Home

Advertisement

Customize

Previous 20

Jun. 21st, 2009

Blue

James McAvoy - "Three Days of Rain", uma fã brasileira em Londres!

 Desde que soube que James McAvoy ia fazer uma peça em Londres eu não conseguia pensar em outra coisa. A possibilidade de ver meu ator favorito, no auge, fazendo aquilo que me tornou uma fã dedicada - atuando - era por demais tentadora. É claro que o dinheiro não estava sobrando, minhas férias ainda estavam distantes, enfim, era tudo uma idéia um pouco extravagante e imprudente de se levar adiante...mas era isso tudo exatamente que a tornava excitante e especial. Qual é a graça quando tudo é fácil demais, não? Então, com algum planejamento e apertos no orçamento, vi que era possível sim realizar meu sonho. E comecei a organizar meus planos para a viagem. Também seria uma oportunidade única de visitar uma amiga que eu não via há anos, e que estava mudando-se da Europa. Tudo conspirava para que eu fosse, e assim, no dia 19 de April, eu embarcava com grandes expectativas rumo ao Velho Mundo...

Cheguei em Londres numa segunda-feira ( e ficaria na cidade até sábado) e até sair do aeroporto, pegar metrô e achar o hostel, quando olhei já era quase noite. Eu estava bem no centro da agitação, em Picadilly Circus, e foi super emocionante sair do hostel e ver aquela povo nas ruas, os ônibus vermelhos, a estátua de Eros...e logo adiante, bem pertinho mesmo, vi o cartaz da peça e o teatro Apollo. Eu já tinha comprado um ingresso para sexta-feira, mas é claro que pretendia assistir a peça mais de uma vez e estava PERTO demais pra reistir à tentação de dar um pulo no teatro e saber se ainda havia lugares para a apresentação daquela noite (que jetlag que nada!). Quando cheguei lá, a mulher disse que tinha lugar na fila E. Perguntei se não tinha nada mais próximo do palco. “Tem a fila A”, ela disse. Bom, pensei, mais próximo que isso só no colo do James (hmmm, não era má idéia! ;- ) ). Cheguei a elaborar se valia a pena assistir a peça pela primeira vez justo quando tinha acabado de chegar de viagem e estava tão cansada, mas a ponderação do meu lado razoável deve ter durado uns cinco segundos. A possibilidade de ver o James tão de perto era totalmente irresistível.



        James estava bem pertinho...o Teatro Apollo, no meio da deliciosa muvuca em Picadilly Circus 


Eu estava MUITO grudada no palco, o lugar não podia ser melhor. Antes da peça começar me bateu um pânico – imagina se o James hoje tirou o dia de folga, e vou ter que assistir a peça com o substituto!
Ah, eu pediria o dinheiro de volta, sem dúvida...mas, e a frustração? Melhor ficar quieta e  pensar positivo.

 Quando ele entrou estava muito escuro no palco, e por alguns instantes achei que a pessoa ali era diferente do que eu imaginava, que não era o James. Mesmo quando ele começou a falar eu ainda não acreditava...acho que estava em choque de ver um ator e um cara que admiro tanto tão de perto, encarando as pessoas nas primeiras filas, dizendo seu texto na beirinha do palco (se ele desse um passo em falso, podia cair no meu colo! ;- ) )...eu nem conseguia raciocinar direito. Me senti uma privilegiada por assistir uma apresentação que era exclusiva nossa, das pessoas que estavam no belo e compacto Teatro Apollo naquela noite, naquele momento. Era um privilégio não só ver o James, mas vê-lo atuando.





                     Fachada do teatro e o letreiro, acima, que se via assim que saíamos da estação Picadilly                                
 

 Depois falo mais um pouco sobre a peça, que é ótima. Antes de mais nada, uma breve nota sobre um detalhe totalmente inesperado e desagradável -  assim que cheguei no hostel, a primeira coisa que fiz foi testar minha câmera, e ela não dava sinais de vida. Achei que fossem as pilhas, então comprei novas numa lojinha perto do hostel. Nada. Entrei em pânico – como eu tiraria fotos da viagem, e pior, como tiraria fotos do James?!

 Então, voltando ao Teatro Apollo, a peça terminara e eu estava maravilhada e nem um pouco cansada, louca pra correr para a porta de trás do teatro e ver o James de perto pela primeira vez. Aí me lembrei que não ia poder filmar nem tirar retratos...que frustração! Tratei então de comprar um programa da peça e pensei “bom, pelo menos digo um ‘hello’ pra ele e peço um autógrafo!” Por ser segunda-feira, imaginei que haveria poucas pessoas lá. Que nada! Estava lotado, e nem consegui chegar perto dele. Passei o programa pro James (e o Nigel, o outro ator) autografar, mas não consegui dizer o quanto tinha adorado a peça e sua interpretação, nem tirar fotos. Mas foi maravilhoso vê-lo de perto, de qualquer jeito...ele sempre perguntava antes de voltar pro teatro se alguém ainda tinha mais alguma coisa pra ele assinar. Muito fofo, muito dedicado...e olha que muita gente enchia o saco (sempre rolava o indefectível caçador de autógrafos, com um monte de fotos pra ele assinar – que depois serão vendidas no Ebay. Idiotas!) e o cara ali, sempre na maior paciência. Um exemplo de como uma pessoa pode obter fama e reconhecimento sem precisar posar de estrela.   

  

                                    Um dos cartazes na porta do teatro..."uma atuação arrebatadora"


No dia seguinte, terça, ainda estava em alfa, pensando em James e na peça maravilhosa. Mas de volta a realidade: o lance da máquina fotográfica estava me deixando muito frustrada, mas felizmente minha amiga (a que fui encontrar em Londres) me emprestou a sua, e ficou de me mandar as fotos depois; mas acabei comprando um memory card, fiquei com medo do dela lotar. E eu planejava tirar muitas, muitas fotos!

Felizinha, de câmera nas mãos, rumei para o teatro aquela noite depois de conseguir um desconto excelente no quiosque da TKTs. O ingresso era para um lugar muito bom, mas não tão perto do palco como o da noite anterior. Para superar a “distância” (qualquer lugar duas fileiras depois do palco é longe demais do James! ;-D), contei com meu simpático binóculo que também adquiri por um bom preço, como souvenir da London Eye. Mesmo que eu não tivesse um binóculo, em frente aos assentos havia vários disponíveis, presos num painel. Era só colocar uma moedinha de 50 pence, que seria devolvida depois que o binóculo voltasse ao seu lugar.

                           


            Programa da peça com os trabalhos e os prêmios ganhos por James e Nigel Harman, e os autógrafos

Senti falta de estar na primeira fila, mas foi bom também assistir a peça de uma certa distância. O cenário é muito bonito – o apartamento detonado e vazio onde o casal de irmãos Walker e Nan e o amigo Pip se reunem no primeiro ato transforma-se num aconchegante espaço no segundo. O que percebemos no futuro não nos dá idéia do que aconteceu no passado, e essa é uma das mensagens da peça – o apê também reflete esta noção. São três dias de chuva, e ela cai "de verdade" no palco, o que causa um efeito muito bonito (e nos brinda com um James de camiseta branca justinha, deliciosamente molhado... :-P)

Os 3 atores são ótimos, mas a distância também me fez perceber o domínio que o James tem do palco, sua segurança - e sua predominância sobre os outros dois. Ele é um ator de extrema fisicalidade, e absurdamente expressivo – mesmo sem a ajuda do binóculo, de longe, a gente vê os olhos dele brilhando enquanto as lágrimas se formam, mesmo que isso tenha acontecido depois de uma cena hilária (no caso do embate cômico entre Pip e Walker, sendo que o último é uma gangorra de sentimentos extremos). Temos também um momento “o encontro de Robbie e Cee no café”, no qual o tímido e calado Ned expressa no rosto todas as emoções que a gagueira o fazia conter. De arrepiar.




                                                                                         Walker, Ned e James...na assinatura! ;-)

Esse dia, terça-feira, 21, era o aniversário do James (e da rainha!
J).
Na verdade, aniversário extra-oficial, porque ele nunca confirmou exatamente o mês e o dia. No final da peça, e no momento dos autógrafos, fiquei esperando alguém soltar um “happy birthday”, mas ninguém se manifestou então fiquei na minha. Esse era também o dia em que teria um contato de verdade com ele – estava bem perto da saída do teatro, e ao contrário de segunda, não tinha ninguém na minha frente e eu tinha uma câmera! J Eu havia levado um retrato muito bonito feito pelo meu chefe, que é um tremendo desenhista. Fui uma das primeiras a falar com o James, e quando ele olhou o desenho fez uma cara de “wow!” O jeito dele é a coisa mais linda do mundo...é difícil de explicar. Eu estava comentando com uma menina de um forum que o que eu acho fascinante é o mix bem equilibrado entre uma tremenda sensibilidade, um carinho em relação às pessoas, uma doçura, com a segurança, a sensualidade, o domínio da situação. O feminino dos sentimentos e emoções com a presença, a fisicalidade totalmente masculina, porque não existe nada de feminino na postura dele, nos gestos, no jeito de andar, na maneira como te olha. Ele tem muita presença, e mesmo no meio do caos de gente de todas as partes do mundo, querendo autógrafos, querendo beijos (era muito fofa, quase ingênua, a maneira com que ele dizia “Sou um homem casado!”), querendo atenção, ele permanecia calmo e dominava o turbilhão.

 




                                        
                                               Terça - Feira, 21 de Abril...aniversário (extra-oficial) do James!


Ainda tinha tempo de conversar com um ou com outro, fazer comentários engraçados sobre alguma foto que ele estava assinando (“Good God, this is horrific!”), relembrar as pessoas que já tinham assistido a peça...e no final ele sempre perguntava se já tinha assinado tudo, se faltou alguém, e só então dava um tchauzinho e entrava. Pra ver como o timing do cara é perfeito, ele fazia tudo isso em 6, 8 min no máximo, e ninguém saía de cara emburrada por falta de autógrafo num papelzinho que fosse.



O desenho que ele autografou...em outro dia, pedi pro James escrever meu nome, e ele acabou assinando de novo!


Acho que uma boa definição é que o James tem uma presença que domina, mas não esmaga. Deve ser uma delícia trabalhar com ele, porque como ator ele não está ligado só em sua própria performance, em ser uma estrela. A maneira como ele agia na saída do teatro mostrou como o cara é conectado ao outro tanto quanto a si próprio. Acho que ele daria um excelente diretor, porque tem uma visão global, inclusive para as minúcias, é capaz de comandar mas também agregar.

Todo mundo sabe que o James não é um cara alto e fortão, um típico "leading man", mas ele tem aquela beleza serena e uma sensualidade inata, natural, e nos sentimos imediatamente atraídas por ele - os sorrisos meio bobos das mulheres que corriam para a "stage door" são uma prova disso. O fato do James não ser tão tipicamente "perfeito" com os Brad Pitts da vida é uma vantagem para ele, pois o deixa com mais opções de papéis variados, de nerd a herói romântico. É como a Keira comentou, quando ele fez a audição para o papel de Robbie - um personagem descrito no livro como alto e forte - ela já tinha contracenado com pelo menos outros 2 bons atores que atendiam mais o tipo físico do personagem, mas o James "chegou aos 1,90m diante de nossos olhos" e simplesmente esmagou a concorrência fazendo o que ele faz de melhor: tornando-se aquele personagem. Quando ele saiu a Keira disse que todos ficaram em silêncio por uns 10 min, e depois só se ouviu um “Fuck!” O papel era dele.
 


Essa magia acontece diante de nosso olhos quando assistimos "Three Days of Rain". No primeiro ato da peça, James é Walker, filho de um arquiteto famoso que tinha acabado de morrer. O rapaz é excitável, energético, loquaz, mas também tem tendências depressivas - pode-se dizer que Walker é bipolar, equilibrando-se em uma linha fina entre o maníaco depressivo e o louco definitivo. No segundo ato ele transforma-se no quieto, tímido Ned, pai de Walker. O que Walker tem de verborrágico Ned tem de lacônico, e ainda assim, pai e filho são incrivelmente parecidos: inteligentes, solitários, e com dificuldades para interagir com o mundo e seus habitantes ("I feel I'm not a people's person anymore", diz Walker logo no início da peça). O pai projeta no filho coisas impossíveis, e vice-versa. É bonito, e triste, acompanhar a história de duas pessoas que poderiam ter se conhecido - e vivido - melhor mas perdem-se entre expectativas e frustrações. 


Quarta-feira, dia 22, foi um dia muito especial. Eu tinha marcado com uma menina do fórum do IMDb (inglesa, mas que não morava em Londres) de nos encontrarmos na entrada do teatro, antes da matinê (às 15:00h) começar. Achei que seria o melhor momento para ver o James com calma, quando geralmente menos pessoas estão esperando, e finalmente entregar os presentes que tinha levado – uma camisa da seleção brasileira de futebol e um livro, não muito grande, com fotos sobre o Brasil e poesias bilingue – e talvez arriscar o pedido de uma foto juntos. Cheguei bem cedo, porque ele poderia aparecer em qualquer horário entre 13:00h até alguns minutos antes da peça começar. Quando passavam das 14:15h, comecei a me preocupar...algumas vezes o James entrava pela entrada principal ao invés da lateral, principalmente se ele via os insuportáveis caçadores de autógrafos profissionais esperando, e uma dessas desagradáveis criaturas já estava ali à postos, com uma maleta cheia de fotos e posters de filmes nas mãos. A atriz da peça, Lindsey Marshall (que fez a Cleópatra na série “Roma”) já tinha chegado e saído de novo. Aí então tivemos uma visão privilegiada – os 3 atores vindo juntinhos, lado a lado, em direção à entrada lateral. Incrível ninguém ter tido presença de espírito de tirar uma foto (pelo menos não achei nenhuma na net), acho que ficou todo mundo meio bobo! O Nigel e a Lindsey entraram rapidinho, sem nem parar, deixando o James entregue às “feras”. J Mas ele estava num excelente humor, e apesar de já em cima da hora de começar a se preparar para a apresentação, conversou um pouquinho, deixou o pessoal tirar fotos e assinou alguns autógrafos. Quando ele se despediu e já ia entrando, entreguei a sacolinha com os presentes e disse “I hope you like it!”.  Ele fez um “Oh, you shouldn’t...thank you very, very much!” (o James tem esse hábito de ficar repetindo os “very” J). Pena que não deu pra ele ver o presente na hora, mas também não ia entregar a camisa toda desfraldada...fiquei feliz dele ter recebido, e esperava que ele abrisse a sacolinha de curiosidade, para eu poder comentar algo com ele depois.

Esse momentos passam mais rápido do que a gente gostaria...seria tão bom poder ter um gravador no cérebro, e depois ficar repassando a cena até cansar. Porque, por mais acessível e simples, anti-estrela, que seja o James, ele ainda é um objeto de admiração – até aquele momento, à distância – para mim e centenas de outros fãs que batiam ponto diariamente na porta do Teatro Apollo. Não tem como não surtar um pouco, não ficar desorientada com o fato de que, sim, esse cara que você adora está falando com você. Só com você. Te olhando nos olhos. O tempo pára, parece que não existe mais ninguém em volta, e ainda assim você não está totalmente no momento, porque o momento é surreal, quase irreal, demais. Sim, é complexo! ;-) 







                                                     James e os (as) fãs, na matinê de quarta-feira, 22 de Abril


Nesse dia eu resolvi não assistir a peça. Afinal, eu também tinha a Londres pra fazer um pouco de
turismo, não podia ser só James (mas que era uma tentação, era! ;-)). Marquei com a inglesa de nos encontrarmos ali na porta dos fundos depois que ela assitisse a matinê, e rumei pra National Gallery, que fica em Trafalgar Square,  nas proximidades de Picadilly. Mas, andando por aquele belo museu, não conseguia me concentrar nas obras de arte. Ficava pensando no James e no jeito muito fofo com que ele lidava com os (as, na maioria, claro) fãs. É algo tão amigável, e ele fala com você como se ele não compreendesse bem a idéia de “fãs” e “distância”, como se todos pudessem ser amigos dele em potencial. É algo que pode ser muito tentador, mas frustrante ao mesmo tempo, porque a gente cai em sí e percebe a chance ínfima (menor do que ganhar sozinho na megasena) dele realmente vir a ser um amigo, ou, nos sonhos mais inalcançáveis, um algo mais. Damn you, James McAvoy! ;- )

Voltei pro teatro e estava num lugar bem legal, perto da porta de saída. A peça acabou e não estava muito tumultuado, o pessoal esperava calmamente a chance de falar com ele. Quando o James saiu ele veio direto pro meu lado, aí resolvi perguntar sobre a blusa da seleção (sei que o rapaz adora futebol...bom, nem tudo é perfeito! J Ele torce pelos Celtics na Escócia). Ele deu um sorrisão e ficou todo animadinho “That was brilliant, thank you!” (ou algo assim...desculpem, mas eu estava um pouco fora de mim naquele momento!) Aproveitei a deixa e perguntei “James, será que você tirava uma foto comigo quando acabar?”, porque sei que ele quer primeiro ter a certeza de que autografou tudo que os fãs levaram, antes de tirar fotos e essas coisas. Ele disse claro, era só ele atender o resto do pessoal. E lá foi ele.

 

                                James interagindo, e meu dedo no botão da camera, pronta pra fotografar! :-)
                                    Photo by PurpleSheep - Thank you! ;-) 
 http://www.flickr.com/sheeppurple


Só um parêntese para um detalhe muito importante, principalmente pra quem é uma legítima fã do James – os olhos.  Eu posso não ter visto muitos olhos azuis na minha vida, mas com certeza absoluta nunca vi um par de olhos azuis tão bonitos e luminosos como os dele. Na hora que ele virou pra mim, sinceramente não sei como consegui articular uma frase gramaticamente correta - e em inglês! Ele estava tão bonito, de um jeito despojado, simples. A menina ao meu lado conseguiu falar o que todo mundo queria, mas não tinha coragem ou falta de vergonha suficiente "James, pára quieto um pouquinho pra eu bater uma foto desses olhos maravilhosos!" Todo mundo riu, e ele fez uma cara engraçada, dando umas piscadelas. Aí ele fez algum comentário sobre a caneta azul turquesa com que ele estava assinando os autógrafos, mas não captei bem. Eu já estava em alfa, e o melhor ainda estava por vir!




                                                             Esses olhos lindos...e um monte de fãs embevecidas! ;-)
                                                                Photo by PurpleSheep
  http://www.flickr.com/sheeppurple

 O James fez a rodada de autógrafos, aí algumas meninas do outro lado começaram a pedir fotos. Fiquei um pouco frustrada, porque ele posou um bocado de tempo e eu poderia ter filmado ou tirado algumas fotos legais...o problema é que não queria deixar o lugar onde estava. Aí ele foi tirar uma foto com a garota do "seus olhos maravilhosos", e comecei a grilar que ele ia acabar me pulando. Mas quando não tinha mais ninguém ele disse "now you", pegou minha máquina, eu me posicionei ao seu lado, ele esticou o braço e bateu a foto ele mesmo. Acho que ele já virou craque na "foto-bracinho", e a maioria que vi fica perfeitamente enquadrada! É lógico que antes de ver a minha bateu um pânico, tipo "claro que logo a minha vai ficar uma porcaria, devo ter piscado, ele deve ter cortado metade da minha cara - ou pior! - da cara dele...” Mas para minha infinita surpresa e felicidade, a foto ficou boa, captando a beleza do azul dos olhos e um sorriso aberto do James, coisa não muito comum nas outras fotos com fãs.


