Monday, February 2, 2009

Brideshead Revisited revisited


I loved the early 80's British mini-series adaptation of Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited. For starters, it was 11 hours, a good length for a mini-series, not like the pathetic little 3- or 4-hour shows that pass for mini-series today. I was in my mid-20's when the show first aired, and I remember it being one of first times I felt like I was watching something truly "adult" on TV--I don't mean something naughty or pornographic, but something that actually had to be taken in and thought about; its meanings yielded themselves slowly and the drama resonated long after the series was over. I tried reading the book but it was so much like the show that I felt not much new could be culled from it--I'm more than willing to admit I might be wrong, but I've never gone back to the book to find out. I do, however, own the show on DVD and have re-watched it in the last several years to find that it holds up remarkably well.

This weekend we watched the 2008 feature film version of Brideshead Revisited. Though this glossy 2-hour film cannot hope to compete with the series in terms of depth, narrative sweep, or character, it does have some pleasures of its own. In the end, its disappointments were largely balanced by small successes so that I was pleased to have seen it, even though it will never replace the TV version.

[Hayley Atwell, Ben Whishaw, and Matthew Goode]

The plot of both versions concerns Charles Ryder, a middle-class lad who goes off to Oxford and falls in with an upper-class crowd, led by the whimsical but troubled Sebastian Flyte. The two have a "romantic friendship" of the kind that the Brits tend to tolerate but that we like to think never happens here in the States, but more importantly, Charles also falls in love with Sebastian's sister Julia, with the family's monied lifestyle, and with the Flyte's estate, Brideshead. Charles' love for Julia triggers jealousy in Sebastian (which leads him down a tragic path), but a bigger obstacle for Charles in his desire to live the life of a Flyte is their religious faith: Charles is an atheist but the family is staunchly Catholic. More to the point, the matriarch, Lady Marchmain, is. Her estranged husband has fallen away from the faith and Sebastian and Julia are stuck in the middle, both wanting to disavow their mother's notions of a stern god but not quite being able to let go entirely. For 10 years, Charles' fate is tangled up with the Flytes until a final break which leaves no one happy.

What this movie version does well is to make the central conflicts of love and friendship and class and religion quite clear. Unfortunately, to do this, the script has to cut back drastically on the rich supporting cast of characters. One of my favorites from the show, the stuttering, flamboyant Anthony Blanche, gets only one small scene in the movie, and sadly, it's not even the luscious "One brandy alexander... two brandy alexanders..." drinking scene. It's also beautifully photographed, far more so than the drab-looking TV show (its flat look was the only thing about the series that disappointed me in the recent re-viewing). Michael Gambon does a better job as Lord Marchmain than Lawrence Olivier did (Olivier was obviously quite ill, which in fact suits the role near the end), and the always fabuous Emma Thompson (pictured) does more with Lady Marchmain than Claire Bloom could do. I do, though, miss the wonderful John Gielgud who had a field day in the TV series with the role of Charles' clueless father.

The acting in the central triangle here is a bit off. Matthew Goode, as Charles, is just OK; perhaps the fact that he sounds a great deal like Jeremy Irons (the 1981 Charles) helps. Hayley Atwell is actually quite good as Julia, but poor Ben Whishaw is totally at sea as Sebastian. I admit that it's difficult to get the image of Anthony Andrews (pictured below with Irons) from the original out of my head--he embodied Sebastian perfectly, and was able to seem loveable and dreadful, admirable and pathetic, at the same time, often in the same scene. Whishaw just comes off as spoiled and irritating. Here, I can't see what this Charles sees in this Sebastian that entices him into a platonic "amour fou" which alters his life forever.

Finally, this film made me realize something about my own prejudices concerning the first version. The character of Sebastian is clearly a homosexual, but when I watched the 1981 version, I believed that Charles was, too. I didn't buy the "platonic" aspect of their romantic relationship (the picnic scene under the tree with the strawberries was so lush, I just knew they'd had sex, and lots of it), and felt that part of Charles' weakness was that he simply tried to transfer his physical feelings for Sebastian to Julia. 20+ years down the road, I can see that this is a misreading--whether or not they had sex is beside the point (in the 2008 version, they do share a kiss in addition to the strawberry scene); Charles was more in love with the family's way of life than he ever was with either Sebastian or Julia. I can recommend this film, but if you watch it, you really should dig up the original series and watch it, too, if for no other reason but to hear the achingly beautiful theme song by Geoffrey Burgon which for me will always conjure up the sadness of lost dreams and desires.

3 comments:

Rosemary said...

Really interesting post, Mike! I haven't seen either the film or the miniseries, but this makes me want to see both.

I'm interested in your observation about the series' depiction of "'romantic friendship' of the kind that the Brits tend to tolerate but that we like to think never happens here in the States."

I just finished reading _The Anglo Files_, a gossipy-good account of British culture by a transplanted American, in which she touches on this issue. She plies the British "comfort" (relatively speaking) with homosocial behavior for laughs, but I think you touch on something more important here.

Roscoe said...

Nice post, Michael. I'd recommend Waugh's novel, which I much prefer to the series, which often seems rather airless and even lifeless in places. There's some weird casting, too. Charles Keating's Rex Mottram is simply not attractive enough to have snared the magnificent Julia Flyte. On the other hand, Olivier's Lord Marchmain is, to me, pure genius. That final episode showing them all surrounding what turns out to be his deathbed is one of the most moving things in television. What balls it took for that old man to take on that role.

The gay content is a weird problem. Do Charles and Sebastain ever actually have sex? It is never stated clearly in the novel, and one of the less appealing aspects of the book (for a contemporary post-Stonewall gay man) is Sebastian's evident homosexuality being linked so specifically to his total decline into abject poverty and degradation, while Charles is able to put it all behind him and live an apparently heterosexual life.

There's also a real snobbishness to the novel, an absolute inability to treat anyone without a title and/or millions as anything other than a joke. Waugh can't take the lower classes seriously at all, and I often wondered how he would feel about a middle-middle class openly gay man of mixed European descent (and an AMERICAN to boot, oh dear!) reading and enjoying his novel. I'm sure there would be a derisive sniff from Mr. Waugh.

But I did like the book very much. It is still entertaining and powerfully moving, even bringing on some uncustomary dampness to my eyes.

Michael said...

Well, based on Roscoe's comment, I guess I'll have to read the novel soon. As for the questions about romantic friendships and gayness, I'll try to tackle those in a future post. Thanks for replying.