it. In fact I probably only saw him in Marple before finally tracking down a copy of Winston Churchill: The Wilderness Years. The reason that Robert Hardy excited me as Churchill is that he is an effortless actor. Whatever role he's playing he is that character. Plus, there's something Churchillian about him that just felt right to me and obviously to him, or he wouldn't have kept going back to the role again and again. Oh boy was I in for a surprise. I will admit that by the end I had become accustomed to how he was playing Churchill so that I accepted him in the role but the problem is he's trying too hard. This isn't the effortless actor I have come to know and love, this is an actor working their hardest to capture the speech and mannerisms of an historical figure to such a degree that the role feels belabored. It was off-putting to see this great actor brought low by overthinking. This show has an amazing cast and yet, because of Hardy's insistence on how he played Churchill, the whole thing came off as a caricature. This is one instance where the fact that this show isn't readily available makes sense. This can be lost media and no one will mourn it's passing. What's more I just don't know what the focus was meant to be. While he was "out of office" in the British sense as not having a cabinet position, by American standards he was still in office because he retained his seat in Epping. So, he wasn't really out in the wilderness as I see it... But until we actually get to introduction of Hitler in episode three with the ramifications of that not seen until the end of episode four, we literally have a miniseries that is just India, India, India, Clemmie why won't you have sex with me, as she not so subtly chops down a beloved tree, India, India, India. I mean, I get that he's obsessed with India, so many Brits were, but what's the deal with his wife? I always thought that Winston and Clemmie had a good and solid marriage and here it's all her running off and not giving him what he wants and NEVER explaining anything and in the end just wasting the brilliance of Siân Phillips. You DO NOT waste Livia! Though you kind of forget the whole first half of the miniseries when the back half is all the lead-up to WWII. Years of Churchill warning what was to come and everyone ignoring him. Given what's going on in this country at the moment I just couldn't handle this. I'd zone out, I'd disassociate, by the end when they were doing an air raid test I was balling. So many people posit the question that if you had a time machine would you go back and kill Hitler. I just want to go back and bitch-slap Neville Chamberlain. So much of what he was saying to appease Hitler is the basic party line of the Democrats. Can't they see that history is repeating!?! Aren't they just as scared shitless as I am on a daily basis!?! Also, is Bernie our Churchill? Please let it be so. I need a small measure of hope.
Back in 2011 I went to the book launch for Margaret George's Elizabeth I at my local Barnes and Noble. When we were able to ask questions at the end of her talk I wanted to know which actor, in her mind, was the definitive Elizabeth I. There have been so many over the years, from Judi Dench winning an Oscar for eight minutes of screen time in Shakespeare in Love to Cate Blanchett's Oscar nomination for her stunning portrayal of the monarch in Elizabeth. Without hesitating Margaret George said Glenda Jackson. It's something I had often heard. I mean, she was literally playing her in two productions simultaneously, Elizabeth R and Mary, Queen of Scots. Now that I have finally watched Elizabeth R I do agree with Margaret George, Glenda Jackson is the definitive Queen Elizabeth, it's just too bad this miniseries isn't actually about her. At this point I'm sure you're scratching your head. You're thinking, but the miniseries is literally called Elizabeth R so how could it not be about her? By being about the men around her. And, oh, does this enrage me. A woman who set out not to be defined by a man and a miniseries comes along in the nineteen seventies and is all about the men in her life. There's literally only one episodes that's female-centric and it's about Mary, Queen of Scots. Seriously!?! This is how you treat the most famous queen in history? But first, let's start from the beginning. This series follows on the heels of the production of The Six Wives of Henry VIII. So unless you've watched that fever dream of a miniseries that literally has a dream ballet, well, you're going to spend the first episode completely confused. But seeing as I totally recommend never watching The Six Wives of Henry VIII because it will make you hate the Tudors forever just go with the confusion. Because it will last the entire series even after you've found your footing as we focus on one male after another. I mean, I love me some Robert Hardy, but this show isn't called Robert Dudley now is it? And as for Elizabeth's suitor François, the Duke of Alençon, getting more screen time than her just bemoaning his life in his shitty quarters? Come on man! The least you could do is dance for the queen instead of bitching and moaning. If you must take center stage, take it! But then along comes Robert Devereux, Robert Dudley's stepson played by Robin Ellis, and he hijacks the plot so much he takes it to Ireland. Did I sign up to watch Robert Devereux wander about Ireland? OH NO I DID NOT! At least I got to see him executed. Though sadly not in as much detail as Mary, Queen of Scots. Who at the BBC really thought this was a good idea? I know this ties together with The Six Wives of Henry VIII which inverted the narrative by being seen from the POV of the wives, so did someone think, hey it worked once let's try it again but with his daughter! Here's the thing though, it didn't work. In either series. Plus actually calling this miniseries Elizabeth R is deceitful. Why not just call it Lizzy's Lads and be done with it? Because I sure am.