O que mais posso dizer?  ;-)

P.S. - Só um detalhe...o memory card da camera não lotou! Eu imaginava tirar milhares de fotos do James, mas quando estava na stage door, só sentia vontade de ficar olhando pra ele, observando seu jeito de lidar com as fãs, ou só ficar curtindo mesmo o momento. Voltei com poucas fotos, mas a mais importante de todas valheu muito a pena! :-D


Jun. 12th, 2009

Blue

James McAvoy - "Three Days of Rain"

Going to London, watching the play and meeting James – what an event! It’s something I won’t forget, as long as I live.

I arrived on Monday, for a whole week in London. I was so excited! I had been to London about 15 years ago, and only for 3 days, so I had a lot of activities planned already – a tour through the city, lots of museums and two concerts booked at the Barbican. And I would also meet an old friend, whom I haven't seen in years, since she moved to Europe. But the main reason I was going to London was to watch “Three Days of Rain”. And hoping for a chance to meet James.



As soon as I arrived, I went to the Apollo to see if they still had nice seats available. First the girl said they had a very good seat, E-something, but then I asked her for one that would be even closer to the stage, and that’s how I got row A.

When he entered the stage, I was so nervous…it was dark and I was certain that it was the understudy, he looked different from the James I imagined. He began talking, and I was still under the impression it wasn’t him. I think my brain still had a hard time accepting that yes, I was in London and yes, it was James McAvoy right in front of me!

I loved the way James played Walker; loved his energy, his presence, the way he kept moving and talking, more like rambling. How he completely owned the stage. I loved the way his cut out jeans kept falling a bit below the navel, revealing the white calvin klein. I loved that his belly kept showing when he raised his arms, and that we could see spit flowing freely when he literally spitted “sports?!” to Pip. The tears forming in his eyes when he finds out about Pip and Nan. The ritual of burning the journal, the way he looked übber sexy just standing there, looking at the flames. He completely mesmerized me from the moment he entered the darkned stage, carrying the flashlight as he spoke Walker's first lines:

"Meanwhile, back in the city...two nights of insomnia...in this room, in the dark...listening...soaking up the Stravinsky of it...no end to the sounds in a city...something happens somewhere, makes a noise, the noise travels, charts the distance: The Story of a Moment.
God, I need to sleep!
Yes. All right. Begin!"



The three actors had a great interaction, and I really enjoyed Nigel Harman as Pip, how he was such a complete opposite of Walker: optimist, all sweetness and light and empathic goodness, and a bit of an oblivious idiot. Nigel's, and his and James' scenes together generated some of the biggest laughs in the first act, especially when Pip goes on and on about Walker being "in so much pain" and his own theory on Oedipus ("Do the Fucking Math!"). Lyndsey Marshal was good too, as the worried, motherly older sister. Nan was nice and bland, but still made us care about her and her long-suffering worries with her nearly crazy, strayed younger brother.





       
Some reviewers, when talking about Walker, said the character was too loud and annoying, and that James overacted while playing him. All I saw was a wonderful performance; after all, Walker was supposed to be over the top all the way, and James nailed the young man's manic-depressive, bipolar, suffering, dark, obnoxious, intellectual-chic but still somehow likeable persona. One of the new things he brought to the character, nearly at the end of the run, was a stutter, when Walker was speaking too fast or was too nervous/excited. It was great; it made sense to see Walker running with the words and stuttering because of it, since he was so prolix and talked so fast and had so many things and ideas and feelings inside his head that he wanted to translate into words. And it made for a great connection with his faher Ned, as we would see in the second act.
I enjoyed Walker so much I wished the play would be all about him - or at least, that there would be a play only about him. Three Days of Wind? ;-)

 

But of course, I was still excited for Act 2, and to meet Ned, Walker's shy, silent and talented father. James' performance as Ned won the most enthusiastic accolades, maybe because of the flawless stutter performed on stage, maybe because he was the kind of character who had an immense inner life of feelings and emotions that he struggled to keep inside because of the difficulties of expressing them with spoken (and even written, as we could see by the laconic entries in his journal) words, the kind of damaged character that makes James excels as an actor, that allowed him to perform silently, using his face and body language to communicate with the audience. But first, intermission, and the chance to check the beauty of the old and lovely Apollo Theatre. It reminded me of a smaller Theatro Municipal in Rio de Janeiro; it was a pity the audience couldn't take pictures inside the Apollo, but some managed to... ;-)






                                Photos by PurpleSheep  http://www.flickr.com/people/sheeppurple/

During the final moments of the intermission I knew that James would be wandering through the stage, making coffee, drawing, oblivious to the chatter of those returning to their seats. I just sat there and watched him, feeling that it was such a privilege to be there, seeing my favorite actor, probably the best actor in the world right now (to me, the best) just being totally in character, inside Ned's own private and silent world, acting subtly, when he wasn't even supposed to be there.

I have to say that James looked gorgeous as Ned. The period outfit, and the nicely combed hair fitted him so well; he always looks great when playing characters like Robbie and Ned, because there's something classical, old-school-acting about James, as if he belonged to another era

.



James was briliant as Ned, but I already thought he had been brilliant as Walker. The two characters couldn't be more different, and yet, so alike. They were both lonely, intelligent, and struggled to express themselves and to be understood - Ned and his silence, caused mostly because of a stutter that mortified him, and Walker with his excess of words.  But I understand why Ned was more loved, im general. He's the kind of character who makes our heart ache for him, we want to cuddle him and take him home. There were so many great Ned moments, as many as there have been Walker's - the first time he spoke, stuttetering (it sounded so natural, it was as if someone like Ned wouldn't utter words any other way); when he was talking to Lena about the "intentions, and what actually happens", how his eyes brighten with tears and how intensely he looks at Lena when she says how much greatness he'll achieve; the passion with which Ned holds Lina (James' natural sexuality is one of the most endearing things about him), the emotional confrontantion with Theo; when he's talking about keeping a journal, not a diary, because "I'm a boy!" (biggest laugh of the evening, he looked so cute when he said it!).  And this:

"I'm always w-watching you...whenever you're here...I can't help it. (...) It's awful. I don't want it...I d-don't expect to have things...like other people, but I'm always...th-thinking of you.
I kn-know nothing can come of it...I know. I can't stop it, though. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry..." 




So beautiful.

I also have to mention that James/Ned looked absolutely gorgeous wearing a white t-shirt and white boxers, while making out with Lina on the matress. It was such a hot moment. And when he just stood there, in the artificial rain, getting soaked...only this time he had pajama pants over the boxers! ;-)

I thought that Lyndsey as Lina was great, but Nigel as Theo was like Pip with less humour. Maybe it made sense, though, because Theo was someone with such a boring inner life, and his son Pip would follow the same path of his father, only being funny and sympathetic  while being an idiot (Theo just seemed to be and acted like an idiot). Also, after the confrontation with Ned, Theo didn't have much to do except stand there in the rain getting wet. The second act was all about Ned...and good for us, who are all about James! :-)


I loved "Three Days of Rain"; James of course was the main draw for me, but it was great seeing him acting in such an intelligent, well-built play, and Nigel Harman and Lyndsey Marshal are such good actors too. Everything was beautiful and nicely put together: the apartment scenery, the music, lightning, clothes, the rain effect. Plus the Apollo Theatre was the ideal place for the play, not too big and with an intimate atmosphere, something that made us feel closer to the actors and to be absorbed into the story.

It was a wonderful opportunity to see what a versatile actor James is, and how commited he is to the roles he plays. He makes me proud to be a fan. 


 

"I don't waste words. I can't...afford to."

 


Feb. 14th, 2009

Blue

ATONEMENT - More symbolisms


FICTION, METAFICTION  AND SYMBOLISMS


From IMDb's ATONEMENT board: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783233/board

I think Atonement is all about the power of stories and how they affect lives. Briony tells a story when she was a girl that ultimately keeps Robbie and Cecilia apart and even contributes to their deaths. Robbie would not have been in the army and Cecilia wouldn't have been a nurse. I have no remorse for Briony because at the end she states that "she" gave them happiness. She is a very self centered individual and as an author she sacrifices art for what a reader wants. As Robbie said, "No Rhymes" just write a true account and she could not do it. The movie is brilliant in how it realizes the apartment scene because Briony is played very uncomfortably and very stilted by the actress. I believe Joe Wright made this decision because that was when Briony the author was really writing herself and it was hard for her to make her a character as she had done with her younger self.
by seanmicsu



"I think Atonement is all about the power of stories and how they affect lives." --This is pretty much a perfect assessment of the film.

When I first came across your post, I have to be honest. I was like meta-wha..? I see meta-anything, and my brain freezes. To the unfamiliar, Wiki defines it as "a type of fiction that self-consciously addresses the devices of fiction... posing questions about the relationship between fiction and reality..." Thanks, Wiki!

Okay, this is deep. What purpose is served by making it seem Robbie and Cee end well? Their sad end is a forgone conclusion, so WHY does Briony concoct a happy one? This is where people bring their own rationalizations. The reasons they attribute to Briony are more of a reflection of their own world view than that of the character.

I find it ironic that while Briony is as much to blame for BOTH endings, both happy and tragic, neither would exist without her.

I don't know how much of her motivation for doing so is explained in the book, but the film is very brief and by no means definitive on this point. Her actions can be seen as either selfish or repentant, egomaniacal or unconditionally sad. It is courageous of the filmmakers to leave it so openly interpretable.

So what does Atonement say about the writer and the power of stories? 'Cause in the end, the book is a commentary on the purpose of fiction. It doesn't come clean with any answers but it brings up a lot of questions. Why do we have happy endings? Is there a deeper catharsis when tragedy leaves its mark? What are the conditions for this catharsis so the reader feels redeemed for the experience rather than depressed and angry? And for me, is there a value in making this distinction?
by gerberdais



Atonement reminds me of that masterpiece of a movie called Blow Up, directed by Michelangelo Antonioni. As in Blow Up, in Atonement we have this dynamic between reality and fiction, which is the most haunting thing about them. In Blow Up (based on one of the best short stories you would read, Julio Cortazar's Las babas del Diablo), a fashion photographer happens to discover a crime while taking pictures in a park --or that's what he thinks up until the amazingly ironic, metafiction-related end.
by Christian-Doig



What I love about Atonement is its complexety, altough the story - and the film - appears to be simple and uncomplicated. But there are so many things going on - one being how we relate to the story of Briony, Robbie and Cee as if it were real, and how we judge the characters based on our sense of reality. Too many people who have seen the film asked me later if it was based on a true story - I find this fascinating, because the film carries itself almost like a haunting fable, allegoric, even surreal at some points. Still, the tragic events, the pain of those characters resonate so much with us, that it's like we're projecting ourselves in a situation like that, imagining how it would be to betray someone we love, to be the one betrayed, to never be able to put things right again, to never be able to reconstruct our lives, to unexpectedly have our lives turned upside down, because of small, insignificant things we didn't care about. The sadness of it all is that, in life, there are so many things which escape our control. Not everyone will get a happy ending, even the ones who deserve it.

When we watch the end of Atonement, and see how the lives of Robbie and Cee could have been, we face a dilemma: either we accept that our notion of happy endings, for life in general, can be as improbable as that happy ending for Cee and Robbie we see on the screen, or we accept that sometimes fiction can heal, and could make real life better or at least, tolerable. And maybe that's why a lot of people feel frustrated or confused by the ending of Atonement; they don't know if they have to deal with it on the levels of reality or mere fiction. 
by cris-a



Fiction exists to complete reality, to make justice and give us --the readers, the viewers-- freedom (and not only for the duration of the movie). Appearances have a reality of their own whenever you think of how different they can get from every different person that approaches the same object/subject. It's like all those female teens who read Twilight, and then, out of the many smart ones who didn't dig the screen adaptation at all, they are still so different from each other because at the end it's not about the outside reality --not even of a novel or a flick--, but about who they are as individuals. And that affects everything we touch with our minds. The subjectivity in regards to fiction and the "real" world is the central theme to Atonement, and it is just fascinating to reckon.
by Christian-Doig



I think the library scene, quasi-crucifiction and all, is symbolic of the films postmodernity; the combining of their bodies with the accoutrements of the bookcase (the stepladder, shelves, books etc) is a quiet indication of their fictionality, as much as they are subsumed by each other, they are inevitably bound to their own grand narrative. Interestingly, I found Bryony's own symbolism was the most provocative; from the start it is clear she is the omniscient narrator. This is signified by her play at the beginning, perhaps underpinned by being the first character on screen, and then at the end when we find she has written what we, the audience, think has been a semblence of 'reality' it brings to the fore how powerful her character is, and how she she has given to and taken from her protagonists. For example, she took away their love, and then gives it back to them in her own piece of fiction. Interestingly again she removes herself from their happiness in her fictionalised ending; we see them through her eyes, we see their relationship as one based on physicality, denoted by Cecelia calming him down by kissing him, the almost sordid reference to the unmade bed and Robbie erupting in anger, a personality trait that had not surfaced before. Her portrayal of the couple is very intimate and is almost uncomfortable to watch, as if the audience feel they are intruding, just like Bryony does.

Just as an aside, I actually felt pity for Bryony; she is also a victim of her creation and shows perhaps more humility than cecelia does in the opening segment. She is more human, I think, than the mythological Cecelia and Robbie; she is envious of her older sister, she clearly has a school girl crush on Robbie and does something which is irrevocable out of jealousy and anger. I have to remind myself that they are characters as well as symbols, as much as we all get carried away with our own hypothesis.
by emmaisabutterfly



It could hardly be their own grand narrative in that the Robbie and Cee the audience comes to know in the course of the film are really characters in Briony's fictionalized account of events. If anything, its Briony's grand narrative. She is the one writing the story, controlling the perspective, even creating events. The fictionalized Robbie and Cee (who are all the audience ever really sees) are just objects in the world of Briony's narrative and, as such, are not in the position to define themselves within the conext of their own grand narrative.

It is thought provoking, though. What would you say is the grand narrative reflected in this film?
 by jessikaaguilar



This was rather the point I was trying to make; I do not refer to Cee and Robbies grand narrative as their own construct, but one that is enforced upon them. When I say they are bound to their own grand narrative I refer to their textuality; they exist as characters which the audience build a relationship with but also as subtext in the fiction of Bryony. I agree that fundamentally Bryony is the creator of their grand narrative, but as a character she also has a grand narrative; the film really exists on two levels.

"What would you say is the grand narrative reflected in this film?" I take it by this you mean which is the true grand narrative? Which is most linear and transparent? If this is what you mean then I would say it is actually a combination of both story lines; that of Bryony and the story of Cee and Robbie which is true, we must remember, to a certain point but distorted through it's regurgitation. Technically speaking a grand narrative is something which explains, posthumously, knowledge and experience, so really the only metanarrative which is viable is Bryony's.

Just in reference to your point about Robbie + Cee being a creation of Briony (or rather your reference to a reference you thought I'd made...lol) I see Robbie and Cee as only created by Briony in their narrative, if you think of the characters as fibres, indeed some larger than others, then Briony would have sewn those fibres together; this is what I mean by it being Brionys narrative. I know they are 'real' characters, but through Briony's interpretation of events they could have become distorted ~Cee says of Briony - 'She can be rather fanciful'~. In regard to your point as well, INeedUnguent, she couldn't have reconstructed that scene completely factually, so some of it we have to admit is her interpretation. They say that when you remember childhood as an adult you remember it with childish emotions; I think the latter is perhaps why we see Robbie and Cee in such extremes, and why their characters are so polarised. To perhaps stretch this point beyond its limit, at the beginning of the film we see some scenes repeat themselves, through different perspectives, and then we settle into one relatively linear sequence, so who's perspective did we settle into? We know it's not the 'true' perspective as we are told at the end, so the only real conclusion is that it is Briony's.

Interesting point about the father and the holy spirit, I can't claim I've studied much biblical imagery but I like the idea. Along that theme would you say the biblical imagery extends to the women around him? I'm not sure about it, could have been more of an allegorical thing, like he sacrificed himself for others sins. Hmmmm....
by emmaisabutterfly



Anyway, when Briony and Fiona rush out to help the wounded, Briony suddenly gets a glimpse of Robbie...or at least, someone that looks exactly like James McAvoy that isn't credited :), but we all know it was Robbie.

Now, if this was after the Dunkirk evacuation, it COULD be Robbie's ghost since he had died in France before departure, or Robbie "rose from the dead on the 3rd day", much like Jesus Christ had, to prove himself to others.



Interesting. It was James McAvoy, pinkconverse, I caught that when I finally watched the movie on DVD for the first time. I was shocked because I didn't see him in on my first viewing at the theatre, it's just a flash but it is definitely him. We know that Robbie died on the last day of the evacuation so that would have been immediately before the evacuees reached Briony's hospital, and possibly, depending how long it took to evacuate and get there, the same day she "thought" she saw him.

To add to the significance of the number 3 here, it is also interesting that Briony's hospital sequence begins 3 weeks before Robbie's death.

Personally I'm disinclined to think it was Robbie's ghost haunting her, if only because I like to think of him as resting in peace and I don't think he would be vengeful toward her. I originally took her "seeing" him as simply the product of her intense desire that he would be among the evacuees, but perhaps it is symbolic of HIS forgiveness, as if he is there to give her his blessing, since it occurs immediately before the redemptive scene with Luc. This fits in very nicely with the Christic imagery (and your idea of a "resurrected" Robbie) since Robbie, now having "given" his life because of her sin, would be the symbolic agent of her redemptive act of kindness toward another soldier.

It's also interesting that in the scene with Luc Briony, though she is complicit with his delusions, does not lie, she does not fabricate or embellish anything herself. Again, because her god complex was at play when she lied about the rape we see a contrasting image of her here, she is passive, yielding her reality to someone else's need rather than forcing her fiction onto others.
by emakii





I agree with what you said about Robbie "returning" to Briony in the post atop. It makes watching her scene with Luc more poignant, to think that maybe Robbie returned not to haunt her, but to forgive her, allowing Briony to have that emotional connection with Luc.
Altough, even if Robbie forgave her, she would never be able to forgive herself, eh? Much like Judas to Jesus. Judas hated himself so much after what he did that he couldn't go on living anymore. We can see how much Briony hated herself too, that she thought she only deserved Robbie's anger and Cee's spite and coldness in the confrontation scene. And in a way Briony ceased "living" and was forever a prisioner of young Briony's actions.
by cris-a



It's easy to forget that not only did Briony fabricate the ending, but that the ENTIRE MOVIE/BOOK--no matter how factually accurate she tried to make it--was filtered entirely through Briony's point of view. All the conversations she wasn't there to witness (especially those between Cee and Robbie, whose conversations had no witnesses) were written by the adult Briony as she imagined they would have said them. The obvious guilt that Briony is carries isn't so much evidenced in what she says as the fact that Cee and Robbie's characters are almost flawless, but the Briony character is so easy to hate.

