Brideshead Revisited (2008)

The Age of Commercialism

Sorry, this movie sucks

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

The acting in this movie is really good.

The most appealing thing about this movie is the sound. Much of the movie takes place in a fine old mansion. The sound captures that. There is usually lots going on off screen left and right. The dialogue is crystal clear. I found myself putting more attention into the sound than the visuals.This is a story about Britons of privilege in the 1920s. The movie captures the music, the costumes, the furnishings in a sumptuous way. The actor who plays the matriarch brilliantly exudes haughty disdain while technically being perfectly polite.The two lead characters have a gay relationship that never seems to go beyond a bit of flirtation. I found that simply not believable. It was a tease.The main theme of the movie is the way the Catholic church utterly ruins the lives of three people, who take religion far too seriously. According to the Catholics, this life is worthless, mere preparation for the hereafter. The preoccupation with sin hamstrings all three so they waste their lives worrying about petty rules. The Church teaches that Catholics are superior to everyone else, and blocks love with non- Catholics. Catholics shun anyone who breaks one of their rules, and feel smugly superior about doing that.Finally Catholics force a Latin death ceremony on an atheist who strenuously objects.The movie a bit of a downer as we watch one of the leads kill himself slowly with alcoholism.

Julian Jarrold's interpretation of Brideshead Revisited is not exactly bad, but it's not very good either and, for me, is a great disappointment. Evelyn Waugh is my favourite author, but even I admit that Brideshead is something of the cuckoo in the nest in his work (and he also admits in a preface to later editions that he did tone down the sumptuousness of the novel's first incarnation). It is not typical of his work. Having said that, it is still a damn sight more subtle than Jarrold's film.Matthew Goode as Charles Ryder does rather well as the middle-class lad who is bowled over by every aspect of the Catholic aristocratic family which takes him under its wing. But Ben Whishaw's Sebastian Flyte is a parody. It doesn't help that I can't stand Wishaw and have loathed his every performance, but I'll try not to let that influence this appraisal.In a sense Wishaw's two-dimensional portrayal of Sebastian as a young, weak, very gay, spoilt and rich man adrift in the world and life typifies what, in my view, is wrong with Jarrold's film. Where Waugh has a light touch and is subtle and ambiguous, Jarrold uses far too broad a brush to paint his picture and thereby kills the piece stone dead. It might survive for later generations as an entertaining enough period piece, but it can and should expect no higher praise than that.Certainly, there are a great many aspects of the film which score well: the production is good, the casting - except for bloody Wishaw - is decent, but without hitting the bullseye in translating the novel's essence to the silver screen, all those successes are rather pointless.

The themes of 'Brideshead Revisted' are not dissimilar to those of 'The Great Gatsby'; and there are later echoes in Alan Holingshurst's 'The Line of Beauty' as well. In all three stories, an outside becomes infatuated with the sublime life of the aristocracy; but eventually learns the painful lesson that he does not belong. I haven't read 'Brideshead', but on the basis of this film version, it's the inferior of the tales. Partly this is because the character of the outsider is never wholly established as such, and seems far too naturally at home in the privileged environment for the sense of not belonging to truly take hold. And partially, it's because what excludes him is not so much the wealth and power of his patrons, but their fanatical Catholicism, a theme that lacks contemporary traction and seems in any case incidental (if only the family had been less religious, everyone could have had a happy ending); whereas in 'Gatsby' and 'The Line of Beauty', the story essentially denies the fantasy of an open elite. I never felt there was much as stake here, save for the happiness of a central character who is in any case blessed with looks, talent and (a certain amount of) money of his own. But I'm still tempted to read the novel and see if there are depths to the story undug here.

Okay I admit that it took me awhile to see the film after it was released - three years that is. And I loved the very very beginning of the film, and thought this would be really good, that British touch of taking a sensuous, romantic period piece and making it work on film. But this doesn't cut it. Unfortunate - because M. Goode is really great in the lead role. He steals it for me, as does the young man who plays Sebastian. Emma T is wasted in the film - not her fault. The script isn't' as good as it could be, and there are moments where one could perhaps fault the editing, direction, adaptation? not sure. But it doesn't flow as well as it could flow.With all that said, may I suggest everyone enjoy the wonderful British TV series of the story. It really is great - not just great film, but great TV and great story telling.This doesn't work. Too bad - I'm sorry for all involved, it had potential.