2000s, British cinema, Historical

The Duchess (2008)

.

Director: Saul Dibb

By Roderick Heath

Keira Knightley in a corset time again—but with a difference. The Duchess tells, with fewer punches pulled than expected, the story of Georgiana Cavendish, whose marriage to the fifth Duke of Devonshire was a private disaster and a public triumph, as Georgiana became one of the Whig Party’s greatest assets as an attention magnet. Under the corsetry and country house porn, The Duchess is a rather brutal tale that serves as something of a corrective (perhaps “reminder” is the fairer term) to the sunshine of the current Jane Austen cult. Then again, Austen, an active figure, as was her father, in the Abolitionist movement, tried to make witty observations on the habits of a society that treated human relations as a form of property exchange even in its highest circles. Yet The Duchess offers a solid reminder of how being a bird in a gilded cage was not always a happy fate.

Knightley’s Georgiana is introduced as a sunny-faced innocent, betting on a foot race between local beaux, including the pouchy-lipped young Charles Grey (Dominic Cooper), without a thought of the fate that awaits her. An alien eye watches her from the window of the adjacent mansion; it belongs to the Duke of Devonshire (Ralph Fiennes), to whom she is soon promised by her mother (Charlotte Rampling, whose icy eyes get a workout) like so much chattel. Soon she’s married and being bedded like a sow matched to the bull, as the Duke, with all the moral and emotional depth of a glass of beer, single-mindedly pursues his aim of producing an heir for his staggering wealth and power.

Georgiana strikes up a friendship with and provides shelter to Bess Foster (Hayley Atwell), a runaway from a putrid marriage and barred from seeing her children by her adulterous husband. Bess soon becomes the Duke’s mistress, initially to persuade him to use his clout to pry her children away from her husband, but eventually becoming a fixture in the house despite Georgiana’s initial outrage.

One irony is that the Duke is a political liberal, searching half-heartedly for a way out of the same old aristocratic prerogatives even as he exercises them mercilessly. Georgiana is soon introduced into his circle of political acquaintances, including Charles Fox (Simon McBurney), soon to be Whig Prime Minister, with whom the Duke is quickly bored but Georgiana engages in a debate about the immutable nature of freedom. Soon Georgiana is using her remarkable clout as a fashion template and all-round attention-getter to work up crowds and the press to support the Whigs, whilst failing to give her husband anything but two girls and also bringing up his illegitimate daughter from a liaison with a servant. She also meets up again with Charles Grey, now a fervent Whig MP, and old flirtations renew themselves.

It’s a promising starting point for a tale, examining a societal set-up that is infinite in both its hypocrisies and its hungers. Georgiana is an avatar for so much of her time: hugely admired and influential in public arena, powerless and constantly thwarted in her home life. The Duchess doesn’t really live up to its potential, mostly because it never really challenges the conventions of the bourgeois period film, let alone making a truly original feminist critique of historical power plays. Nor does it delve with assiduous precision into the relation between etiquette and power, as does Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon. And it doesn’t bristle with a sense of period life like Tony Richardson’s Tom Jones.

It’s a fundamentally safe type of movie, and perhaps Georgiana, a rule breaker, deserved something more radical. The Duchess is more like Ken Loach’s Ladybird, Ladybird in fancy period garb. The film’s saddest lapse is that though it encompasses a very important political and cultural period that are relevant to the tale it has to tell, The Duchess has disappointingly little to say. Georgiana’s friend Richard Sheridan (played in the film by Aidan McArdle) based his famous satire School for Scandal around the Duke and Duchess’ marriage, but this is a mere throwaway detail here.

Fox’s and Grey’s politics are reduced to simplistic epigrams; the complex Grey is especially denuded to a pretty-boy spouter of clichés about the times they are a’changin’. The Duchess’ makers obviously decided at some point that all period politics would be beyond an audience more interested in heaving bosoms, insulted stares, and teary breakdowns. But without a clear picture of the social dimension of the tale, the film becomes, finally, just a rather rugged domestic melodrama.

The script lacks depth beyond its portrait of Georgiana; it can’t make the Duke’s or Bess’s characters translucent enough. Fiennes is terrific in playing the Duke as a kind of monster who doesn’t like being allowed to be one. It would perhaps be more comfortable if the Duke was a rollicking shout-out of a preindustrial Britain like Fielding’s Squire Western, bedding maids and bashing noses with aplomb, or a plain monster fit for getting a comeuppance from Mel Gibson on some fantasy American battlefield—anything but the profoundly uncomfortable, utterly incoherent mixture of prerogative and hesitation that Fiennes plays so beautifully. But I’m not so sure it’s a coherent character concept, as both the characterisation and the performance seem to have been drawn partly from a caricature of Prince Charles, who, for all his faults, was never this kind of jerk.