Someone used the term "mythological" to describe Cee and Robbie. I think it fits perfectly. In the context of the story, Cee and Robbie WERE real people, but the ones we are witness to are wholly characters constructed by Briony based on them. It's ironic because the reason for their destruction was because the 13-year-old Briony used them as characters to act out the script in her head, and now the 77-year-old Briony uses them, yet again, as characters in her attempt at atonement.
by invisigothx11



And an entry by [info]enchantee</lj>  at  http://community.livejournal.com/fadingatonement/

I definitely agree about the tracking shot, although I think it can be pushed even further: I think that the whole film can be seen as a commentary on film. Much like the book, which explores the way in which ideas, feelings, and memory in writing are all inevitably mediated through the construct of words, I think that the film is very effective in demonstrating the power of illusion and images that we create, and accept as audiences. Take the opening shot-- preceded by the sound of Briony's typing, the first thing we see is a doll house: a miniature replica of the life that these characters are familiar with. Pulling back, the camera reveals to us the source of the sound a Briony types the closing words of her play. Throughout the first act of the play, this pattern is repeated: we see the results of an action before we see their causes-- the encounter at the fountain, one of the Quincy twins bouncing a ball against the wall, Robbie's picking the wrong letter to give to Cecilia. The film sets us up to say, "Okay, this is what really happened," but when we get to the end, we see that the entire thing-- even the supposed truth-- is a product of Briony's conscience, and imagination.

Similarly, the use that Wright makes of reflections-- in the lake while Cecilia, Leon, and Marshall are lounging, as well as in the Cecilia's mirror-- reminds us of films' roles as a reflection of life. There's this tradition in American and British films--a tradition that was definitely predominate during the thirties and forties-- that almost requires filmmakers to make everything plausible enough that the narrative moves along without the audience having to question it too much. In this respect, I think that the film definitely takes on and challenges this tradition: it makes us think about how films are constructed to look real.

I think that the same applies for the tracking shot at Dunkirk. While it pulls the audience out of the moment, I think it's important to recognize that this is a scene that needs to serve multiple purposes-- not only is it operating within the realm of the narrative, but it is also functioning as an act of remembering the historical past. By 2008, post-Vietnam and five years into the Iraq War, we have this heroic image of World War II (especially as its generation is aging and dying--a fact which is instrumental to our understanding of Briony in the third act); I think that it's important that the tracking shot reminds us that this is a recreation, a visual representation of history, and not the real thing. It's as much a version of the war as Briony's book is a version of the Robbie and Cecilia's romance. 
 

OTHER SYMBOLISMS

THE AIRPLANE 




We all know that Robbie sees a plane for the first time in the film when he's in the bathtub. At that moment, he's excited about his life and his future. He's planning on studying medicine, he has just found out that he was in love with Cecilia...the plane represents his life soaring high, adventure, his future plans. He observes it almost in a childlike state, fascinated by it as much as he was fascinated with the possibilities of his own life.





The second time is during the war. The plane now represents destruction, hopelessness. It's interesting that, this time, altough Robbie looks up to the sky, we the audience can see only the reflection of the plane on the water, and it looks like a spectral shadow, a bad omen pairing over the soldiers.





The third time...well, this is what I found out recently, watching the film on a very bright LCD screen:
Robbie has just died and Nettle is leaving the basement. Briefly, almost invisible in the dark, we see the drawing of a plane on the wall, near Robbie's dead body. A childlike drawing, as if Robbie himself had projected with his mind his first impression of that plane, long ago, that meant his youth, his future and everything he would achieve in his life. Robbie's last moments were "the man returning to the child", like Joe Wright said in the commentary...






The little plane on the wall was his release from the tragic reality of his death. The imaginary plane that would take him away from Dunkirk and that dark basement-coffin, to the cottage on the beach, and to Cecilia.
by cris-a


HANDS, FINGERNAILS AND COLORS

One thing I noticed: when Briony tells the lie and everything goes black behind her the first thing we see after she has lied is her mother's perfectly manicured hand with blood red nails reach forward out of the darkness to place itself on her shoulder. This seemed to me to symbolize the complicity of the Tallis family with the evil that Briony does, not only their support of her and the way they close ranks with her against Robbie, but their complicity and culpability in the destruction of an innocent man. In particular it underscores the class issues and injustice underlying what is being done here; this beautifully manicured hand, representing the rich, superficially well-groomed Tallis family, has blood on it (symbolized by blood red nails and dress). Briony does not act alone, the adult members of this family are equally guilty because of their disregard for Robbie's humanity, classism, and casual cruelty.

Over and over we see that the superficial "perfection" of these people masks another reality entirely. Briony wears white dresses and bobbi socks but she is anything but pure; Lola in her pink ruffles is neither girlish nor innocent; Mrs. Tallis' hands, though perfectly manicured, are far from clean.

Robbie's hands, by contrast, are rough, with noticeably stubby fingernails, and Cee's get rougher especially after she leaves her family. Briony is seen scrubbing her hands frantically, obviously a symbolic reference to her efforts to cleanse herself of the blood she has shed.
by emakii



Also on the subject of hands and nails...wonderful insight about Emily's red finger nails (and red dress). I also noticed that when Cee is getting ready for dinner, she has red nail polish on. She looks briefly at her hands, says something to herself, and in the next scene (with Leon, before she gets the letter) the red nail polish is gone. Some people called it a continuity error, but when we think about it now...wasn't a way of telling us that Cee was starting a process to remove herself from the snobbery and cruelty of her upper class family?
 
Cee's fingernails painted in red appears briefly, when she's getting ready for dinner. It's interesting because she looks at her hand and says something, like she's questioning the nail polish.
But she uses the red lipstick during the whole film. It's like a "Cee trademark" - maybe something Briony remembered her sister wearing that caused an impact on her, maybe as how she finally started recognizing Cecilia as an adult (and sexually active) for the first time.



As he looks up at the wet Cecilia, his thumb is actually stroking the handle. So i take it that the handle is a phallus symbol. Overall a very sexualised scene.

Interesting, I went to see Atonement with a friend of mine (her first time watching it, mine was like the fourth) and she commented exactly the same thing. I had noticed it too, on my first viewing...the close-up of his hand, the tension, seemed to me a very sexualised moment.
And Wright used hands a lot in this film, to express what is not being said. When Robbie touches the water, it's like he's touching Cee for the first time. It's sexual, but it's not as lustful as he stroking the handle; it's more like he's acknowledging his love for her.
by cris-a



Sorry if i repeat anything but the use of color in the briony-as-a-nurse section of the film was important. she has no identity; her appearance blends in with the pale blues and whites of the hospital. the dying frenchman's red velvet curtain sticks out as a bright statement amongst the rest. at his side, briony learns about passion, and she learns to love, something which she states that she has never experienced before. this passion gives her her identity back, shown when she tells him her name is briony. and thus, afterwards she is able to wear her bright red nurse's outfit, something which asserts her identity by connecting her with the frenchman.
by eds-poofed-hair



I like your observations about the color scheme. I tend to think of the big red tent (for lack of a better word) that Luc was in as a kind of heart - this big shockingly colorful heart in the middle of all the drab arteries (hallways) of the hospital, where Briony goes to get her feelings and her identity back (I agree with you about the 'my name is Briony' being significant in her regaining herself, and I tend to pair it with her line 'There is no Briony' near the beginning of the hospital scenes when she's looking out the window at the city.)
by mikuhgtt


More about the colors...
It's interesting how the color scheme of the film changes, depending on what kind of emotions are being expressed. In the first part, the predominance is that of greens and pastel colors. There's  green everywhere: it's the color of the kitchen of the Tallises house, the gorgeous green grass, Robbie's and Grace's house (including the very greeny bathtube scene), and of course, Cecilia's wonderful green dress. The green is the symbol of that perfect summer day - when everything seemed to go so well, especially when we observe it through Robbie's POV. He was young, fresh and had his whole life ahead of him - a future life full of green, vibrant summers.
Of course, later on the first part, the black of the night takes over the green, casting its doom over the young lovers.

In the second part, the green is replaced by the browns and sepias. Life was very much taken away from Robbie, and he had to face the cruel reality of a war. Despite the sadness and lack of vivid colors, the use of browns and tans is amazingly beautiful.  For example, observing the tearoom scene, and the scene at the bus stop, we'll notice that even the people around Cee and Robbie are wearing brownish clothes. There's the eventual use of bright colors to give the scenes an interesting contrast, as the blue in the tearoom scene (Robbie's eyes, Cecilia's uniform) and the red during the bus stop scene (the double-decker buses).

In the third part, we get the white and red, symbolizing the contrast between purity and the horrible crime commited by Briony. Briony's uniform is white, but there's a red cross in it, as if to signalize her guilt. There's red in the blood of wounded soldiers. Red are also the curtains around the dying French soldier's bed, an interesting reminder of the theaters' curtains, pointing to Briony's unability to live outside the fictional world inside her head.

A wonderful way of expressing sentiments through colors, in a film which was never praised enough for the beautiful and intelligent use of symbologies in all levels. 




MORE SYMBOLISMS


When robbie goes to pick up Nettles boot just before he sees all the dead bodys, he takes off his hat and lifts his head to the sky with his eyes closed, when he looks up the screen brightens dramtically and his face looks like the sun is shining just on him, then he lowers his head and opens his eyes and the screen darkens like the sun has dissapeared, its almost like when he has his eyes closed and looks to the sky he is in heaven in the light and when he opens his eyes again and looks to the ground he is in the reality.
by oxmilliexo


When Briony is trying to reconcile with her sister (the part of the story she creates to bring Robbie and Cecilia back together) as they kiss, she turns to the window and sees an old woman pushing a small pram. Is this to be taken as some kind of premonition into her future? While her sister and Robbie are given a future of love and happiness (albeit a fictionalised one), hers is to be one of loneliness and madness because of her own actions?
by xtenement_funsterx


The film is loaded with foreshadowing - the picture on the wall near the door in the Turner bungalow, the picture above where Briony is typing in the opening shot, Briony's reading in the field, etc. - and I've always looked at the shot you mention as another example of that. Briony seeing herself far in the future - an old lady bent by a life of carrying the burden of guilt from what her lies did to Robbie and Cecilia.
 by mikuhgtt


I don't know whether this was mentioned but water can also be associated with refraction, the way in which what we see gets distorted by our perception. Which I would link with the glass window when Briony is watching the scene by the fountain...there is a moment where the image is refracted by the glass while she's opening the window.
Also what do you think is the symbolism of the trapped insect, when she's watching Robbie and Cee?
by ophelia83


There's also refraction when Cecilia is lying on the diving board over the lake, and we see her reflex distorted by the water. I like the idea of things being distorted by perception; it is one of the main themes of the story, after all. Like the "You can only imagine the truth" tag that they used for the film, so much better and intriguing than the other one ("Joined by love. Separated by fear. Redeemed by hope" - never liked this one...).

Joe Wright said that he used the bee because its buzz is like a buzz inside the brain, irritating you, making you confused about things...but I also like the imagery of something trapped, as in Briony trapped by her own imagination.
by cris-a






Feb. 7th, 2009

wanted guns

Wanted

 

O QUERER EM WANTED - O PROCURADO  

Wanted é um filme que permite várias leituras. Pode ser visto apenas como um blockbuster de ação cheio de adrenalina, com efeitos especiais caprichados e cenas típicas de perseguição de carros e explosões, e muita testosterona. Pode também ser visto como uma típica fantasia masculina – um dia, uma garota linda e misteriosa virá resgatar-me dessa miséria de vida chata, do cotidiano de um trabalho frustrante e uma namorada exigente e histérica, para me apresentar a um mundo totalmente novo, desafiador e perigoso. O mais interessante no entanto, e algo que parece ter escapado a muitos críticos que desprezaram ou rotularam o filme como mais um filme-pipoca escapista, é a busca pela identidade. Seja a identidade do Eu (Self), ou a identidade adquirida através da convivência e das lições adquiridas de nossos pais, ou a identidade conquistada através de uma realização amorosa, ou através do trabalho, ou de um grupo com os mesmo interesses .


 


 

A  própria palavra wanted, no original em inglês, revela várias camadas. Não apenas Procura-se ou Procurado, como nas fotos dos criminosos. Mas também o fato de sermos todos seres sempre em busca de algo, no processo contínuo de entender o que realmente queremos da vida. Wesley havia chegado ao ponto em que acreditava não querer mais nada para si e sua vida, que resumia-se a uma rotina frustrante e vazia. O contato com a Fraternidade o fez, talvez pela primeira vez como adulto, encarar as frustrações de quereres não realizados. Wesley queria um lugar no mundo e queria uma família. O fato de ter tido um pai tão famoso por seus feitos o fez querer se espelhar naquele homem grandioso (que até pouco tempo, antes da Fraternidade, era apenas um covarde que o havia abandonado). Por outro lado, Cross, o pai, também queria o filho. As circunstâncias de seu trabalho com a Fraternidade fizeram-no afastar-se da família e abandonar Wesley ainda bebê, para evitar que ele seguisse seus passos. Mas o abandono gerou uma série de frustrações e mágoas que ambos nunca conseguiriam resolver, e ironicamente surtiu o efeito contrário, fazendo com que Wesley, assim que foi informado ser filho “do maior assassino que já existiu”, projetasse na figura do pai uma imagem de perfeição, (tratava-se, afinal, do homem que conseguia “conduzir uma sinfonia” com sua arma) e desejasse ainda mais ardentemente ser como ele – tudo que Cross não queria para o filho.

      A frustração pela busca dessa identidade perdida (ou nunca conquistada) permeia a história, e a percebemos também nos outros personagens. Voltando ao super-assassino Cross, o desejo de ter um contato com Wesley e ao mesmo tempo, o horror gerado pela possibilidade do rapaz  seguir aquela vida errante , o transformou em um voyer do próprio filho. Morando no apartamento em frente ao de Wesley, ele o observava, fotografava e monitorava à distância. Talvez percebesse sua inércia e depressão, mas não conseguia fazer nada a respeito. Wesley, inconscientemente, percebia a presença de alguém o vigiando (sempre que saia de casa e olhava em direção ao apartamento de Cross), o que aumentava sua paranóia e isolamento, que podiam desencadear crises de pânico. Essas vidas isoladas, que poderiam ter desenvolvido um relacionamento pai/filho produtivo, vão reproduzir em parte a tragédia de Édipo, que desconhece o próprio pai e acaba por matá-lo.

 



 Identidades perdidas, ou apagadas, vidas unidimensionais, fazem parte do ambiente de um culto. Na Fraternidade, existiam pessoas com funções específicas, e sem vida fora do que “sabiam fazer bem”. Havia o Reparador, que “reparava erros do passado” em sessões de espancamento. O Armeiro, perfeito com as armas. O Açougueiro, bom em manipular quaisquer tipos de objetos cortantes. E Fox, talvez a mais complexa, a única (ao lado de Wesley, como iremos verificar mais tarde) capaz de causar um defeito irreparável na máquina bem azeitada da Fraternidade. Apesar de seu aparente niilismo, Fox possuía um forte senso de honra e justiça. Ironicamente, a pessoa que mais aceitava a premissa do Tear do Destino (e portanto, da própria Fraternidade) seria uma das responsáveis por sua derrocada. Para Fox, a partir do momento em que se revelou a manipulação dos nomes, tudo perdeu o sentido. Sloan os havia tornado assassinos comuns, visando apenas lucro. Não havia mais um objetivo sagrado, eles não eram mais anjos exterminadores em busca de justiça e equilíbrio no mundo. Sua própria vida perdeu o sentido a partir dali, mas ela deixou Wes viver na esperança de que ele ainda pudesse se redimir, e talvez no processo, redimir a todos eles.


           Uma das maiores críticas feitas a Wanted foi sobre a função do Tear do Destino. Na verdade, o Tear é um dos elementos mais intrigantes do filme, justamente por lidar com a questão da credibilidade, e como elementos aparentemente ‘mágicos” e esotéricos podem nos fazer estabelecer uma “fé” em determinados sistemas. A Fraternidade nunca questinou a a credibilidade do Tear – na verdade, nunca questinou a credibilidade de Sloan, que era o único que podia ler e interpretar as falhas no tecido que forneciam os códigos binário transformados em nomes. O Tear, no fundo, era apenas um símbolo – os assassinos da Fraternidade acreditavam no que desejavam acreditar, e talvez a maioria apenas gostasse da matança, sem importar-se com o fato de estarem fazendo justiça ou não. Isso fica bem claro no momento em que Sloan revela a farsa, e deixa claro que os assassinatos geram lucros. Não se tratava de “justiça” ou “buscar um equilíbrio entre o bem e o mal no mundo”, mas simplesmente de um negócio. Os membros da Fraternidade perderam assim sua função quase mística (segundo aparentemente acreditavam, ao ingressar no culto) e tornaram-se meros assassinos de aluguel. Quando confrontados com esta verdade, os membros simplesmente se ajustaram a nova idéia de assassinatos gerando lucros – já que nunca questionaram a moralidade de matar apenas baseado no que um tear dizia, e gostavam de ser matadores, porque não unir o útil ao agradável?


 
 
Wesley procurou manter intacto seu senso básico de humanidade (um dos momentos mais engraçados – e ironicamente mais verdadeiros – é quando ele exclama “Eu tenho respeito pela condição humana!”), e isso naturalmente não é bem aceito em um culto, onde o objetivo final é a desumanização. Wes questinou os métodos da Fraternidade – a aceitação cega às ordens do destino, às mortes ditadas pelo tear - até que a história contada por Fox o fez encontrar um objetivo "justo" (e humano) nos assassinatos. Ele mesmo, afinal, estava em busca de justiça para seu pai. A questão é se “matar um para salvar mil” pode ser mesmo considerado justiça, e até que ponto algumas pessoas podem tomar para si a responsabilidade de assumir a identidade dos lobos que abatem os “fracos” ou “doentes” - os que podem prejudicar a coletividade do rebanho, o funcionamento adequado da sociedade. Talvez sejam questionamentos que Wes fará mais profundamente na continuação da história. 



  

 

Provavelmente, as informações fornecidas pelo Tear vinham sendo manipuladas desde que o primeiro líder da Fraternidade percebeu o poder de persuassão de um “objeto místico”. O que não quer dizer que, embora muitos membros fossem simplesmente assassinos psicóticos que na Fraternidade pareciam ter encontrado uma justificativa e função para seu desequilíbrio (como no caso do Reparador e do Açougueiro, por exemplo) outros tantos seguidores não acreditassem piamente na função mágica do Tear, e no trabalho quase divino que executavam – matar os potencialmente maus para alcançar um equilíbrio no mundo. Esse era o caso da assassina Fox que, devido a um trauma que ela pode ter sofrido ou não (conhecendo-se as técnicas de “lavagem cerebral” dos cultos, a morte do pai de Fox por um homem cujo nome havia sido ditado pelo tear, mas não havia sido executado, pode muito bem ter sido algo no qual ela foi levada a acreditar – exatamente como Wesley, mais tarde), sentia que havia uma missão sagrada a ser cumprida, e as ordens ditadas pelo Tear deveriam ser seguidas à risca. Ironicamente, a pessoa que mais acreditava na Fraternidade foi uma das responsáveis por sua derrocada. O desvirtuamento da finalidade de todos aqueles assassinatos significava que ninguém mais era puro, e todos deveriam ser sacrificados – inclusive ela mesma.