The British do love their holiday ghost stories, so it only makes sense that they took that tradition to the television. Starting in 1971 they started adapting ghost stories written by M.R. James for the holiday season starring acting luminaries such as Robert Hardy, Clive Swift, Peter Vaughan, Barbara Ewing, Lalla Ward, Denholm Elliott, and Peter Bowles. They even adapted a Charles Dickens tale before foolheartedly deciding to create their own original content. Two abysmal stories, "Stigma" and "The Ice House," seemed to put the nail in the coffin of this series. But it was so beloved, with fans clamoring for remastered releases and Blu-ray sets, that that wasn't the end. The show returned in 2005 going back to it's origins by adapting an M.R. James story, "A View from a Hill." Once again they brought in the top names in acting, starting with Pip Torrens, Greg Wise, John Hurt, and many others. After his adaptation of 'The Tractate Middoth" in 2013 Mark Gatiss took over the show delivering it once again on a yearly schedule starting with an original episode in 2018. Thankfully Simon Callow was able to make "The Dead Room" work whereas Peter Bowles had let "Stigma" flounder. But I think that wasn't just down to acting, I really do think it was the material. And Mark Gatiss, bless his heart, just somehow is able to embody a bygone era whereas the writers in the seventies had other ideas. Bad ideas. Incestous flora ideas. And seriously, what was with the blood just oozing out of that poor lady's pores? Aside from that one original episode all the episodes in what we shall call the revival for lack of a better word have been adapted from the work of M.R. James. Except for this past year's. This past year's was adapted from "Lot No. 249" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. This episode has it all, Kit Harington being a stuffy and incredulous nonbeliever of the supernatural, Freddie Fox being a fey and dangerous man who with longer hair unnervingly looks like his sister, and a man who may or may not be Sherlock Holmes played by John Heffernan, a man who should have definitely said no to that horrid Dracula adaptation by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, and in the coup de grace, a mummy who will deliver your coup de grace. This episode might just be my favorite among the revival episodes. Well, I do love a good haunting by mummy, and Conan Doyle, like the episode adapted from Dickens, seems to work a little better than the stories by M.R. James. I'm not saying there aren't genius episodes adapted from his work, they're just a little more nebulous, a little more open ended. Sometimes, even when dealing with the supernatural, you want a definitive ending, but if you're M.R. James how about some creepy kids wandering off eerily playing the hurdy-gurdy? You think I jest? Just watch "Lost Hearts" and I'll be over here laughing while you're unable to sleep. Sadly it looks like this tradition might be coming to an end due to budgetary concerns. While I only caught the revival episodes the last two years and was finally able to see the original run this year I think this fate is a shame. It's a tradition that survived whatever "The Ice House" was and I want it to continue for many many years to come. It's not like we're going to run out of material now is it? There's always a ghost story to tell for Christmas.
The original All Creatures Great and Small has always held a special place in my family's heart. My grandfather, who has to be held partially responsible for turning me into an Anglophile by having the rule that every Sunday when we visited the TV had to remain on AND remain on PBS, had the complete series of books by James Herriot that I ran off with. As for my father, let's put it this way, when one of my friends announced she was marrying a rural Canadian vet his first question was had they watched All Creatures Great and Small together yet. I have a sneaking suspicion that my parents didn't get an invite to the wedding because my friend knew the gift would be the complete DVD set of All Creatures Great and Small followed by incessant pestering if they had watched it yet. Therefore when the new series was announced it was greeted with incredulity in my house. How could they remake such a classic!?! My Dad was actually a little flabbergasted that I wanted to watch it when it started on Masterpiece. I told him my reasoning. First, it had aired in Britain earlier and all my friends there who had the same fanatical devotion to the original show that my father has fell in love with it. Secondly, it would be a return to something comforting and secure on a Sunday night, which I think we can all agree we need right now. On January tenth the first episode, "You've Got to Dream," aired and I KNEW my father was hooked by the fact he was copiously sobbing at the complicated labor of a cow. I was more shocked than anything though when after a few episodes he said he thinks that Samuel West is a better Siegfried Farnon than Robert Hardy. This is as close as it gets to blasphemy in my house. But the show is magnificent. It's a breath of fresh air, and those gorgeous Yorkshire landscapes! THIS is what Masterpiece Theatre has always been about. Tapping into the perfect dream of England, with a little trouble and strife along the way, but a happy ending to cap it off. Nicholas Ralph who plays James Herriot says he hopes next season that his character and Helen go on their first date after her engagement with Hugh was broken in the Christmas special. Personally a true happy ending to me will be their marriage! Or I will be willing to substitute Samuel West wearing those gorgeous knee-high leather boots in every episode.
Mrs. Dalloway