The film’s at its most intense, and also its best, when studying private hypocrisy. The Duke can, of course, parade his mistress Bess about along with his wife, refuse to send her away when Georgiana is in the first grip of her rage, and eventually settle down to the trio sharing. That she might be their mutual girlfriend is an idea toyed with in a moment of pure bodice-ripper fantasy when Bess caresses Georgiana in the persona of Grey, but remains, in essence, a rather sorry tease. The film observes, but can’t really say much about the sort of alternative family arrangement the characters stumble into, because it’s more involved in making us feel sorry for Georgiana. It does that, but in failing to find anything beyond that, the film, with an outraged stance to the private life in addition to the scrappy, unengaged approach to the social, never really finds what it wants to be about. The film leaves off precisely when it and Georgiana ought to be hitting their stride.

When Georgiana’s romance with Grey blossoms into a proper affair, the Duke snuffs it out with brutal thoroughness in a glorious example of the double standard. Georgiana has to then give up her and Grey’s love-child, Eliza, to the Grey family, on a marshy road under a grey threatening sky—a devastatingly well-handled scene that captures a kind of primal horror of being foiled by social expectations. Aided by Gyula Pados’ good photography, the scene is director Saul Dibb’s finest moment. He felicitously handles Georgiana’s rape by the Duke, communicated through Bess’s reactions to the screams behind the door, and the climax. Otherwise, his direction is largely ordinary, and revels in lazy TV habits, like a shot that’s pure soap opera as Georgiana walks away from Grey only to be stalled just facing camera front by his cry. With no intellectual dexterity to this filmmaking, The Duchess dangles close to historical soap opera.

Ultimately, Knightley has to do a lot of work to hold the film together and thrust Georgiana across as a creature of real depth. A skinny little wisp of a thing, rather than the voluptuous Georgiana that Gainsborough painted, she still pulls it off. Her acting in some scenes, like the delicate minuet of expressions she displays in watching the Duke play with Bess’s children, and recognising that Bess has essentially taken her place, is of a high calibre indeed. One of the film’s strangest moments and Knightley’s best scenes has Georgiana cavorting through a fashionable crowd, dressed to the nines, yet blind drunk and in a near mesmerised state of depression, her wig aflame long before she realises it.

But Fiennes, who plays emotional obfuscation like a master musician, ultimately steals the film. By comparison the rest of the cast are fairly muted. Rampling and Atwell present interesting characterisations but don’t get much of substance to do. Ultimately The Duchess is affecting, even rather powerful in places, and though, as a whole, it barely breaks out of the confines of its corsetry as a costume-clad weepie, it deserves notice for being rather tougher, more demanding, and better-made than many such movies.

Standard
1970s, Drama, Foreign

1900 (1976)

Novecento

1900-01

Director: Bernardo Bertolucci

By Roderick Heath

In the mid 1970s, Bernardo Bertolucci was a figure with the financial clout and artistic eminence to produce a hugely ambitious flop. But that flop, 1900, is such a totemic work that it is impossible to dismiss, as it attempts to revive the mammoth dimensions of presound epic cinema, like Abel Gance’s Napoleon and Fritz Lang’s Die Nibelungen, and invest it with a kind of socialist epic mythology. It also illustrates the schism between the standout features of Bertolucci as a director—a great portrayer of sensuality and psychology, and a committed political artist who can never quite reconcile the two perspectives.

1900-02

The film begins a huge ellipse as the Allies are winning the war and partisans are mopping up the remnants of Italian fascism. Field-labouring women scooping hay in shots framed like classical landscape artists spy the escaping Atila (Donald Sutherland) and his wife Regina (Laura Betti), and chase after them with pitchforks. The sight of this middle-aged pair crying for each other, farm implements jutting from their bodies, is horrific and demands sympathy. One of the peasant boys decides to march into the house of the local padrone (landlord), Alfredo Berlinghieri (Robert De Niro) and take him prisoner. Alfredo, caught at breakfast, pleasantly agrees, “Long live Stalin!”?