           A função de Wes na história é nos representar. Somos o homem comum, muitas vezes oprimidos pela sociedade, no trabalho ou em um relacionamento fracassado, nunca tendo dinheiro suficiente para realizarmos nossos sonhos. Como nós, Wes também questiona a irrealidade aparente da Fraternidade (“Um tear fala conosco?”) e seus métodos (“Porque tenho que matar alguém de quem não sei nada a respeito, não sei o que ele fez de errado...que direito temos de julgar essas pessoas?”) até que, depois de várias manipulações emocionais e torturas físicas, se entrega ao culto que parece lhe oferecer um objetivo na vida, uma missão. Quando tudo cai por terra, Wes precisa encontrar em si suas próprias convicções. Ele desperta, mas ainda assim – apesar de ter tomado o controle de seu destino, ao menos em relação a questões como o trabalho, seu relacionamento, e o grupo que havia servido de substituto ao pai, à família – seu questionamento permanece: “O que sou eu?”




 
E para terminar, existe uma uma outra característica interessante em Wanted que é o uso de uma mitologia de contos de fadas, usada para nos fazer embarcar no curioso mundo da "realidade irreal" proposto pelo diretor. Castelos, teares mágicos, ratos "encantados" (tal como no Flautista de Hamlin"), o rapazinho fraco e sem graça que se joga (ou é jogado) em uma jornada heróica - como em "O Alfaiate Valente", dos irmãos Grimm, onde um modesto alfaiate ruma em busca de aventuras depois de sentir-se o tal ao matar sete (moscas!) de uma vez...
São elementos que enriquecem o filme e permitem muitas leituras, e tornam Wanted um filme único no universo cada vez mais apático dos filmes de aventura/ação. É só querer entrar na viagem...

 

 

Wanted screencaps # 1, 3, 4 & 5 by [info]youbecomeme


Wanted screencap # 2 by [info]cris_a

 
 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  

      








                                        
    

 

Nov. 17th, 2008

ani robbie&cee cottage

Atonement video with Gattaca soundtrack


My friend [info]youbecomeme  made this incredible video for Atonement, and I had to put it here too.
It's really beautiful and dramatic, and what a wonderful choice for the music! And there's still more to come... ;-)


 

 

 

 

 

 

Oct. 19th, 2008

Blue

(no subject)


I've never heard this song, but I was searching for Atonement videos and I really loved it. The video is beautiful as well.


Oct. 6th, 2008

ani robbie&cee cottage

"Don't make me wait" - another Atonement fanvideo



Song: "Don't Make me Wait", by This World Fair
Blue

Robbie Turner

Well, it's been a while!

I found this interesting article about Robbie Turner, and how the character was played by James, in the words of Joe Wright, Ian McEwan, and James himself...


ROBBIE TURNER

The male lead role of Robbie Turner, the son of the Tallis family housekeeper with a Cambridge education courtesy of the Tallis family, is played by James McAvoy who according to director Joe Wright, “had the acting ability to take the audience with him on his personal and physical journey.”

McAvoy saw the story as “epic, romantic, and really about what it is to be a human being. It affected - and still affects - me hugely, and I hope it will do the same to audiences. Atonement also explores the truth of how we are at our best when we are being attacked, and Robbie Turner is forced to fight on two fronts.”



Wright adds, “I’d first seen James in a play about seven years ago, and I could tell how good he was. I’d offered him parts twice before, and this third time was the charm. James has working-class roots, and that was very important; Robbie’s story is that of a working-class boy whose life is often at the mercy of the snobbery of an upper class family. James also has a deep soul, and isn’t afraid to show it. The character is described by Ian McEwan as having ‘eyes of optimism,’ and James has those. When he smiles, you smile; when he cries, you cry.” McEwan adds, “Later in the story, it is written that ‘there is a stamp of experience in the corners of his eyes.’ Through James’ performance, you feel the pathos.”



Even so, as McAvoy notes, “Joe would tell me, ‘Don’t beg them to cry,’ meaning, the audience. Robbie was one of the most difficult characters I’ve ever played, because he’s very straight-ahead. In the 1935 scenes, the family doesn’t see him as one of them, yet he doesn’t have a chip on his shoulder. Joe was very keen not to be manipulative with the audience, so he emphasised underplaying. So, later in the story, when Robbie explodes, you really feel it.



“As a director, Joe knows how to choreograph his scenes, understands the story he’s telling, respects his crew, and loves actors; he made me a better actor on Atonement.” McAvoy believes Atonement also explores the truth of how we are at our best when we are being attacked, and Robbie Turner is forced to fight on two fronts.” Robbie is a compassionate and decent man. We know he has leadership qualities from the war scenes in France and that he is a person that can fit in with any section of society. Robbie is devoted to his mother and not afraid to show his love for her. His mother may only be a housekeeper but he is not embarrassed by his background.

Robbie is obviously changed by prison but he does not lose his best qualities and that is shown when he is in France. One part of the film to think about is when WWII sends Robbie and his British Expeditionary Force (BEF) unit through France, the full scale - human and spatial - of the army’s retreat from and at Dunkirk is captured in a single shot worked out by Wright and McGarvey with steadicam operator Peter Robertson.

Wright says, “The sequence was originally scripted as a montage. But that would have required 30-40 set-ups in a single day, with consistent light. So we went a different route.”

McGarvey adds, “We wanted something that would evolve within the scene itself, and was appropriate for the context. The conventional way to shoot what Robbie is seeing would be to go for a wide shot with a longer lens. With this shot, you are with Robbie, so you share his point of view and also see his face, his reaction to it all.”



The sequence was filmed on location at the seaside town of Redcar, with its existing beach and Corus Steelworks industrial landscape; 1,000 locals were employed to portray wounded or dying U.K. soldiers stranded on the beach at Dunkirk while awaiting safe passage home in 1940.

Greenwood notes, “Joe wanted the scale to be fully conveyed. To me, this shot says everything about Dunkirk - and about Robbie’s journey.”



Ian McEwan reveals, “My father was in or attached to the British army for 50 years. He was on the beach at Dunkirk, severely wounded and then evacuated. When he talked about it, you could see the darkness of the memory, yet also the sense that it was when he felt most fully alive.”

McAvoy reflects, “We talked to one veteran who couldn’t tell us a lot. He said, ‘When you’re doing it, boys, just think about how bad it really was.’ It was hard for him to even say that to us.”

All departments worked together to marshal for the sequence - among many other elements - a bandstand, French and British army weapons both vintage and re-created, a working ferris wheel, bombed-out buildings, a huge beached Thames barge, a choir in performance, and show horses.

In the five-and-one-half minute uninterrupted shot, the camera follows James McAvoy, Daniel Mays, and Nonso Anozie - as Robbie and the two other surviving British soldiers from his decimated unit - as they tenaciously search for any quieter space to try to decompress in.

Webster says, “James’ powers of concentration and transformation impressed me all through the shoot. When it came time to shoot this sequence, he was moving through it all and reacting - which, in a way, is the hardest kind of acting. Robbie witnesses a lot, and James conveys his inner state brilliantly.”




Source: http://schol.wordpress.com/2008/08/17/robbie-turner/






Aug. 15th, 2008

Blue

And now ...more "100 Things I learned from "ATONEMENT"

People can't seem to get enough of it, so...

More "100 Things I learned from "ATONEMENT"! ;-)




100) When yelling for a 13 yr old that is running through a field (because you just realized she is carrying the wrong letter) YELL LOUDER!!

99) Now I think the word CUNT is sexy.

98) I now want a library in my house.

97) Never go searching for little red heads that ran away.

96) Be sure to seek a second suspect.

95) Get a drink of water and a doctor when you are sick.
 
94) Get immediate medical help when you have something inside of your chest.
 
93) HIDE SECRET LOVE LETTERS. Preferably in high places where scrawny 13 year olds can't reach them, or go looking for it.
 
92) Keira Knightley can dive well off a diving board.

91) "Hot weather encourages loose morals" HELL YEAH IT DOES.
 
90) Don't hesitate making your first lie, even if it would be a crime. You have good chance to tell the truth in your 21st book.
 
89) A chocolate bar could be highly dangerous in the hands of a 15 y.o. redhead girl. If you have to have it, be sure it has a brand other than "amo", and be sure to eat it correctly: never ever bitting. Otherwise, you will have someone killed either on the French coast or in a British subway station, and some other lying all the way to her death. And yourself, will never get away from chocolate and your chocolatey husband.
 
88) When two boys run away, stay at home.
 
87) Never take candy from strangers.

86) When going to medical school on a rich guy's dime, opt for early admission.

85) Never leave one's chic white bathing suit and inflatable flotation device at home when spending the night in an underground subway.

84) Lost twins will be just fine if nobody looks for them until morning.

83) It is prudent to avoid venturing into dark wooded areas at night with men who give you wrist abrasions in daytime.
 
82) Police would belive that a gardener can have sex twice in a single night before finding a pair of lost twins.
 
81) No one knows who's ever been to Poland.
 
80) The best way to escape having to care for your twin brothers while your selfish parents dump you to tend to their divorce is to seduce a heir to a chocolate empire.

79) By all means send a kid who you know is a trouble maker and has a crush on you on an important errand such as delivering a note.

78) Robbie writes very anatomical letters.

77) 80 year old dementia riddled authors absolutly are the bastians of truth in interviews.
 
76) Make sure the letter your sister is holding is the "naughty" letter that you think it is before you shout out "Give it here!" awkwardly in front of everyone at the dinner table.

75) I think we all knew what Keira was talking about in the library...we knew before she did.

74) Do not raise your hand to prevent someone from cutting his or her foot. Just one step closer to being labeled a "sex maniac."

73) If you have septicemia during wartime, try not to go to sleep the night before you get to return home.

72) Always keep the first pornographic note you recieve in an easy to rummage drawer or jewlerybox.

71) If you have the boring "brother" part in a movie make sure you nuance your performance with slightly incestous glances at your "sister".

70) Robbie hears jungle drums and they tell him things...like Briony is putting on a play 

69) Lola has fabulous taste in clothing--in men, not so much.

68) Some women do end up marrying the men who rape them, and it wasn't just a weird footnote in my sociology book.

67) If your not a real member of an aristocratic family don't bother bringing the lost kids back cos you will still get accused for something you didn't do!

66) The Olivier method of acting is back, bitchnaz!

65) That green dress was EASY ACCESS, people, EASY ACCESS! (Joe said so)
 
64) Even during wars, there is always that creepy crazy oblivious guy tanning at the beach.

63) Never lose sight of the fat twins.
 
62) Subway stations are never a good idea in ANY situation, let alone ones where your life is at stake.
 
61) Fountains, libraries and Summer are dangerous when combined.
 
60) Emily Tallis was soooo wasted it's not even funny.
 
59) If you have a sister, rip her eyes out to prevent her from seeing things that she doesn't understand.
 
58) When you feel rather foolish and lightheaded in someone else's presence, a one-night stand is probably the safest option.
 
57) If you're going to have sex:
a. Make sure the door is locked
b. Make sure the girl is at least of age
c. Make sure it's not in the middle of the woods, during a search party 

56) To avoid the need for a and c above, explain the "birds and the bees" to your little sister.

55) There is nothing more distracting than a ferris wheel.
 
54) Horses are better at playing dead than French schoolgirls

53) Horses are very good actors
 
52) Even in the worst war situation, you'll still be able to ride a ferris wheel, watch a movie or get your feet washed by someone that looks like your mother.

51) Seeing James McAvoy in this movie will then require you to go out and rent every movie he has ever been in.

50) Even a psychotic, emotionally dead virgin-for-life can be a success.

49) There are parts for actresses so old they look like they've been in the grave for a few years.
 
48) Run your own errands

47) If a loved one sends you a postcard with a picture of a beach house on it, get that septicemia checked out.

46) Be sure to atone ASAP. Mini-strokes might get you.

45) Mistakenly sending your crush an explicit note, will undoubtedly be the key to breaking the proverbial ice in the Library. Works every time!
 
44) Cecilia loves Robbie, will wait for him, and wants him to come back to her.

43) Briony is very, very sorry for the terrible distress she has caused you. She is very, very sorry.

42) You shouldn’t necessarily believe everything Briony tells you. She's rather fanciful.

41) If Cecilia had been allowed to visit you, if they had let her, every day, she would have been there every day.

40) Robbie plans on paying Cecilia’s father back.

39) That’s not what Cecilia meant at all!

38) A hairstyle you had when you're 13 doesn't really look good on you when you're 130.

37) When you're son is arrested by the police, it's generally a good idea not to attack the police car with an umbrella.
 
36) When writing your autobiography, feel free to change things around. You'll forget it soon anyway, so best to reread it with a happy ending.

35) When you lie about something, wait a good five years before realizing the damage you've done. Chances are, everyone's lives will be ruined, so you won't have anything to feel guilty about.
 
34) Completely believe every word an author writes when they suffer from dementia.

33) James McAvoy is amazingly hot, especially in this movie.
 
32) Always pack a lot of extra matches when going to a war.

31) If you are responsible for the downfall of two innocent people, write a book and give them a happy ending to make yourself feel better.

30) Always invite a guest into the library before dinner...

29) Lock the damn door.

28) It's okay to hurt the people you love, as long as you imagine them happy in the end.

27) Don't save Briony next time she jumps in the water. (Woulda solved everything)

26) When you're rich.. the most valuable thing you own is an ugly vase.

25) If you get the lead role, Briony gets to be the damned director!

24) Parents will always trust and listen to the younger sibling when it comes to charging a family friend with statutory rape.
 
23) Trying to drown won't make a person love you.

22) When you're done hallucinating, put your boots back on.

21) The best way to show how much you love a girl is to send her a letter describing your fantasies of her vagina;

20) I am perfectly capable of falling in love with a fictional character.
 
19) If you have the chance you should not by any means hesitate to have unprotected sex, especially if it's in a library which anyone can walk into;
 
18) If you like one sibling, before making any moves, make sure the other one doesn't have a crush on you.
 
17) Cambridge is a better place because Briony didn't go to school there.

16) No music playing in the background is the key to a successful sex scene.
 
15) It is impossible to find drinking water in Dunkirk, even when alcohol is flowing freely.
 
14) If you dream of having sex with someone all day (and who doesn't ?)... you are a sex maniac and nothing good will become of you.
 
13) You have to let the love of your life get on the bus, let the bus leave and then chase the bus for dramatic effect. By doing this, you are showing that you can run, love the chase and that your life story is being written by an 80 year old hopeless romantic.
 
12) Don't expect to finish writing, cast, rehearse, and perform a play all in the same day. It's not going to happen.
 
11) Three and a half minutes of hot library sex can lead to a lifetime of misery.
 
10) Don't follow a delirious man not wearing boots

9) Throwing one down the stairs versus breaking one's neck then and there is indeed a tough call.

8) If you're meeting someone you love after 3 1/2 years apart, make sure to get the directions to the place of rendevous so that you won't be late.
 
7) Always humour the hallucinations of a dying, French soldier.

6) Learn how to clip your nails with your left hand because if you can't find anyone to do it for you, you're doomed. Briony won't always be around, y'know.

5) Your father is wrong, there will be a war.

4) The C-word makes Robbie giggly.
 
3) A good mother will show up to beat on the hood of the police car that is taking her son to jail.

2) Library sex is so mind-blowing, you can ride off those fumes for a few chaste years afterwards.

1) There is no Briony.  







Aug. 12th, 2008

robbie lol

100 Things I Learned From "Atonement"

A wonderful collective thread at IMDb...funny, moving, smart. Thanks to all the posters at the Atonement IMDb board! :-)


100 Things I Learned From "Atonement"
 
100) Libraries are the new bedrooms.
 
99) Never trust 13 year olds with anything.
 
93) To atone for your sins, all you have to do is write a book!
 
92) Think twice before you make a really stupid decision and end up ruining people's lives, even if you're just 13
 
91) That green dress is insanely gorgeous (I want one!!!)

90) To hell with Keira's green dress! James McAvoy is drop dead gorgeous and...I want one!
 
89) True love can survive through passionate letters
 
88) Old school swimming costumes look damn good on Keira Knightley
 
87) James McAvoy sounds even hotter when he speaks French
 
86) Fielding is a passionate author

85) Garden fountains can be a hell of a lot deeper than I thought
 
84) He's a sex maniac
 
83) Heat makes James McAvoy write 'naughty' love letters
 
82) Maybe Briony wouldn't have ruined peoples lives if they just gave her a pet or something.
 
81) Think of Grace Turner, when you see your face on polished silver.
 
80) Always take along a lighter and/or matches when you go off to War so you can view photographs you have taken along 
 
79) Things are not always what they seem 
 
78) It's always the guy with a mustache who did it.
 
77) Break some expensive vases.

76) Typewriters are musical instruments.

75) Hope the bus never comes.
 
74) Choctails are for pedophiles

73) It's always important to send your own letters.
 
72) Sometimes you should just let little girls drown.
 
71) Contraception is not a worry if you're in love.
 
70) French people just want to give you food.
 
69) If a man asks you to loosen his bandages, don't do it.

68) Set things right before it's too late.
 
67) When watering flowers, always go for the fountain with the hot guy next to it...never go for the sink in the house.
 
66) Isn't it strange how the best day of your life can also be the worst day of your life?
 
65) Never hand over an important note to a girl who is viciously whacking away at weeds, and then comes and glares at you over the fence.
 
64) Don't write love letters while listening to passionate opera music. It will make you think and write obscene things.

63) Be sure to always carry a bottle of water around with you so you don't become delirious during war.
 
62) You don't have to worry about washing your feet when you're delusional, a vision of your mother will take care of that.

61) Never go to sleep when you're delusional.
 
60) Never use the word 'cunt' , especially if you are thinking about it all day.
 
59) Nothing sets a romantic mood like Puccini.
 
58) You can always atone for past errors by making up your OWN story and publishing it!

57) If you move in different circles than someone else, it may very well mean you are deeply in love with them.

56) Biting a chocolate bar can lead to aggressive sexual behavior.

55) Anything you see from your window is really something else.

54) Finding a shelter in an old subway? - not the safest place.

53) In order to successfully get a small piece of vase out of a 3 ft deep fountain, it is necessary to take off your clothes.
a)Your arm will never reach to the bottom.
b)If you get in with your clothes ON then you'll be completely wet.
c)If you get in with less clothes on and put your dry clothes back over them, they will STILL be wet.
d)But you will have looked EXTREMELY sexy in front of the man you love.

52) Using a mere bobby pin to tuck back the other side of your hair is a brilliant hairstyle! Timeless in fact!

51) Saying 'come back to me' will immediately end all feelings of anger, aggression. It's the soothing replacement for aromatherapy!
 
50) Never trust a 13 year old with an over active imagination with a private letter
 
49) Always ALWAYS lock the library door when your in there with the love of your life.
 
48) Always rehearse a 13 years old's play whenever she wants to.. or else she'll spy on two people behind her bedroom window and ruin their lives.
 
47) No matter how safe you think you are, at some point in your life you'll be fucked over by an aggravating child
 
46) You are screwed if you are a soldier and dont know how to sing
 
45) Redheads are just horny as heck
 
44) Robbie Turner is not a toff, whatever that is.

43) Most of a town can be without electricity or water and torn to bits but the movie theater will still play shows as schedualed
 
42) Seventy years later...yeah, running after the one you love is still sexy.
 
41) Seventy years later...yeah, smoking in film is still sexy.
 
40) Seventy years later...yeah, being a war soldier in film is still sexy.
 
39) Always ALWAYS double check the letter before putting it in the envelope.
 
38) Avoid small girls with big typewriters.
 
37) Always ALWAYS write a dirty letter to show your confused childhood sweetheart that you want to be more than her friend.

