Jess Paine
BartoThe Other Boleyn Girl: buy one, get one free
March 16th 2008 10:29
Bodice-heaving, history-making, monarch-breeding and incest are all on ripe display in The Other Boleyn Girl. The film charts the rise and fall of the much maligned Anne Boleyn, and her sweet (and therefore often forgotten) sister Mary in the court of King Henry the eighth.
Imaginative detail and smudging of historical fact are all to be expected in this adaptation from the novel of the same name by Philippa Gregory. Through the machinations of the sister’s father Henry takes Mary as his mistress, but a jealous Anne is soon turning his head and demanding more than mild Mary would have ever considered. Break with the Pope, form your own church and disavow your perfectly legitimate current Queen are among Anne’s requirements.
Nathalie Portman plays Anne Boleyn, and owns every frame of film (including the ones she is not in). She is scheming, ambitious and yet complex and somehow fragile. Anne comes across as her father’s creation, as desperate for power as he is, but much more intelligent. She is also the villain of the piece, but with Portman’s performance one can’t help but feel she is simply on the receiving end of some severe sexism which seems to imply that with ambition comes beheading.
Of course, Mary is proudly brought to you by Scarlett Johansson. She plays against type, for perhaps the first time in her entire career, as the sweet-natured victim of her family’s plots. Here it becomes apparent that being meek and accommodating is what makes a woman truly attractive. I am not the biggest fan of ScarJo, but I must say that her scenes with Portman carry a lot of chemistry and she really seems to be pushing herself (I normally find her one note, overrated, leading with her lips and followed closely by a husky whisper). She doesn't push herself too far from the norm however and comparisons might make one inclined to rename the movie The Other Portman Girl... if ScarJo changed her name. Her timid character is less charismatic but certainly sympathetic.
Eric Bana as Henry is the most underwritten. He is believable and ultimately unlikable as a result of his actions. I still find myself quite disturbed watching him in sex scenes, ever since Munich. Kristin Scott Thomas, Jim Sturgess and Ana Torrent are the other notable players, shining with minor roles.
The movie is unflinching in it’s representation of the way nobles used their children as pawns, and lives were cheaply ended. The brutality of the end, while unsurprising for those who know the history, is still shocking. Perhaps a complete lack of knowledge would make it all the more effective; the demise of a certain character might become a shock twist.
If what you want is a good, old fashioned costume romp then this is your film. It lacks a little something in the delivery that might make it award winning, something in the script fails to bring the oomph, but the performances shine through and the intrigue becomes more involving as the plot gathers pace.
Of some note is the odd use of closing title cards that explain everyone’s fate. It seems strangely full of pomp and aimed at historical credibility for a film that essentially buys into the ‘Anne as ambitious wench who got what she deserved’ mythology (most of the accusations have been proven to be false). It also seems to be setting itself up as some sort of prequel to a truly great historical film. Don’t want to give anything away, but we all know Portman’s history with prequels and playing the royal tragic mother. Look closely and Portman and Cate Blanchett next time you see them – you might spot the family resemblance.
Imaginative detail and smudging of historical fact are all to be expected in this adaptation from the novel of the same name by Philippa Gregory. Through the machinations of the sister’s father Henry takes Mary as his mistress, but a jealous Anne is soon turning his head and demanding more than mild Mary would have ever considered. Break with the Pope, form your own church and disavow your perfectly legitimate current Queen are among Anne’s requirements.
Nathalie Portman plays Anne Boleyn, and owns every frame of film (including the ones she is not in). She is scheming, ambitious and yet complex and somehow fragile. Anne comes across as her father’s creation, as desperate for power as he is, but much more intelligent. She is also the villain of the piece, but with Portman’s performance one can’t help but feel she is simply on the receiving end of some severe sexism which seems to imply that with ambition comes beheading.
Of course, Mary is proudly brought to you by Scarlett Johansson. She plays against type, for perhaps the first time in her entire career, as the sweet-natured victim of her family’s plots. Here it becomes apparent that being meek and accommodating is what makes a woman truly attractive. I am not the biggest fan of ScarJo, but I must say that her scenes with Portman carry a lot of chemistry and she really seems to be pushing herself (I normally find her one note, overrated, leading with her lips and followed closely by a husky whisper). She doesn't push herself too far from the norm however and comparisons might make one inclined to rename the movie The Other Portman Girl... if ScarJo changed her name. Her timid character is less charismatic but certainly sympathetic.
Eric Bana as Henry is the most underwritten. He is believable and ultimately unlikable as a result of his actions. I still find myself quite disturbed watching him in sex scenes, ever since Munich. Kristin Scott Thomas, Jim Sturgess and Ana Torrent are the other notable players, shining with minor roles.
The movie is unflinching in it’s representation of the way nobles used their children as pawns, and lives were cheaply ended. The brutality of the end, while unsurprising for those who know the history, is still shocking. Perhaps a complete lack of knowledge would make it all the more effective; the demise of a certain character might become a shock twist.
If what you want is a good, old fashioned costume romp then this is your film. It lacks a little something in the delivery that might make it award winning, something in the script fails to bring the oomph, but the performances shine through and the intrigue becomes more involving as the plot gathers pace.
Of some note is the odd use of closing title cards that explain everyone’s fate. It seems strangely full of pomp and aimed at historical credibility for a film that essentially buys into the ‘Anne as ambitious wench who got what she deserved’ mythology (most of the accusations have been proven to be false). It also seems to be setting itself up as some sort of prequel to a truly great historical film. Don’t want to give anything away, but we all know Portman’s history with prequels and playing the royal tragic mother. Look closely and Portman and Cate Blanchett next time you see them – you might spot the family resemblance.
| 67 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
love the review, love your style, you should be in print.
your secret admirer
Comment by Harry
World Art
Sydney Diary
Personals
Video Games
Brisbane Diarystar
Films Found
Zoo Parent