1900-03

1900 contrasts Alfredo with Olmo Dalco (Gerard Depardieu). Both men were born on the night Giuseppi Verdi died (January 27, 1901), and are tied together by life on the Berlinghieri estate. Each grows up in the care of their grandfathers—Alfredo, with the grand old padrone (Burt Lancaster), and for Olmo, Leo (Sterling Hayden), patriarch of the peasants who are nightly locked in their barn. The two old bulls have a prickly friendship, united by their earthy sense of nature, sex, and socializing even as they are separated by class and resentment. Olmo never discovers who his father is. Alfredo knows his all too well—the cold, callow, money-grubbing younger son of the padrone, Giovanni (Romolo Valli). Elder son Ottavio (Werner Bruhns) has fled the estate to lead a bohemian, cosmopolitan life.

1900-04

Casting Lancaster as the padrone ties this film thematically and chronologically to Luchino Visconti’s The Leopard (1963), as that film’s aspiring liberal Italy is dying. The padrone gives Alfredo a buffer from his crass parents, but hangs himself when he can’t achieve an erection in the hand of a girl. Mechanization destroys the bonds of the landlord-peasant relationship; Giovanni’s entitled greed doesn’t help. The native wisdom of Leo—he won’t let any Dalco become a priest, the ultimate freeloader—agrees with the socialist ideals that excite the labourers to strikes and revolts. He lectures Olmo in his creed as the boy marches down the long dining table, stepping over the eating families’ plates of food, a vision of the gritty vitality of communal life. Olmo and Alfredo (played as youths by Roberto Maccanti and Paolo Pavesi, respectively) taunt and entertain each other with the dirty panoply of boyish obsessions and character tests. Olmo’s great feat of bravery is to lay between railroad tracks as a train (a recurring symbol of tidal history) rushes over him, which Alfredo cannot at first manage, and no one sees it when he does.

1900-05

World War I precipitates the great rupture in Italian society that has been building. Olmo fights and Alfredo is commissioned, but kept home by his father’s influence. Olmo returns to find the number of workers reduced, machines encroaching, and the estate now run by foreman Atila, who poses as a simpatico fellow veteran. With the prodding of his personal Lady Macbeth, Regina, Atila soon becomes a fascist bigwig. Giovanni and other landowners form a fascist chapter in response to their inability to evict peasantry, who successfully resist the cavalry with nonviolent tactics. Olmo and Alfredo resume their edgy friendship, Alfredo regarding them both as free spirits, though he is torn between temptations of power and the intentions of his liberality. Bertolucci tries to demonstrate how Alfredo is a decent man imprisoned by position, his ability to force his wishes on other people incidentally malevolent. Alfredo and Olmo go into the city to visit Ottavio, and get sidetracked with a prostitute, Neve (Stefania Casini). When the three of them are in bed together, Alfredo forces Neve to drink, which sets her off in a violent epileptic fit between the two men whose penises she’s grasping.

1900-06

Olmo has a crush on Anita (Anna Henkel), an educated girl who has come to work on the estate and act as the peasant’s schoolteacher. They marry and have children, and Anna starts a community school through the developing socialist infrastructure. Alfredo meets Ada Paulhan (Dominique Sanda, tres bon), a half-French orphan (her parents perished guiding rich tourists on a mountaineering expedition; “They died as they lived—beyond their means.”) who lives with Ottavio and whom he assumes is his mistress, not yet knowing his uncle is homosexual. Ada’s a loopy, capricious poseur and muse who occasionally fakes blindness and writes awful poetry. Alfredo finds her wonderful. Alfredo, Ada, and Ottavio live out a bohemian fantasy, snorting cocaine and gaily dancing. Ada and Alfredo and Olmo and Anita drink together in bar set up in a barn, Afredo begging that the four of them will always remain the same. Two deflowerings are instantly precipitated. Ada and Alfredo screw amidst the hay bales, Alfredo stunned that Ada is a virgin. The innocent solidarity of the socialists is killed when Atila and the fascists burn the school, killing three old peasant men Anita had been teaching to read. As the communists rally, Atila, being fitted for a black uniform, demonstrates to his awed fellows the attitude required of a fascist; he straps a cat to the wall and crushes it with a running head-butt.