36) Make sure to keep all hairclips on at all times so as to avoid little siblings finding them and leading them to the library

35) That vase is probably the most valuable thing the Tallis' own

34) Not anymore it isn't.
 
33) Blushing is likely caused by: a) hot weather, b) embarrassment, and/or c) recent sexual exertion.
 
32) No matter how sexy you look in a tux, or soldier uniform or gardening clothes, you will be 10000000x sexier speaking French.
 
31) If given the choice to stay in prison or join the army, stay in prison. For the love of god stay in prison.

30) Never trust a man who knows how to make a "choc-tail"
 
29) That the average audience knows what "septicemia" means
 
28) That water on the Tallis' property is always crystal clear (garden fountain, river where Briony jumps in)
 
27) The C-word is the worst word you can possibly imagine.
 
26) That James McAvoy is a brilliantly charming actor
 
25) You are NEVER to give a patient your first name. You are your last name, and that ONLY.

24) Robbie sleeps so deeply.

23) When having flashbacks of a painful past, try to stay AWAKE! You may never wake up if you go to sleep.

22) If it's the hottest day of the year, lie unshaded in the middle of a lawn and complain about the heat

21) Household servants/workers can afford a crisp black tux.
 
20) You need music to inspire you to write a love letter (especially a naughty one)

19) Doing it up against the book case seems more hot than uncomfortable, suprisingly! 

18) The c- word is sexier than the p- word.

17) Atonement is a very hard word to pronounce

16) This movie proves that are still good films out there in this world, but they are a rare treasure.
 
15) Even if you've been kept from becoming a doctor, carry antibiotics.
 
14) Don't ever let the bus get away.
 
13) When you hate someone and think they're beneath you, it's really because you want them on top. ;)
 
12) Forget the next shift at the hospital when James McAvoy's in town!
 
11) Smoking and the word c_unt can actually be used properly and sexy
 
10) Have a Guinness when you're tired. (taken from the bus during the cafe scene)
 
9) It bores Jackson and Pierrot everything that ends in "O"....like polo and aero...

8) Cecilia thinks she'll make Robbie feel bad by undressing and going into a fountain. And then coming out soaking wet and practically see through.
 
7) When James McAvoy cries, I (along with everyone else in my theater) cry.
 
6) Those books-you-can't-possibly-make-into-movies have met their match.
 
5) You can't say "pass the biscuit" or "where's me hand grenade" in France because nobody speaks the fuckin' lingo out there.
 
4) Love letters allow lovers to live infinitely and allow their TRUE story to continue
 
3) DNA testing of evidence was one of the greatest advancements in matters of crime investigations.
 
2) When the love of your life -- who is serving time for a crime he didn't commit, whose academic potential and dreams of a medical career are forever destroyed, who the whole world thinks is a perv and pedophile, who has developed a nervous tic from years in the pen, whose devoted mother is disgraced, who is on his way to fight and die a thankless, obscure death in a war where he can't even score a medal, who didn't even get to kiss you on the naughty regions that started the whole mess in the first place -- in short, whose life is utterly, completely and irrevocably destroyed because of the confused adolescent fantasies of your jacked up baby sister -- runs insanely after you on a bus, don't just stand there looking cute, HOP OFF!
 
1) Briony should burn in hell 








 

 

Aug. 9th, 2008

Blue

James McAvoy: Arena

James McAvoy na revista ARENA...hmmmm...! ;-)

James McAvoy in ARENA magazine. Yummy!








Blue

Atonement: um comentário

Um breve comentário sobre o filme que capturou meu coração e mente...

 

É muito bom perceber que o cinema ainda é capaz de produzir arte, de ser o que o cinema vem se propondo ser há anos - sensorial, emocional, intelectual. Encontrar o equilíbrio entre as imagens belas, a música bela, as belas atuações e as pessoas belas que atuam e ainda assim ser um produto que não pode apenas ser sentido, tem que também ser compreendido, analisado, dissecado.

 
Quando assisti pela primeira vez acho que a beleza do filme me tomou, a incrível tristeza de tudo aquilo. Meu lado angsty falou mais alto. Existe uma crueldade explícita, aquela que te pega de jeito, mas talvez o mais importante seja a crueldade não explícita. E isso já mexe com o intelecto. E existem tantas coisinhas mais no filme, maneiras em que o visual esconde símbolos, referências. Tudo muito bem pensado, mas nunca cerebral demais. Mesmo porque alguns momentos precisam da cumplicidade da emoção, e funcionam. E essa é talvez a maior crueldade de todas, e o triunfo final da Briony, a contadora de histórias.

 
Eu amo cinema, foi a primeira arte com a qual tive contato, quando tinha cinco anos e nem sabia ler e nem sabia da existência da arte. Acho que o primeiro filme que assisti foi o francês "Pele de Asno" e até hoje tenho na memória a beleza das imagens e o impacto da história. Odeio o xiitismo de alguns literatos em relação ao cinema, de que nunca um filme vai ser melhor que um livro do qual ele foi adaptado. Ao mesmo tempo que algumas coisas são únicas no ato de ler uma história, elas são únicas quando se vê a mesma história na tela. Aliás, ironicamente, Briony fala sobre isso logo no início do filme. E sim, algumas cenas do livro são mais evocativas na telona que no próprio texto de Ian McEwan, como o reencontro dos amantes no salão de chá.
 
Relembrar o filme me faz pensar na beleza e no poder das imagens que o Joe Wright escolheu tão meticulosamente. Que belo diretor, e ele é ainda tão novo, 35 anos eu acho. Espero que não vá para os States tão cedo; por mais que eu admire muitas coisas na cultura americana, adoro mais ainda a distinção de culturas, e amei a sensibilidade européia (e não só inglesa, de jeito nenhum, e isso é um dos trunfos do filme) que está em todas as cenas de Atonement.
 
E as imagens se relacionando, a todo momento...se formos analisar cada fotograma, vamos perceber como tudo foi pensado, estudado, e ainda assim o filme retem sua sensibilidade e emoção. Por exemplo, estava lembrando outro dia da cena do Robbie no banho, olhando o avião passando pela clarabóia. Naquele momento pra ele a idéia da guerra é tão irreal, e embora ele realmente possa ver o avião este mais parece um brinquedo distante, ele até imita baixinho o som do ronco do motor. Quando a guerra se torna real, o que ele vê não é o verdadeiro avião, ironicamente, e sim apenas seu reflexo na água, quando está a caminho de Dunkirk. Real e irreal, o filme brinca com isso o tempo todo, alterando nossas expectativas assim como as dos personagens.
 
Acho que, no filme, a parte mais difícil de ser desenvolvida foi a do Robbie na guerra. Primeiro, por um problema de orçamento mesmo. Afinal, para um filme que tinha o orçamento do tamanho do salário do Tom Cruise (outra coisa que deve ter deixado muitos diretores revoltados - ver como a qualidade de um filme não depende necessariamente de grana) montar uma operação de guerra, literalmente, seria suicídio. Em relação a filmes assim, com suas explosões, bombas caindo, esquadrilhas de aviões, multidões de soldados, ou se faz bem feito ou vira um lance meia-boca horroroso. E o diabo do Ian McEwan é MUITO minucioso em suas descrições do que foram os horrores daquela caminhada interminável em direção a Dunkirk. Dá pra ouvir o barulho das bombas caindo, sentir o peso do pé que não consegue mais correr na lama, sentir o cheiro das centenas de cadáveres espalhados pelo caminho. Enfim, se houvesse grana, a odisséia de Robbie na rota de fuga em direção à Mancha daria um filme de guerra dos melhores, talvez um dos mais contundentes já feitos. Mas como isso se encaixaria com o que já tínhamos visto no primeiro ato? Será que, depois da ópera da parte um, seria interessante ver um "Saving Private Ryan"?

 
Parece que o Wright se debatia com essas idéias. Ele mesmo disse que gostaria de ter mais grana pra mostrar pelo menos um dos bombardeios descritos no livro. Mas a questão estilística estava pesando também. Qual seria o propósito de ser minucioso com os horrores, em relação ao personagem? Porque ao mesmo tempo que o McEwan faz questão de descrever a via crúcis física de Robbie, ele está igualmente preocupado com sua via-crúcis mental. Com o delicado equilíbrio entre a sanidade e a loucura, entre o "vou esperar você" e o "de que adianta chegar", entre as coisas que deixaram de ser feitas e o que poderia ser recomeçado. Certamente a decisão de focar todo o caos da retirada naquele pequeno grupo de 3 soldados foi controversa - alguns críticos reclamaram que faltaram os tais horrores, como se tudo tivesse que ser literal pra fazer a gente sentir. Quando Wright teve a brilhante idéia de mostrar as cenas que se viam na praia (como descritas por Ian) em um take só ("Só pra se exibir", disseram alguns. Não, por problemas de logística, de grana, de tempo - e sim, pra se exibir um pouco, porque não? Que pode pode!) ele atingiu o ápice dessa mistura da realidade e a irrealidade, que é a situação do personagem. Dali em diante o que é delírio e o que é real? Ao mesmo tempo, foi genial manter a ordinariedade dos soldados (que só queriam se mandar dali e que não tinham tantas questões existencialistas na cabeça como o Robbie), personificados por Mace e principalmente Nettle, o que fica com Robbie até o fim. No livro, através de suas brincadeiras e reclamações, os dois acabam sendo o elo de Robbie com a realidade. O filme também nos dá esses momentos de alívio; dá par rir de algumas coisas, assim com dá pra rir com algumas cenas do livro.
 
Mas assim como no filme inteiro, o que também acho especial nesse segmento é a opção pelo silêncio, pela sutileza, em cenas que talvez, num filme mais tradicional, fossem feitas com música bombástica e barulho de explosões e gritos. São notáveis os momentos finais de Robbie, a morte pequena e silenciosa, uma vida que se extingüe como a chama de um fósforo. Brilhante e breve, a vida de Robbie Turner.
 
Classe, muita classe - é o que 'Atonement' tem de sobra.
















Jul. 7th, 2008

Blue

Robbie, Cecilia...and Briony.

Now we have some thoughts about Robbie and Cecilia, Briony and her terrible crime...did she atone or didn't she? What made a 13 year-old girl accuse a man of a crime he didn't commit? Or did she really believe "she saw him with her own eyes"? So many questions! The posters at IMDb helped with some answers, or maybe confused us even more...


I know a lot of folks really like movies that conceal their character as stories; I’m just the opposite. I love movies like this that in effect say “Once upon a time …” and you know you’re in a story from beginning to end.

That especially fits a drama like this, though, because tension between Story and Reality is a key theme.

So we have all those shots of Briony’s eyes … over the years … emphasizing that we are dealing with what Briony sees, with Briony’s perceptions … and Briony’s misperceptions.
Really everything in this movie excudes a delicious sense from beginning to end that we’re grappling with tensions between Reality and Story in Briony … but not only in Briony, in everything.

Take Robbie at Dunkirk. He descends into that ad hoc movie theatre. Then he hallucinates about his mother...and as Robbie lies dying, we have his final hallucinations. From the time that Robbie and Cecilia have reconciled in London, we know that Robbie is seeking above all, to Get Back: to Get Back home to Cecilia. We see this in Robbie’s Reality … he says this several times … and in his imagined, hallucinated Story sequences. His deadly septicemia puts a stop to all this … or does it? Of course that all depends on how we view the dying Briony’s view of her own fiction … and so we have Robbie’s struggles with Reality & Story intersecting with Briony’s.

What really struck me most in this viewing, in looking at that pattern over time, was the contrast among visual patterns: (1) 1935 England, with exquisite, intricate, finely textured and colorful scenes … full of “frames” … we see so much through windows and in mirrors and through obscuring objects in the foreground … then (2) in 1939/40 the framing is still there, but has begun breaking down; colors are less vivid; wallpapers more washed out: everything is less orderly, less intricate,; and finally (3) we get the dying Briony in two scenes: a dressing room with sterile., colorless, stark white walls; and an interview room full of fake strangely lurid pastel lighting. Yet we are left with a bit of hope: that very final scene shows a Robbie and Cecilia “back together”: almost all the framing is gone, and we have our hero and heroine together in wide open vistas of sea and beach and lovely white cliffs of Dover in a home, their home, that the camera does not dare to enter. 

 

I really do think people pay too much attention to the "save me" scene.
It is, after all, shown much later in the movie, and also from Robbie's perspective -- he was trying to figure out what went wrong with Briony and him for her to do such a thing... he was trying to rationalize it. But Briony told Fiona that it happened years ago (when she was 10) and the minute she said "I love you" to Robbie the feeling disappeared. So I am not convinced that it is jealousy.

Also, Joe Wright made sure that we saw the two different points of view as depicted in the novel (one from Briony's and the other what actually happened). I think it is very important to understand that, instead of chalking it up as Briony knew exactly what went on. The two figures at the fountain, for example, showed two different interpretations. From Briony's point of view, it looked like Robbie ordered Cecilia to strip down to her underwear and go into the fountain. From her point of view, it also looked like Robbie was attacking Cee in the library.

If it were all just jealousy, then Joe Wright and Ian McEwan would have no reason to show us the scenes twice, in each POVs. It is very important to understand that, that Briony was too young to know what was actually going on. It took her four years to figure out.

I think people want to believe what they want to believe, and the "jealousy" explanation is the easiest. They latch on to the "save me" scene and decide that is the key reason... but that really is just Robbie's POV -- trying to figure out what went wrong. He thought Briony was in love with him and jealous. But was she? 



Someone said that great literature leaves you with ambiguity, and it's up to each of us to make up our own mind, and what we believe shows us "what we're made of." I think it's true. For those who believe, for example, that Lola wasn't raped but was engaging in consensual sex, or Briony did what she did because she was jealous... I think that has more to do with their own world views and conviction, instead of what McEwan actually intended. In fact, Joe Wright has given us literature on film. Bravo!
I also think the "save me" scene isn't there to show us that she did everything out of jealousy. I think it's the easiest thing for us to assume so we can assign blame. I think the scene is to add more layers to Briony. First, yes, she's one with the hyper imagination, to a point she would jump in the river to test out her theory about love. It also shows us that, yes, indeed Briony was fond of Robbie... that makes her decision to send Robbie away because "he's a sex maniac" more interesting and conflicting. It's not as if she didn't care about Robbie -- she would have done that without blinking if it were Danny Hardman. So I think "betrayal" has a point -- she probably did feel betrayed, but not the way we thought. I really don't think she felt betrayed because Robbie had sex with her sister (I really don't think she was in love with Robbie at age 13), but she was betrayed because Robbie turned up not the knight in shining armor as she had always thought.

Of course, when she found out she was wrong, her world just crumbled.


 
The purest "villian" here is Paul---for whatever happened between him and Lola, he clearly crossed the line and initiated the destruction.What I found most unjust, was how easily Robbie was accused, arrested and convicted.Here, a young man had been trusted throughout his lifetime with everything and everyone occupying the Tallis household---yet, it only took the accusation of a little girl and production of sexually-charged typing to seal his fate.You just know much resentment and bitterness must've been simmering under the surface of that household.

Robbie was, of course, the purest "martyr" in the story. He was a sincerely good man; intellectual yet unassuming, a hard worker, friendly and polite, a playful spirit, compassionate soul and reflective thinker. The Tallis' head of household may have been away on "business" for long periods of time but Robbie's Dad had checked-out for good, establishing for the audience yet another hurdle he had to overcome. Despite it, he still turned out better character than most of the Tallis household.

The only "crime" he committed throughout the film, was the crime of being human. Robbie dared to desire anything for himself--even if it was only Cecilia's love, companionship and sexual intimacy--and once off the pedestal of purity, paid dearly for it. Unselfish, even, in expressing arousal and desire (understandably raw--a product of carnal intoxication that even inspired a laugh from its author),we notice another aspect of Robbie's "good" nature; he's a sexual giver, i.e "I want to kiss your...". It's as if fate punished this nice guy for being human, fantasizing about a wealthy woman and wanting sex. In the most extreme representation of this, even his deserved moment of sexual bliss was interrupted in a disturbingly awkward way, when Cecilia's little sister walked into the library and caught the two in an intense pose. Robbie wasn't allowed to make anything "official" throughout the story, allowed any respite or finished "work"---even a mutual act of passion.

I think Briony's guilt was so permanent because Robbie was that rare person; truly good with minimal flaws. There were no "Well, he was a jerk..." stories to fool herself into feeling better about her great decision. He was a top-shelf person who couldn't catch a break, despite rising above class lines with his natural intellect, sense of dedication and hard work (he was probably the first to graduate college, no less than from Cambridge,in his family). There was no way around it: He was horribly, devastatingly "screwed over"; what's more, he'd likely deserved it less than anyone she had ever met or could imagine. The idealist writer in Briony would recognize this role mismatched to its fate and would struggle to accept what she'd done. Her lauded child-genius-writer's-intuition confused vital signals; she'd painted the "good prince" as a monster.
 
 
Well, there are two things I agree with you on--especially since I previously wrote about both of them in another post; There was no opportunity for wrongs to be righted because The War clipped two lives short and cemented Briony's fate. I mentioned in another posting that The War was the real "villian" in this story---but Paul was the purest representation of it in one person. Not only did he violate a young girl and disrupt every character's well-being, but he benefitted financially from The War and somehow convinced Lola to marry him (without considering her psychological well-being).

I didn't say Robbie was perfect, I made it clear it was his humanity that propelled his character through the story. Goodness is not synonomous with perfection. Robbie was simply a good person who became entangled in a bad situation. I do think Briony's pre-occupation with literal archtypes led her to view the situation from a "black and white" standpoint; Robbie was either a prince or a villian. She realized later that she had assigned him the wrong role.

I do think Robbie's goodness, in itself, was a strong player in this story; as Briony matured and looked back on Robbie from an adult's perspective, she appreciated how good he really was and how much he and Cecilia deserved to be together. It's not that she ever really believed that he deserved the fate she'd set rolling for him, but a guilty kid might conjure up convinving stories to herself in order to ease the guilt. Robbie lived a life of strong character and I think that fact was meant to convey a poignant message; sometimes a bad fate isn't earned at all. A "bad" or rather, unfortunate life can happen to good people.
 
I do think that Briony knew "deep down" that Robbie wasn't guilty. Briony realized she'd gone too far from the moment she told the authorities that it was indeed Robbie she'd seen. She already knew, watching him from her window, that her character wouldn't allow her to retract the lie--he was doomed to suffer from it. At that point, she was likely terrified of being caught-out a liar in a courtroom or by her family.

However, I'm not sure if she fully understood the consequences of such a grave accusation when she made it; like Cecilia stripped and jumped into the fountain to "punish" (tease, actually) Robbie, so do I think Briony accused Robbie to punish him for liking Cecilia over her, as well as for the genuine uneasy feelings she had over his sexual relationship with her sister. At 13, she was certainly experiencing a developing attraction to him, but I think she was still in the "sex is unspeakable--so bad!" phase. Perhaps, for a while, she justified her behavior with that consolation. She might've even imagined herself as later being a sort of savior for Robbie, earning his adoration once she stood forth to clear his name. Of course, it was all fantasy comfabulation---there was/is no place for storytelling when accusing someone of such a serious crime.Briony learned this too late and didn't have the strength of character to come forward before Robbie was imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit.

If she weren't so self-absorbed and headstrong--determined to always be exactly right--perhaps she would've come clean in time and suffered the consequences of her behavior. She waited too long and the lie developed into a disease of heavy guilt. When she was old enough to reflect on her actions, realize that it wouldn't have been death for her to have come clean before Robbie was sentenced, it became her lifelong journey to make any ammends possible for such an awful, impetuous choice.
 
I don't think it necessarily was atonement, at least, not an atonement for Cecilia and Robbie but within Briony herself. I think Briony realized later in life the earlier limitations of her personality and character. What she developed in old age was what Robbie had as a young man; a sense of wisdom and reflection. Briony knew how many opportunities had been lost for everyone but death had prevented her from ever finalizing that story in reality.

The book was an attempt to accomplish something for Cecilia and Robbie that her lie had prevented them from investigating while alive...but Robbie's name wasn't cleared in reality, so I suppose that could've been looked upon as the greatest error of Briony's life. Her lie had placed the burden/responsibility of many people's happiness on her back and she realized she wasn't capable of carrying it. I don't think this exempts her from responsiblity, but I think it took a lifetime for her to truly understand the depth of her mistake.At that point, I think she still didn't know what was the best thing to do about it because her choice had isolated her from those who would've given the best counsel. Noone reached out to her and she was too paralyzed to reach out to anyone else. She retreated into her stories as a way to find peace from her reality and to deal with it on her terms.

It's a sad premise; serious enough betrayals can divide people, nomatter how close previously, for life. While Cecilia was perfectly justified in her disgust, her expectations for Briony were above what Briony had already shown she was capable of. Cecilia knew she was a story-teller and that her lie landed Robbie in jail and war, so why wouldn't Briony show cowardice in attempts to patch things up? If Cecilia had reached out to her--however much it bothered Cecilia to have--perhaps an older sister could've helped Briony see the error of her ways and requirements of decency. I certainly don't blame Cecilia for the outcome of things, but it's a pity it couldn't have worked out that way.

Damage was done but with the right amount of support from Cecilia (despite Cecilia being a sort of rebellious spirit--her sloppiness and casual, no-stocking attire might've made her seem less credible to the Tallis' than her story-telling kid sister) and Briony's own dedication of will, she might've prevented things from getting worse. Of course, there was also the case of Mrs. Tallis; in the darkest caves of her soul, Mrs. Tallis would likely resent that it wasn't Robbie, especially if Cecilia's love affair with a "villager" was realized. However nice Robbie was, he was still a working class guy benefiting from her husband's attention and faith in his capabilities(something she certainly saw little of). What did Mr. Tallis have to say about everything? If he believed so strongly in Robbie's intelligence and character that he funded his education, isn't odd that he did little to understand what actually happened? Did he sit down and discuss it with Briony?

I wouldn't say the situation would ammend itself easily, but it could've been done. I'm sure Robbie would've had to work through his own anger toward Briony, the family would've been dissapointed in her, she'd have to testify against Paul and Cecilia's sisterly trust in her would've been diminished. But everything would've been "righted" in time and she probably would've suffered less in the long run. She could've paid her penance while also allowing Robbie freedom from public shame of a crime he didn't commit...but the trade-off would've been her own deserved shame for his undeserved.
 
 
I'd have to reconsider that atonement within Briony was actually achieved; her life was ending but it would never be "finished" in the neat, satisfying way her novel was. Ideals--challenged, lost or realized--replaced the comfort of common lives; all three were denied the normalcy of romantic companionship, perhaps children and a hum-drum daily life. They remained fixed in time, two by death and one by the consequences of her life. Briony anticipated in old age what Cecilia and Robbie had by dying in youth; life cut short by circumstance rather than a finalized story of life with its typical ebbs and flows over time. It is unlikely that Briony would even experience her last breath in a lucid moment...rendering a profound sense of the unfinished life, even as it would end. 

 
 
 
What made me like Briony, and dare say love Briony, the character is when I realized that she too loved Robbie. It's even clearer in the novel if you ask me, but I'm speaking directly about the film.

The imagined apartment scene, if you can't see the love and the pain in the eyes of Briony then I don't think you've ever seen a person in love, and hurt. 

I know Robbie loved C, and C loved Robbie. Briony loved them both. And she betrayed them. And she had to live with that for the rest of her life right down to her last days. Poor Briony. Poor all of them, really.
 
 
 
Yes, she was a 13 year-old. But the point is, she didn't remain a 13 year-old her whole life. Or did she?
Because, see, it's not that I personally want Briony to suffer. It's only that I can't offer her any forgiveness. Not because of what she did as a child, but of what she didn't do as an adult. But if she never really abandoned her 13 year-old self - because of mental problems or any kind of pathology - it could be a different story.
Maybe she remained forever stuck in her own fantasy world, even if in the book she tells us that, after seeing the scene by the fountain, she left her childhood behind. She suddenly understood the adult world. But in reality, how little did she know about it. 

In fact, what Briony couldn't understand when she saw the scene by the fountain, or when she read Robbie's letter, was sexuality. In her own orderly mind, sex was chaos, confusion. Her stories had moral issues, and sex somehow subverted it all. The sex maniac, the psycopath, that's how she started to see who Robbie "really" was. He was no longer the immaculate prince from so many of her tales, the one she once professed to love with such intensity and purity.

Briony sent Robbie to jail because of a lie. I can understand that the over-impressed, over-imaginative girl Briony once was really believed in her own lie at the time - "I saw him with my own eyes". But, even when she started to admit to herself she wasn't so sure, she still insisted in her lie. Because she wanted to punish Robbie. He had betrayed her pure love with a carnal one. He turned out to be human, imperfect and tarnished. A fallen idol. It was Briony's job to teach him a lesson.

Years passed, and Briony started to fully understand what she had done. And still, she didn't tell a soul that Robbie wasn't the culprit. Because now he had another status in her mind - he was the victim, the innocent man paying for a crime he never commited, and thus he became again appealing and beautiful and immaculate to her. The fact that he was in a prison meant there was no sex, and he was pure. As a purified man he was to start his ordeal as a soldier and complete his journey towards redemption.

And Briony was playing her part as a nurse; seeing Robbie's face in each man she cared for, waiting for him to return so she could hold his hand and see in his face the gratitude "Yes Briony, now I understand what you were trying to do. Thank you! A heroe's journey was all I needed to be THE perfect character!"

It's not a surprise that, when she wrote the confrontation scene, Briony made Robbie say "Tell me, did it give you pleasure, to think about me inside?" This sentence, double meaning and all, means everything. Yes, it did give her pleasure after all. She gave Robbie his journey and made him triumph (because he died as a pure, immaculated man), and she gave the couple their happiness. Robbie was never meant to be hers, but in the end he belonged more to Briony than he ever belonged to Cecilia. 

Briony is a wonderful character. She fascinates us with her complexity. But I find it impossible to have any kind of empathy towards her - menatl illness or whatnot. When I think about her, in terms of a real human being, a human being doing what she did to Robbie and Cecilia...her suffering is nothing compared to their suffering. As a human being, she's crap. As a fictional character, she's brilliant.
 
 
Cecilia and Robbie (Tea Room scene)
Yes, she's doing it for Robbie, too. For the both of them. She feels the need to be strong, to keep her mind focused on her new job (and we know how hard and demanding the nurse training was), for that Robbie will have something solid, real, something to hold on when he returns. Because I'm sure Cee never doubted he would return, but in what conditions? Badly wounded? Traumatized by the war experience? And also, maybe he would have trouble finding a job, being an ex-con and all. So, I guess all these thoughts crossed her mind, and she chose to remain strong, as much as she (like all of us) just wanted to hold him at that bus stop and never let him go. The romantic in me felt that she should had never returned to the hospital that afternoon, but at the same time, I respect her a lot because of it. I understand why she did it. Cecilia certainly grew as a character...her suffering made her more compassionate and at the same time, stronger.
 
Thinking about it, it just adds to the complete tragedy of their story. Because not only Cee, but also Robbie, never doubted for once that they wouldn't be together one day. When he said in his letter "I will return...our story will resume" we never doubt his determination for one second, and Cee never doubted, too. Just as Robbie (and we all) never doubted that she would wait for him. With all their suffering, they were still young and optmistic. They really believed their love would prevail.
 
 
 
I think people are overcomplicating things because they feel duped by a "trick" ending and then confuse themselves trying to understand what was real and what wasn't. Also I don't think it's meant to be a clever, big reveal "surprise" ah-ha type ending - and if you are looking at it that way you will overthink it. It actually flows quite naturally from the story and underscores its themes.

Everything that occurs in the story is absolutely true, forget Briony writing it and just consider it as true, except that the couple doesn't have a happy ending: the scene where Briony meets with them to apologize never happens because Robbie is already dead and Briony doesn't have the courage to go to see her sister who is subsequently killed.

It's really not a trick ending, in my estimation. It's just that we aren't told that Briony has created that ONE scene until after we've seen it. And when it is revealed we see the utter tragedy of this girl's life, and the pathos of her attempt to atone.

In a real sense Briony loses her chance to make any real atonement when Robbie dies at Dunkirk, his death, and Cecilia's, shuts the door forever.

It's interesting that people are talking about Briony being rich, successful, etc. I think that really misses the point. I think we are meant to see that she is forever "stuck" in the evil she committed as a young child, that her actions truncate and define her life as much as they do Robbie and Cee's. She is shown wearing the same hairdo, the same necklace as an old lady that she had on as a child, had on that night in fact - she is trapped in that moment. We never see her experience love, or real passion, or enjoy the fruits of success. We are shown an image of her standing before a brick wall with Cee and Robbie kissing passionately above her, frozen and immobilized. She is stuck behind that wall, separated from them, ever the voyeur, the spectator, to real life, real love. She can only live through fiction, which is what has destroyed her, and what she uses to try to redeem herself. 

 



I have not found one reviewer to remark on the movie
as a brilliant, multi-layered study of the narcissism of Briony Tallis. The romance is simply her pathetic attempt to atone for her wrong. Yet it is a 'false' atonement, in my opinion, because she only confesses when she: 1. is dying of vascular dementia therefore will suffer no mental or emotional repercussions; 2. can profit financially from her public confession about the real background of her final novel (during a TV interview no less) and 3. all the participants are dead except for her cousin that is molested. (Her confession allows her to extract retaliation from her now famous cousin grabbing the lead role in her play by exposing the basis of their marriage. What a field day the British tabloids will have with her revelation about her famous cousin.)

To classify this movie as a romance is misleading. The romance is only Briony playing god once again (the first time when she jumped into the stream after asking Robbie if he would save her; the second time when she falsely accuses Robbie of molesting her cousin). It is not the innocent imaginings of a highly impressionable young girl misinterpreting a fountainside flirtation. She was a highly accomplished narcissist from a very young age. The romance is very high flown, stilted but examine who the authored the love story. An extremely self-centered woman who has never known true love only a 'crush' and then subsequently never marries. The romance is a product of an arid soul. As the old saying goes, what can you expect from a pig but a grunt?

I had to see the movie twice because at first I couldn't decide if I disliked the movie itself or that the manipulations of Briony influenced my dislike of the movie. When I saw it a second time, I decided that it is one of the best, if not the best movie about narcissism since All About Eve.
I think Briony actually says in the film (if not, then in the book) about the atonement, that "The attempt is all." She knows she will never actually make things better. Not that this makes me feel for her in any way, I despise the character of Briony, especially at the end.
 


I disagree with the premise of this post. Narcissism is an adult personality trait or disorder. To say that Briony, as a child at 13, is a narcissist is entirely misplaced.

She was very egocentric at that age, quite true. But psychological research conducted over the past decade or so has demonstrated that egocentrism--and the inability to appreciate the long-term effects of one's actions--are hallmark cognitive deficits at that age of mental development. (As a sidenote, these same brain studies of adolescents were cited in support of abolishing the death penalty for juveniles in the United States, among other things.)

Part of growing up is realizing there is a world outside of oneself. Briony hadn't yet reached that level of awareness yet, and although she is not blameless, her age and corresponding lack of maturity at 13 are extremely relevant in assessing her moral culpability. To hold her to the standards of an adult would simply ignore the science of cognitive developmenet.

Whether Briony exhibited any traits of narcissism as an adult is another matter. But as it concerns a child, that label is simply inaccurate.
 
Thanks for the textbook explanation. Remember, Briony is a character in a novel, not a person. I think the author and the adaptation artfully and consistently reveals that her accusation and self-centeredness was a character trait developed and present as early as 12 or 13. Throughout her life, her manipulations and self-delusion became so highly refined that she defined the standards for atonement and proclaimed them on national tv. What a brilliant character study this author gave to us and how magnificently it was portrayed in the movie.
Yes, Briony is a character in a novel. She's also a child character in a novel. And as such, I feel it's inappropriate applying adult standards to her behavior, and ignoring proven facts about human nature and how our minds develop. I think McEwan would feel similarly.

As I said before, none of this renders Briony blameless. She told a lie that, on one level, she most likely knew was false. But I do very much believe we'd be presented with a much different character--nay, a much different story--had she been 17 or 18 at the time of the accusation.

There is a reason why McEwan made Briony 13 in the story, on the cusp of adolescence and yet very much lacking in maturity especially in matters of sexuality. A large part of the narrative was premised on how Briony genuinely did not fully comprehend what she observed between Robbie/Cecilia--but at the time believed that she did.

Without that angle, the story would lose its thematic focus on truth versus perception.
 
On what basis do you feel McEwen would agree with you? Has he hinted as much? Can you show us something he's said in support of your idea? It's rather unrealistic, if not naive, to expect a character in a novel to reflect reality. And the reality you espouse is only a hypothetical one. It may have strong evidence behind it as of now, but is still only a theory, not even a universally accepted one.
 


I agree. What Briony did was the result of the impulsiveness, the imagination and the egocentrism of her age, not to a personality disorder like narcissism. Furthermore, I don't think that a narcissistic person would change her plans of going to Cambridge in order to become a nurse and do something for other people. 

 
 
Are you serious? What she did went well beyond childhood impulsiveness. Children do tend to be self centered, but they aren't totally incapable of understanding that their actions effect other people. Especially when its something this serious.
 That's why Robbie asked her (when she was 18) "How old do you have to be to know right from wrong?"
 


Robbie never asked her the question. Robbie never survived the war. This conversation is no more than a internal conversation she said it to herself. I admit that she never admit her wrong until old age, but that is what atonement is all about right?
 
 I disagree with the premise of this post. Narcissism is an adult personality trait or disorder. To say that Briony, as a child at 13, is a narcissist is entirely misplaced.
 
Not entirely true. Are you familiar with the story of Peter Pan? He is only around age 10 - 13 and he's the very narcissist. A lot of the story focuses on that characteristic of his. Very selfish in nature, has to be the center of attention all the time, constantly boasts and is overly proud of himself...etc. While that is a fictional story it's not unheard of for real children of that age to act similarly.

Her character seemed somewhat narcissist but at the same time she also misunderstood some of the events she saw going on.
 
I'm not about narcissism but it's definition about the God-complex of being a writer. Perhaps that's why it affected me because I am am writer myself and I certainly can relate to this. But it also poses the conflicts within the writer: tell the truth, or not? Compared this to another film about writers: Stranger Than Fiction and you will see the difference in themes, tones, and styles.

I think Briony is a rich and complex character that is going to be studied for a long time to come. It's easy to just reduce her to one thing or another, and to hate or pity her out of necessity, but to me, she's so much more and while I despise what she did (or didn't do), I don't necessarily despise her. She's just human.
 
Personality disorders are generally believed to have their onset in late adolescence or early adulthood.

That's why doctors very rarely diagnose children with personality disorders. Their personalities are still in the process of forming at that early stage.
 
 
 
I don't necessarily agree with the idea of narcissism, but I do think the original post has the right idea: this is not a romance, but ultimately Briony's tragedy. Briony did act selfishly, self-servingly, and heartlessly, and ultimately completely destroyed the lives of Robbie and Cecelia. But the primary tragedy is not their fates; it is that Briony, when she finally feels the repercussions, cannot apologize. In the book, she is too afraid to see Cecelia after Robbie's death, and then Cee dies in the tube bombing. Imagine the guilt she must have felt, not only for her actions, but also taking the fact that Cee was alive for granted? We as people think that our loved ones, even ones we've wronged will be around indefinitely, and Briony learned the hard way that that is not always the case. Her first attempt at atonement is obvious, when she gives up her cushy college seat to pursue nursing in the then very dangerous London. But then Cee died, and she realized that missed opportunity. So in lieu of an actual apology, she imagined one. It's narcisstic in nature, yes, to expunge her guilt, but can you blame her for apologizing in the only means left at her disposal? The guilt she feels is plainly visible and she has obviously lived with that pain her entire life.
 
It's been said here, but not quite in this way--narcissim is the normal state of affairs for many children but an aberration in adults. I'm not a shrink but it doesn't seem incorrect to call a child a narcissist.

Also thinking about the book, on the day of the big event, Briony (the child) determines that she is no longer a child but is in search of adult experiences to write about, and her decision to become a nurse can easily be interpreted as a search for writerly fodder. Although I think you are right and becoming a nurse is a form of self-punishment, I do think there is some kind of personality defect and she is not really living but trying to get life experience that she can put into literary form. As she does.

I think her epiphany in the novel, the point at which she transcends her limitations, occurs when she tells the French soldier that she loves him, because he needs to hear that before he dies. That is really the only moment in either the book or the movie that she achieves genuine shared emotional communication with another person. At all other times she is emotionally disconnected from everyone (and herself).

And I agree, no Atonement for Briony. The book is her failed attempt to achieve it. 

              
 

it doesn't seem incorrect to call a child a narcissist.

I don't know about that. We all know how the term came about. A child can be selfish, yes, even self-absorbed. Often, they do crave attention and would often see themselves older than they really are but narcissism is extreme. IMO, Briony didn't display such tendencies but was just a normal naivè child.

And I understand we are talking about the film so I'm also basing my view on how the actors played the characters.

Remember how 13yr old Briony asked Robbie to come see her play? There was no malice in the beginning, not even a thought about her spurned crush 2 years back. You can judge by her facial reactions.

The way she said "Cecilia" when she witnessed the event in the library, that to me was clearly fear or shock that this man was attacking her sister.

Same with the 18-year old. She sees her reflection in the window and in contrast to the real Narcissus, says "There is no Briony."

For the old Briony, I would have to go back to the book as I can't remember if it was mentioned by Vanessa Redgrave. It was only in her final draft that she gave the lovers the happy ending. She wanted to be honest and tell the world everything and that's how she had been writing it all those 50 years, but finally she realized it was useless. "I no longer saw what purpose it would serve." The fake ending wasn't intentional from the beginning. It was just submission, loss of hope that made her do it. It wasn't narcissism. It was sadness.

I still don't buy the narcissism. There's nothing to be gained by her revealing the true story (despite the made-up ending) in the novel if she's a narcissist. She is desperate trying to atone for what she did. She felt that she had prevented Robbie and Cee's happiness -- self-centered and egotistical, maybe (what writers aren't?) but narcissistic? Not really. Her novel didn't paint her in a good light at all -- and the scene at the flat clearly showed how wrong she was, still, at age 18 and that neither Robbie and Cee could forgive her. That's what something a narcissist would do, in her own book.

Also, at least in the book, her motivation to stop Robbie was to protect Cee from a sex maniac. Confused and misguided she may be, but she isn't narcissistic. No narcissist would care about someone else except herself. In this case, she cared about Cee.

Briony definitely has limitations. She's definitely self-centered (and many people are). But narcissistic? I just don't see it.