1900-07

Atila and Regina are the film’s nexus of evil (Sutherland managed to freak himself out viewing his acutely perverse performance). Giovanni dies and Alfredo inherits the estate. Despite Olmo’s earnest, faintly menacing warning, Alfredo cannot rid himself of Atila, a deep-rooted cancer. Regina’s crush on Alfredo (they were briefly lovers; in one scene, Alfredo tries to orgasm Regina with the butt of his rifle, a moment as ribald as it is symbolic) makes her loathe Ada. Atila and Laura’s machinations extend to murdering a woman for her house, and, at Alfredo and Ada’s wedding, drunkenly raping and beating to death a young boy. When the body is found by searching wedding guests, Olmo is close by. Spurred by Atila, they mercilessly beat him, and Alfredo won’t stop it. Is he afraid of Atila? Or glad to see his judgmental pal receive a hiding? Either way, Olmo’s life is only saved when another peasant confesses. Anita dies, leaving Olmo to care for several small children. (Even at 300 minutes, 1900 is missing pieces. We see neither Anita and Olmo’s wedding nor her death, and supporting characters in the film often disappear.)

1900-08

Ada is distanced from Alfredo—Ottavio has vowed never to return at all—because of his poor response to fascist courtship. Ada relies on Olmo for emotional support even as he resents her trying to tutor his kids. Perhaps the film’s best scene comes when Alfredo and Ada row fiercely in a skid row tavern, Alfredo accusing Ada of having an affair with Olmo, then infuriated by her calling him a fascist. Alfredo recognizes Neve when she enters the tavern; her laughing acceptance of life’s caprices briefly reunites the troubled couple.

1900-09

As Italy enters World War II, Alfredo’s attempts to fire Atila prove impotent. Atila massacres “partisans”? in a miniature concentration camp set up in the centre of the villa. Olmo goes into hiding, and does not reappear until war’s end. Atila and Regina, after the pitchforking, are both duly shot by a kangaroo court, with Alfredo to be next for his collaboration. Bertolucci tries to celebrate the victory for the Italian workers in scenes staged to resemble a ’60s happening or Stalinist rally, with narrative becomes imagistic parade. Eventually, with Solomonian wisdom, Olmo talks the partisans out of executing Alfredo because all they have to do is declare that the padrone is dead—not the inhabitant of the role, but the role, the title, the idea. Alfredo, up till now accepting and life-weary, manages a stiff-necked response to Olmo’s rescue. Just as when they were kids, they begin wrestling in enraged love.

1900-10

1900 is a structural chimera, trying to fuse Shakespearean drama, Brechtian epic theater, socialist realism, and propagandist melodrama. Bertolucci tips his hat to Visconti not only via The Leopard, but also by borrowing thematic value from Visconti’s own rise-of-fascism parable, The Damned (1969), following its lead in quoting the plots of Macbeth and King Lear, and also its portrayal of fascism as indivisible from a psychologically rooted adoration of raw force, sexual degeneracy, and gross greed. This also echoes Pier Paolo Pasolini’s Salo (1975). As in Pasolini’s oeuvre, 1900 contrasts free sexuality in his bohemians (Ottavio cavorting with his male models) and workers (Olmo gives Anita earth-shaking head) with the savagery of fascist sexuality, in Atila’s child rape and Regina’s voracity that conceals an incapacity for orgasm. Alfredo’s occasional displays of cruelty in bed reflect his temptation to the extreme ego-fulfillment of fascism.

1900-11

1900 is at its best when not concentrating on politics. The complexities that compile in Ada and Alfredo’s marriage, which breaks up because of her fear she will be held guilty with Alfredo at the war’s end, but already long poisoned by the spectacle of his weakness, successfully dovetails the themes. The multinational cast demanded by complex funding arrangements, but allowing a capricious pick-and-choose of international talent, meant that the soundtrack is never entirely comfortable. In the English dub (most of the smaller parts are Italian), things often go spaghetti western, yet watching the Italian version loses the original interpretations by De Niro, Lancaster, Hayden, et al. De Niro, in his career’s golden era, is at his youthful, supple best.

1900-12

The film has slow stretches, but always seems to have some virtuoso set-piece in store, from the sweeping early sequences that show off Bertolucci’s gift for camera movement (aided by the Velazquez-toned photography of Vittorio Storaro), to give a sensation of drifting through countryside and time, to that vivid final scene, both distressing and weirdly comic, a glimpse of a future where Alfredo and Olmo are old men, still fighting and sticking by each other. Olmo escorts Alfredo to his last act on earth, lying across the railroad, head about to be flattened by a train. Like his grandfather, Alfredo suicides—a tired, sympathetic remnant of a superfluous class clucked over with indulgent dismissal by Olmo.

Standard