 
 
 
As a person, I judge harshly when such thoughtless acts occur and causes so much pain. And yes I do tend to overthink things =). There was a post SOMEWHERE who talked about how Briony was plain, her lack of beauty, plainness, paleness and "sack cloth and ashes" style of dressing underscored her desire to atone. (the baggy dresses in her youth and old age and the nurses uniform etc. That observation shifted my perception somewhat. I think I need to see the movie a third time. I also know that narcissists are incapable of atonement, so maybe the act is everything, at least for Briony (meaning she can't really do much but try).

Briony has some kind of multilayered complication of sexual nature that kind of makes her feel exaltation, aroused, hyperventilating in a satisfactory way or simply said feeling good when she is in the midst an opposing an "occurrence" of sexual nature. (By occurrence I assume everything even sexually explicit text). Acting against just further indulges her trill and that is why she is so at it… Perplexed by her young age and mixed up feelings and knowledge it is indulged further. You see it’s like some people love crying, they feel some kind of sweetness from the fact that they are feeling deeply sad and they are aroused by it. It’s of that nature.
It is very hard to judge the movie as the acting is so good and one can always get mixed up… Added is also a little Dostoevsky vibe and this film becomes so multi layered and complicated we can discuss it by the end of the millennia and we will find we have opened a new discussion in itself... Anyway a good film, good arts and a lot to talk about…
 
 
 Young people are almost invariably self-centered--I'm sure that most of us have played god at Briony's age. The suggestion that the financial and perhaps personal gain brought by her book corresponds to some trend of conceit and narcissism is an unfounded insinuation. Any publishing author makes money and gains fame. This should not be taken to mean that authors in general cannot also be forthright and sincere. The achievement of atonement is not immediately thwarted, as you suggest, by the existence of possible ulterior motives. Instead, it comes through genuine emotion backed by appropriate actions. As for Briony's emotion, it seems clear that her sentiments were authentic. Her actions were delayed for quite a long time, but she acknowledges her failures and it is obvious that she has attempted to do the best she possibly could given the circumstances.
 
That's an interesting take, and my gut instinct says you're probably right. What I find fascinating about the film (I just saw it), is that one thinks it is a romance even as one is watching. Not all the time, but the second half of the movie definitely seems to shift in that direction.

The most interesting thing about the ending is that it casts a new light and forces us to reexamine the previous scenes. As we do so, we realize (and this is where I think you're right) that even the romantic scenes we think about are about Robbie and the woman are really about Briony. It's all about Briony, even when it's seemingly about someone else.

The title Atonement is ironic, because she doesn't atone. She's so narcissistic that she may believe that this is atonement, but it's not. The lovers are still dead, and there is no justice.

So it's narcissism, but it's ultimately a thoughtful statement on the usefulness and limits of art.

One more thing: Isn't it interesting that movie would be a romance, if not for the last five minutes or so?


 
 

Well, what's your definition of atonement?
You mention the word justice--do you consider the two to be the same or similar? For me, justice connotes punishment or karmic retribution. Justice involves outside forces righting a wrong. Atonement on the other hand comes from within. It is an intensely personal phenomenon that requires a person to deal with their own demons in their own way. Just as a killer may be executed without ever atoning for his or her sins, so might Briony atone without facing justice or repairing the effects of her misdeeds.
 
I would say justice and atonement are related. You're right in making the distinction that atonement is more personal, whereas justice is something that happens or doesn't regardless of one's personal reaction.

Still, I would not consider her atonement proper. Atonement is making reparation, to make amends. But what I was saying about justice and the limits of creativity is that nothing actually changes. Art does not alter the "reality" of her situation, that these people she loved and who loved one another are dead. And everyone her story could have affected is long since dead. So it is a selfish act, one to give her the illusion of atonement. It is purely for herself.

Had she published, or attempted to publish, her story within, say, a decade of the incident, that's another thing. It might not have changed things, but it might have made a difference in the lives of the people she hurt, and that's what counts when it's too late to undo a hurtful action.

As someone pointed out, the title "Atonement" is something she strives for and fails. Notice that in the her final scene with McAvoy and Knightly, they describe what she must do atone for her sin (write it all down and confess immediately). She does not do this. Instead, she waits years and years until it's too late.

I think she realizes this, with sadness. Narcissistic, in retrospect, is too strong a word, but I think what she did she ultimately did for herself.
 
In response to the OP, yes I felt that her admission or confession was entirely self-serving. A happy ending to a nightmare that Briony created and never actually "atoned" for.
 
I dont know about narcissism but its not a love story really thats one thing Ill say.

This film is not about love and certain characters dealing with said emmotion, as much as its about guilty, ignorance, selfishness and well, "Atonement".
Even if its arguably unsuccessful or insincere.
 
 
 
Having had personally viewing the movie from the same side of the fence as you, I also saw it as a tragedy in it's purist literary sense; i.e. Greek Plays. Even to the point of flirting with the tale of Oedipus.
Cecilia and Robbie's relationship (if indeed there was one) was always doomed.

 

There is no debate that WWII imagery is not new
and as such when you use it it had better be in a unique way. This movie does none of that. The long take will assuredly be mentioned as unique and the "shot" was, but the content was not. It was things we have seen already. Further, he is in WWII by choice, or by conscription, but not by Briony. How are we supposed to witness the plight Briony put him through when they skip the prison time he served?"


I dunno, the dude had the choice of rot in jail for a crime he didn't commit or go and fight. And that's over and above the massive emergancy that WAS WWII in Britain. And I must say, the imagery was unique in it's not about the war at all, but rather an allegory for Robbie's conviction and prison time -- confusing, full of both despair and hope, wasteful. 

"Love story - Please... like we have never seen two lovers torn apart before. This is in a somewhat unique way however so kudos for trying, but the lovers have so little screen time leading up to the divide that it is largely unbelievable that their involvement is more than puppy love or infatuation. We get all of a few lines explaining he'd been a friend for a long time. but like the prison, we don't see it. Additionally we hardly ever see them apart. It is really hard to swallow that they had such a bad time away from each other when we don't see it. 

What? Do you need explicite iconography and conversations to understand the concept being presented? The point is that they don't really know how their love would develop, that they were torn apart in the first, powerful rush of it. The awkwardness of the tea room scene does a wonderful job of describing this -- she can't remember how he takes his tea, he's not sure why she's there. It's powerful enough for her to turn her back on her family, but he's not sure she made the right decision.

"Which leads me to the end - 'Seriously audience, we were just faking, the two hours of tripe you just negotiated was not really what happened. I assure you the truth is much more powerful and moving than what was shown to you. It was full of love and adventure and an unfortunate ending. But the ending I gave is better because it is my way of justifying to myself that when I die real soon I have fully atoned (title!) for the horrors I caused (that you didn't see)'"

Wow, I guess you are one of those folks who's lived a pristine, blameless life and has never felt guilty over anything? Must be hard to be you. Seriously though, if that's what you got from this film, you DID miss the point entirely. It's as much about the single-mindedness and certainy of youth as it is about wishing you hadn't been. It's about self-delusion, the choices people make, and how they effect over people. If you can't understand the tragedy of having effectively put your sister and the guy you had a childhood crush on in a position that ultimately caused them massive unhappiness and perhaps death, then I suggest you go watch Alvin and the Chipmunks.

 
I felt that the ending was indeed a cruel trick of the author to play on the reader. Cheated? No. Disappointed and duped? Absolutely. I wanted to throw it away initially, but then the intensity of these feelings began to crystallize.

The author seems to have achieved his goal and further reflection on how he had deceived me gave me an even better reward than the happy ending initially sought. Can art reconcile? For Briony, perhaps not, but she has attempted some form of reconciliation by telling the story we all wanted. Can the author reconcile the fallout between author and reader? Brilliantly.

All art is an attempt at reconciliation, an act of atonement, between life and its artistic representation. But the artist is no man/god and cannot reconstrue events to provide us with idealized reality. It is fiction and it fails when experienced in the oppressive shadow of a real world. If we expect idealizations, perfections, we will feel a sense of disappointment and deception. Art is not just for art's sake, but we must recognize it is not infallible - we should not demand that it make our lives any better, only hopefully fuller. The conclusion was a slap in the face, one, that I at least, have benefited from.
 
 

Granted I have just finished reading Atonement
so my outrage is a bit fresh, but I believe Briony is the same self involved child in 1999 that she was at the opening of the story. She intimates as much, feeling that she is the same youthful girl even as she is 77 and facing her immortality. By spending her life writing draft after draft of the story of her "crime" and the devestating effects it had on the lives of her sister and Robbie she gets exactly what she wished for even before the lie was told. She is a parasite. A parasite that can fancify and dramatise the lives of her host, but no less a parasite. Parasites don't apologize for what they are, and I cannot grasp a real apology or atonement in the entirety of her story. Her play was her attempt to send a moral lesson to her much older brother about his seriousness in relationships. Briefly mentioning the superb father he turns out feels like a weak attempt at dismissing her childhood ignorance and assumption, a weak apology without any cognition on her part of her continual pattern of dramatising and attempting to control the lives of her family. That her attempt at atonement fails doesn't seem to pain her in the least. Worse than that is seems to fuel her conviction that to be godlike in her authorship is worth everything that has happened. The entire rest of the story seems a cheap theft of her sisters life. If this, as she implies, is what it is to be an author I do wonder at the feelings of Mr. McEwan himself. I love this story because even as I am typing I feel myself becoming aware of my own Briony-like stupidity, questioning whether I read each passage right, and sympathising with those who so foolishly jumped to the conclusion that he himself stole the life and story of another for literary success. The effect of the novel is as contagious as Briony's hysteria from her encounter with the adult world of cunts and maniacs. Can I say I love this novel too many times?









Jul. 5th, 2008

Blue

Atonement: Symbolisms

We've been having some very interesting discussions at the Atonement IMDb board. Many posters there are very insightful, when coming up with new ways to look at the film. One of the most intriguing things about Atonement is the use of symbolisms to express the most different themes, or to take us inside the hearts and minds of the characters. Here's a small dose of what we've been talking there. The posters are not identified (I used different colors for different posters and/or posts), but here's the link for the thread: 
If you want to give your own interpretation of the symbols and themes that can be found in Atonement, please join us...we're always glad to talk with new Atonement fans! : )

I will post more discussions about Atonement from the IMDb board soon...



One image that I thought was interesting
was the way that Cecilia is splayed against the (wooden) bookcases with her arms outstretched in the library scene and this image of her is repeated at the end in her death scene, where she is suspended in darkness, again with arms outstretched, as if crucified. It seemed not only a reference to Christ, and her crucifixion/martyrdom, but that she is nailed to the cross, by love, at the moment she is united to Robbie in the library. At that moment her fate is inevitably sealed, united to his, she becomes a victim and martyr.

It was interesting too that they both die in trapped, underground situations, helpless, hidden, in darkness and isolation, lonely deaths.

There is also symbolism related to blood; the nun tells Briony to wipe the blood off her face (someone else's, a soldier like Robbie). And we see Cecilia dabbing blood off her lip (her own, shed for Robbie). 


Cecilia is pressed against a wall of literature...I hadn't really thought about it. Since it's only in literature that they found "their happiness".
 
Either that or that they are crucified by fiction! And so much wood in the study, like the wood of the cross. 


What is quite astonishing has been the almost total inability of film critics on both sides of the Atlantic to (so far) correctly “read” this film. Even those critics who play up their literary pretensions, by claiming to have read the book, (and there are some pompous assholes out there) still don’t seem to have got it.

There is a lot of largely irrelevant chatter about the English class system, which if it exists, as a system, is about money and power, just as it is in the USA. And neither are the Tallis family aristocrats, minor or otherwise. They are simply wealthy. The book makes clear that the family fortune comes from Cecilia’s grandfather who made his money from padlocks and ironmongery. Quite American, don’t you think?

Some critics have helpfully prefaced their reviews by pasting in a dictionary definition of the word atonement: expiation of guilt, reparation for wrong and injury etc. In so limiting the definition, they spectacularly miss the point, by a millimeter.

Try this: In Christian theology the atonement refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ which made possible the reconciliation between God and creation.

Don’t stop reading; I am not a Jesus Freak or even a regular churchgoer. Ian McEwan is an atheist.

But there is no escaping the fact that underpinning both the book and the movie is a Christian allegory. It’s obvious, and in your face from the beginning, but no one seems to have noticed! Where to begin? Perhaps with a name - Robbie!

Jesus saith unto her, Mary (Magdalene, at the resurrection). She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

Also in Mark, twice, Matthew and John.

We learn that Robbie comes from humble beginnings, he wants to become a healer and in the book, at least, he has liberal, essentially Christian, politics. James McAvoy brilliantly portrays him as an empathetic, Christ like, figure, a fact some critics have alluded to.

He is betrayed by a previous admirer. The family close ranks against him to protect their wealth and status. The authorities cannot be bothered to investigate the truth. (Pilate?).

He is, metaphorically, crucified and cast in with the thieves.

Now comes the bit which really annoys me about many critics’ comments – the Dunkirk beach scene. Several have said that this is irrelevant, that it slows up the show, and that it is merely a piece of cinematic showing off.

In fact, this is the catharsis. It is the “Passion” of Robbie Turner. The walk along the beach is his Via Dolorosa. What would they have Joe Wright do? Label the Stations of the Cross? Have him carrying his Cross with a Crown of Thorns? Isn’t it enough that his side has been pierced?

Goodness me, if they still haven’t got it, Robbie rises from the dead in the penultimate scene.

So, what is the book/movie about? First of all, it’s a rattling good love story and a page turner. Secondly it’s about Briony’s, ultimately futile, attempt to expiate her guilt for the crucified Robbie through a fiction – whilst also giving him an afterlife and immortality. It’s about the novelists God- like power over his/her creations and, ultimately, it’s an atheistic message. About how fact can be blurred into fiction through the retelling and rewriting of history. The Bible anyone?

A couple of other things you might have missed in the movie.

Look out for when Briony looks through the stained glass (sic.) window which has the word Matilda on it and then refer to the poem of the same name by Hilaire Belloc.

The operatic duet played as the lovers dress for dinner is O Soave Fanciulla, from La Boheme. Check out the English translation of the lyrics on the net and see just how appropriate they are.

As above: the hymn being sung by the troops in the bandstand at Dunkirk is: Dear Lord and Father of Mankind which is both ironic and sadly appropriate. It is not, as some twit of a so-called critic has said, Men of Harlech

Drop Thy still dews of quietness,
Till all our strivings cease;
Take from our souls the strain and stress,
And let our ordered lives confess
The beauty of Thy peace.

Breathe through the heats of our desire
Thy coolness and Thy balm;
Let sense be dumb, let flesh retire;
Speak through the earthquake, wind, and fire,
O still, small voice of calm.

The movie being shown in the Dunkirk cinema is the 1938, Le Quai des Brumes. Check out the synopsis.

 


 
 
I'm not a religious person but I like the religious symbolisms in the film. Even James McAvoy said in an interview that Robbie was Christ-like, that he was almost a higher being. I can agree with him being some kind of sacrificial lamb, yes. I think Robbie is a very symbolic character anyway, more than literary.
Another great religious symbolism was Robbie's mother washing his feet. Her only son, and he was about to die. It was one of the most poignant scenes in the movie because it brought Grace Turner back to the story, another character who was destroyed by Briony's lie.
 
 
 
I think the director's choice to include Robbie's hallucination of his mother was very interesting. In the hallucination Robbie envisions his mother, Grace, washing his feet. This is so interesting because the act of foot washing is such a biblical act. At the last supper Jesus washes all of the diciples feet. He has a very interesting conversation with diciples about the act of purification in foot washing. He also explains the act as a sign that no one man is another man's master.

How facinating then, to see Robbie's mother engaging in such an act? She is literally washing away the lie and allowing him to be free. The disparity of the classes is also linked to this foot washing scene. Much of what happens to Robbie is linked to his status in the social spectrum. The fact that he is the house keeper's son, makes Briony's lie all the more believable. Having his mother wash his feet reinforces the idea, which becomes evident later in the story, that we are all equals. Both cecilia and Briony cast off their privelidged status in acts of Atonement.
 
 
 
The water is an extremely important element in this movie, just as it is in our lives. Water is seen as the "universal solvent", which is very true. We use it to clean everything! Water is needed for bathing, laundry, dishes, car-washing etc. Also, when you're sick you're supposed to drink a lot of water because it will help you get clean and well.

In the movie, all the characters use water to try to clean or rid themselves of feelings they are trying to suppress or even express. Sometimes something bad is happening or has happened and the characters are trying to clean themselves of it. Cecilia dives into the water mid-conversation after her brother questions her about why she doesn't want Robbie to come to dinner. She wants to keep her feelings suppressed so she goes into the water. Robbie also takes a bath and we can only guess that he is thinking about Cecilia as well, but likewise at this point he is suppressing his feelings. During one of the flashbacks we discover that Robbie had saved Briony from drowning a few years prior to her accusation. After they are out of the water Briony spills her feelings for him. They had been suppressed until the water "cleansed" her of them.

At Dunkirk (and before) there is a LOT of Biblical symbolism. Robbie, Mace, and Nettle are wandering around France trying to get to Dunkirk, looking for water. In the book they finally find a house and demand the woman brings them food and drink which she reluctantly does. In the movie it shows them in a "large upper room" eating, this compares to the Last Supper. (Matthew 26: 17-30, Mark 14: 12-26, and Luke 22: 7-38) At Dunkirk Robbie and his friends are desperately seeking water and can't find any. They are longing to cleanse themselves from the war just as they are longing to get home. In the end Robbie didn't get any water and he didn't go home. When Jesus was crucified the soldiers offered him wine vinegar, not water, then he died. (Matthew 27: 45-56, Mark 15: 33-41, and Luke 23: 36-43) I think when his mom washes his feet this is also Biblical symbolism. In the Bible, Jesus washes his disciples feet which is a little opposite of what's going on in the movie, but it happens right before Jesus is crucified. (John 13: 1-17) John 13: 10 says, "Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean." So, when Grace washes his feet she is cleaning him entirely. Just like Jesus, Robbie dies shortly after his feet are washed. They are also right by the ocean which is the only barrier for them getting home. They need to cross the water to cleanse themselves of the war and be back home.

When Briony becomes a nurse and is sent to talk to the French soldier she gets blood on her face. Sister Drummond then tells her to go wash off her face. I think it's important to note that it was a French soldier because it shows that she also has a part in this war. She didn't just send Robbie off to it. Now she is involved too. It could also be a comparison of: English soldier Robbie who dies in France and now English nurse Briony with a French soldier who dies in England. The movie also shows a scene where she is trying to wash her hands but can't seem to get them clean enough. This is theme of her life. She can never truly atone for what she did.

Two more, Cecilia dies in a flood in the end. I loved how some of you pointed out that she looked like Jesus in this scene and the library scene! So true! Also, at the very end, at the last stage of Briony's Atonement, we see Cecilia and Robbie traipsing in the ocean. This is not only Briony's final attempt at cleansing herself but it is the moment where the Cee and Robbie can finally express their feelings completely. Throughout the entire movie social class, prison, the war, and even time constraints have put a damper on them truly being able to express how they feel. They are now free. 




 Loved your analysis of the water element. You just forgot to include the founatin scene; Cecilia emerges from it like Aphrodite, she's revealing herself to him as a person ready to love. Water "clears" everything for both of them at the moment, even tough Cecilia still tries to fight her feelings, walking away from him as if she was angry. In fact, the water had revealed so much of her, exposed her in so many ways that she didn't know how to deal with her new emotions.

Like the poster above said, I'm not religious as well, but I love symbolisms. It's interesting to notice all the christian symbolisms in the film, and you came up with some interesting ones. Like when you said that Jesus was given wine vinegar before he died; when Robbie died, he had a bottle of wine by his side.

 
 
 I suppose I see water as the universal symbol for purification – not only physical (refreshment, cleansing and de-toxification) but spiritual purification. The rite of baptism, for example, involves sprinkling or submergence in water to symbolize cleansing from sin, restoration to purity, and spiritual renewal. As you suggested, there are also many references to water as a purifying, cleansing and transformative agent in Scripture (e.g. Christ’s baptism in the River Jordan, his references to washing the feet in order to cleanse the “whole” person, feet washing scene at Last Supper, water into wine, etc.).

In that vein I saw Robbie’s association with water as generally representing his purity of heart, and his longing for restoration to purity. It’s interesting that he dreams of living on a beach, that Cee gives him a picture of a cottage and that they are represented in perfect happiness there in the final scene. I saw this as representing not only their personal purity, but their desire for a pure, unsullied life, a life without shame. To be cleansed from the filth and evil that has taken over their lives.

When Robbie is in the tub immersed in water his life is still pure, but the dark silhouette of the plane passing overhead symbolizes the journey that he will soon take that will completely change his life and the impending doom of the war.

Water as a Destructive Force

I think water is used to symbolize a destructive force too; in fact I think the two ideas – water as a source of purification/renewal /restoration v. water as a force for destruction and death, are intentionally juxtaposed in the film. (I have not read the book.)

For example, the beach Robbie dreams of sharing with Cecilia – a place where he can live in peace and love, purified of shame and sin -- is contrasted starkly with the beach at Dunkirk, the site of cruelty, chaos, loss and violence, and ultimately death. Here the idea of water as a source of life and renewal is contrasted with water’s association with chaos and death (e.g. Noah and the flood). One his dream, the other his reality.

Similarly I would contrast the Cee and Briony “diving” scenes. Both women have a scene alone with Robbie where they dive into the water. Both are in some way seeking his attention. But while Cee’s action is ultimately an expression of her sincere desire for him, her love, Briony’s action derives from self-love, not sincere love. What she does is destructive toward Robbie; she is manipulating him to test his response to her, to act out a “drama” in her head, and has no regard for the real consequences of her actions. It is manipulative, selfish, narcissistic and controlling. While Cee risks only herself, Briony risks Robbie: she is willing to risk him - and to exploit his goodness - to glorify herself. She is Narcissus, staring into the pool. This scene therefore is pivotal because 1) gives us insight into the “god complex” aspect of Briony’s character that helps to understand why she did what she did later, 2) it contrasts Cecilia’s true love for Robbie with Briony’s selfish “crush”, and 3) it clearly foreshadows later events when she will indeed destroy his life for the sake of playing out the “scripts” in her head.

There is another subtle Biblical reference here because satan, when tempting Christ in the desert, instructed Him to throw himself down for the sake of “testing” God for his own glory. That is precisely what Briony does here, she “tests” Robbie by forcing him to throw himself down into the water, but she does it for her own glory, not Robbie’s.

Water and Cecilia

Water is also symbolic re Cee’s journey, her martyrdom if you will. Her dive into the fountain is the first step leading to the events that will irrevocably unite her fate and Robbie’s and ultimately result in her death, where she will end as she began with him, in the water. Her plunge into the fountain signifies her plunge into their relationship – at that moment she risks her reputation, leaves propriety behind, exposes herself to him, literally and figuratively strips herself of her defenses – as she says herself, she is acting out of character. On the surface it is an act of defiance but in reality it is a move in his direction. Similarly in the next scene where she is fighting so hard against Robbie coming to the dinner she ends by plunging into the water. Finally, in her death scene we see her again in the water, arms outstretched, crucified now by her love for Robbie. Her journey which began with that first plunge is now complete; it begins with her plunge into the water and ends in the water.

Again this is very Christic, Biblical imagery: like Christ’s apostles, Cee first symbolically makes an act of self-abandonment – leaving herself, the world she has known, behind – and ultimately, having been faithful to him, left home and family and possessions for him and followed and suffered with him unreservedly, finds herself crucified as he has been. It begins with her plunge into the water (her commitment to him, or baptism), is confirmed with her plunge into the lake (confirmation) and ends having come full circle with her again in the water at her death, now, having followed him, crucified with him, a martyr for the sake of love.

Seen in this context, it is also symbolically significant that what she is diving for in the fountain is a precious vessel, the broken vase, a treasure. This vase, a treasure, represents true love, the priceless pearl. Her nearly reckless dive for the precious vase symbolizes her willingness to abandon herself, to dive into the deep, in order to seek and save the priceless pearl, which is true Love.

Okay, this post is now embarrassingly long. I've added subtitles to break it up.

More Biblical Imagery

So I’ll just throw in one more Christ-like image I saw. There are essentially three people who are faithful to Robbie after his “crucifixion” has begun and remain so until his death: his mother, Cee, and his wartime friend. These roughly parallel the three people who were faithful to Jesus at the foot of the cross, his mother Mary, his female disciple, Mary Magdalene, who loved him much, and his faithful apostle, St. John. (I’m not saying he was romantically attached to Magdalene, so nobody accuse me of it, please.) 



When Briony is sent to talk with Luc, the French soldier, she opens the red curtains around his bed as if the curtains of a theater.
It's like she's on a stage, directing one of her plays...but maybe it's the first time she notices the cruel reality of real life opposing her fictional world.
 
 

I found quite interesting the scene where Cee wipes her lip
and we see a little blood on the napkin. We know that she bites her lip when Robbie enters her. To see that little blood later on, as a symbol for the breaking of the hymen, I thought it was quite poetic.
 As for the water, I have already said this in another thread, I think it may symbolize sexuality. This symbolism of water can be found in other authors, like Federico García Lorca. I think that it makes sense to apply this to Atonement. For example, that scene in which Briony jumps inside the water because she wants Robbie to save her... it could be like the awakening of her sexual attraction for him.
 
 
 
All the symbolism with water I think represents the changes and transitions all the characters go through because that is exactly what water symbolizes in many cultures; change, transition, constantly moving and flowing into the next phase.

Also, the shot were Cecelia is lying on the diving board above the lake and you can see her reflection in the water, rippled and distorted. It's almost a premonition of her death...drowned in water, as she appears in the reflection.

Then in the very next shot Robbie comes out of the bath looking up at the plane, showing a premonition of his fate in war. 



 

The very first opening shot of the film
is of a model of the house in which they all live and Briony is typing away, finishing the Trials of Arabella. I got the symbolism in that - it like her whole world is a model and she's controlling it, dramatically changing the lives of those around her and not understanding the severity of her actions.

Also, you see a neatly ordered parade of animals at the start of the film and we see more of those animals, strewn on the bed when Briony finds the letter from the twins. A sign of order falling apart? That things are not all well?



There's quite a lot of Biblical imagery in this, I suppose the most prevalent is Robbie being a Christ-like figure, the sacrificial lamb who bears the burden of others' sins (Briony, the ruling class), and is ultimately destroyed by them. He is quite literally the suffering servant, lol, who is betrayed unto death by his "friends".

And speaking of Biblical imagery, it's interesting the way everything goes black behind Briony at the moment she tells the Lie. It reminded me of that line in the Bible when satan enters into Judas and he goes out to betray Jesus: "And then it was night." The opposite of "let there be light", which is associated with God's act of creation, of giving life. Briony has now engaged evil, and all is darkness, destruction, death.

 

You may have missed a few. Consider the mansion and its grounds in the beginning the Garden of Eden. The residents live in sexless harmony until the serpent, in the person of Paul Marshall, arrives. He offers a bite of the chocolate “apple” to Lola (see the look on his face as he urges her to “bite” it) and from then on chaos begins to reign. The twins run away, Robbie sends that scandalous letter, he and Cecilia do the dirty in the library, and the devil finds ultimate satisfaction with Lola, who, with her acquiescence to Briony’s story, becomes the agent in driving “Adam,” as Robbie, from the Garden. (In the 1958 film “Damn Yankees,” the devil’s female agent, played by Gwen Verdon, was also named Lola.) Briony, besides symbolizing the initial innocence (i.e., ignorance of sex) of the Eden dwellers, is also God. She created it all! A major symbol is the sound of the typewriter from which all the characters flowed. Later, Cecelia, the source of Original Sin, dies in the Great Flood, and Robbie, like Moses, dies just before crossing over into the Promised Land. Only Briony’s God survives, to literally create the final, happy manifestation of her original Adam and Eve.
 
 
 

 

Jun. 29th, 2008

Blue

Wanted surpreende

Wanted superou as expectativas, e arrecadou mais de 50 milhões no fim de semana de estréia. Com a concorrência pesada da Pixar, com Wall-E, e um certo descrédito inicial, Wanted acabou tendo boas críticas e certamente o boca-a-boca ajudou a bater as previsões iniciais (imaginava-se algo entre 25 - 35 milhões de dólares na estréia.

Parabéns, James! :)



















 

Jun. 23rd, 2008

Blue

Wanted - Premiere no LAFF


James na pré-estréia de Wanted  no Los Angeles Film Festival. Exuberante! :)



































 




 

Jun. 12th, 2008

ani robbie letter

In this world...Atonement fanvideo










Jun. 11th, 2008

ani robbie&cee cottage

Promises: "Atonement" em fotos e música

</lj-embed>                     
                         PROMISES 





























 





 

 



robbie bath

Wanted photocall em Berlim

Algumas fotos novas do James, do photocall que rolou ontem em Berlim.

Mas é muito lindinho... ;-)







Mais aqui... http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/24385583.html?page=1#comments



May. 29th, 2008

Blue

James: uma breve biografia

Há algum tempo, eu estava tentando "explicar" James McAvoy para uma amiga que só o conhecia como o fauno Sr. Tumnus de "As Crônicas de Nárnia". Quando olhei, o email estava se transformando em uma biografia - uma biografia informal, claro, quase como se fosse uma conversa entre amigos.

Dei uma ajeitadinha, e ei-la. Como eu disse, não é uma biografia que está preocupada com datas certinhas e coisas assim. Num dos próximos posts, vou colocar aqui a filmografia completa de James, e me aprofundar um pouco mais a respeito de seus filmes.


James McAvoy nasceu em Glasgow, na Escócia, em 1979 e teve uma infância meio complicada - os pais separaram-se quando ele tinha sete anos, e o pai acabou abandonando a família de vez - até hoje James não  tem contato com James Sr., que já apareceu choramingando em algum tablóide britânico depois que o filho ganhou o Bafta. Mas voltando a nossa história... 

A mãe, Elizabeth, era muito jovem e se preocupava em não poder dar atenção suficiente aos filhos, já que trabalhava como enfermeira e fazia muitos plantões. James e a irmã mais nova Joy acabaram então indo morar com os avós maternos - mummy morou um tempo com eles até que se mudou para um prédio do outro lado da rua, e pode-se dizer que os manos sempre a tiveram presente, apesar de terem sido 
criados mesmo pelos avós . A família vivia em um dos bairros mais barra-pesada de Glasgow, num daqueles "projects" que por aqui a gente se habituou a chamar de BNH. Mas vovô James (que era açougueiro) e vovó Mary (que fazia vários biscates, e até dirigia caminhões de entrega por Glasgow!) deram uma educação esmerada pro menino, uma mistura de dedicação amorosa com o bom-senso da classe trabalhadora inglesa (ou escocesa, no caso), e instilaram nele a noção de que  as coisas se obtém através de muito trabalho e esforço pessoal. Nunca deixaram ele ficar vagabundeando pelas ruas, entre os muitos desempregados e drogados da área, até terem certeza que o moleque tinha a cabeça no lugar e "não iria virar um completo idiota" - como o James mesmo falou. Ele também comentou que os avós nunca lhe disseram "Você pode ser tudo que quiser na vida" - segundo James, a maior mentira que se pode contar para uma criança. O que eles sempre lhe disseram é que ele nunca devia deixar de tentar. Era a educação rigorosa de um bom menino católico, "da escola pra casa, da casa pra escola" até pelo menos seus 16 anos, e James sempre teve a consciência de ter muito menos liberdade que seus colegas, mas a dedicação de seus avós a ele e sua irmã é algo que o enche de orgulho e satisfação até hoje.

Essa boa educação acabou se transformando em sua porta de entrada para o mundo do teatro e cinema. Porque um belo dia, um certo diretor/ator escocês foi fazer uma palestra na escola do menino James, então com 15 anos, e o garoto ficou ao mesmo tempo curioso com as histórias do diretor, e chocado com o comportamento agressivo de alguns colegas, que resolveram ser rudes e atormentar o homem por o acharem efeminado, e "posh" demais para suas sensibilidades "working class". Depois da palestra, o educadíssimo James acreditou que seria de bom-tom agradecer pelas preciosas informações e também se desculpar pelos colegas idiotas. Aí achou que talvez houvesse alguma oportunidade - quem sabe ele não poderia trabalhar na próxima produção do famoso diretor, fazer o chá, varrer o chão? Não que até aquele momento ele tivesse sequer cogitado em ser ator (já tinha até pensado em ser padre missionário, ou entrar para a Marinha), mas filmes, e o ambiente que o diretor descreveu em sua palestra, tinham uma certa fascinação. E também podia ser um trabalho em potencial, claro...algo importante para um jovem que entendia bem as dificuldades da vida da classe trabalhadora.  Para sua surpresa, três meses depois, o tal diretor, David Hayman, entrou em contato oferecendo a oportunidade para James fazer um screen test para um de seus filmes. Assim, na lata. Pode-se imaginar que o menino de pele alva, com seus olhos azuis enormes e brilhantes, tenha causado uma certa impressão no diretor, para que o homem se lembrasse de James depois de tê-lo visto apenas uma vez depois da palestra. Teria sido apenas uma atração física, ou talvez a desenvoltura do garoto, seus bons modos? Talvez a soma de todas dessas coisas; embora surpreso, James resolveu seguir o conselho do avô e, ao menos, tentar.  

James disse depois que, apesar de ter conseguido o papel em "The Near Room", se achou uma droga quando viu o filme. Mas sua autocrítica sempre foi poderosa mesmo - e ainda é até hoje, o que é um grande atributo para um ator de verdade numa era de meras celebridades (Ian McEwan, o autor do livro "Reparação", comentou que James era "brilhantemente despretensioso, para alguém tão 'hot' "). O fato de não ter ficado satisfeito com sua atuação, apesar de só ter 15 anos e nenhuma experiência, demonstra o quanto ele levava a sério o trabalho. Qualquer trabalho, na verdade, porque James nunca achou que alguém se torna mais interessante ou especial por ser um ator. Ele tinha um bom exemplo disso em casa.


James em seu primeiro filme, "The Near Room", 1995

O que acabou acontecendo foi que esse primeiro papel o fez ser picado pelo bichinho da atuação, embora nos 2 anos seguintes James tenha apenas prosseguido com seus estudos, ainda se debatendo entre a idéia de entrar para a Marinha ou tentar uma vaga em uma universidade (a essas alturas a idéia de ser padre missionário já tinha sido abandonada, pois ele havia acabado de descobrir as meninas e não tinha nenhum interesse em ser um celibatário). Ele foi um bom aluno, e quando chegou o momento de decidir seu futuro, já tinha propostas de três universidade em Glasgow, para Inglês, Política e Estudos Sociais. Aí de repente surgiu outra - improvável até o momento - opção: "Por que não uma Faculdade de Artes Cênicas?" Porque havia, em Glasgow um razoável número de boas escolas dedicadas às artes do palco, e como ele já tinha aquele pequeno papel no currículo, não custava tentar. Escolheu a Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama (RSAMD). Os professores que o analisaram para a admissão comentaram depois que James era um dos candidatos mais jovens e um dos mais impressionantes, e não tiveram dúvidas em aprovar sua entrada. Sempre com a mentalidade prática que lhe havia sido instilada pelo avô, James, ao mesmo tempo em que cursava a faculdade, trabalhava de madrugada como confeiteiro em uma Mark & Spencer's. "Se tudo o mais falhar...". Mas não falhou. Começou a fazer muito teatro em Glasgow; como boa parte dos alunos formados na Escócia tentava a sorte em Londres, havia muitos e bons papéis disponíveis nas produções locais. Começou também a fazer pequenos papéis na televisão e no cinema, enquanto ainda estava estudando. Antes mesmo de receber o diploma, James embarcou para os Estados Unidos, onde uma oportunidade de ouro surgiu para um pequeno papel numa das séries mais badaladas de todos os tempos, o drama de guerra "Band of Brothers". Embora como o soldado James Miller sua participação tenha se restringido a um episódio, ainda assim ele conseguiu chamar a atenção de um dos produtores da série, Tom Hanks, como veremos na outra parte da bio...

Logo depois de formado James seguiu o caminho de outros atores escoceses e foi para Londres, aos 20 anos, começar finalmente sua vida adulta longe dos avós, dividindo um apartamento com colegas boêmios e fazendo teatro sem parar. Foi em uma de suas primeiras peças em Londres, "Out in the Open", que ele capturou a atenção de Joe Wright, então um jovem se iniciando na carreira artística, como diretor de séries na BBC. Ele ficou intrigado com aquele ator intenso que fazia o papel de um garoto de programa com um sotaque "scouse" perfeito de Liverpool, embora, como Wright descobriria mais tarde conversando com o diretor da produção, o jovem fosse escocês. Ainda se passariam 5 anos até que os dois finalmente tivessem a chance de trabalhar juntos em "Atonement".



"Out in the Open", 2001


James não teve maiores problemas em fazer a transição do teatro para a televisão em papéis cada vez mais importantes, como um dos protagonistas da mini do Sci-Fi Channel “Filhos de Duna”, onde fazia o papel do complexo Leto II, e também atuando em algumas séries muito elogiadas como "State of Play", sobre um grupo de intrépidos jornalistas (que Hollywood já está transformando em filme - sem James) e "Shameless", onde finalmente seu rosto e seu nome tornaram-se conhecidos do grande público britânico. 


"Filhos de Duna", 2003


Na excelente e premiada “State of Play”, de Paul Abbott, dirigida por David Yates, seu papel como o jovem jornalista Dan Foster atraiu a atenção de bons diretores de cinema ingleses. Tom Vaughan, (que anos depois dirigiria James em “Starter for 10”) comentou: “Assim que James fez sua primeira cena em “State of Play”, virei para alguém e perguntei ‘quem é ele?’ Porque havia uma segurança, uma presença e um carisma que não muito comuns em atores jovens e iniciantes. Era bem óbvio que James era um estrela em ascensão.” 


"State of Play", 2003


Em "Shameless", também escrita por Paul Abbott, ele interpretava Steve, um garotão classe média de Manchester que resolve se tornar ladrão de carros por pura adrenalina, mas que se apaixona pela "working-class" Fiona e sua família complicada, e acaba virando uma espécie de Robin Hood, roubando carros dos ricos para ajudar a namorada e seu monte de irmãozinhos meio que abandonados pelos pai doidão. James ficou pouco tempo na série - apenas 13 episódios, entre 2004 e 2005 - mas o suficiente para penetrar no imaginário coletivo dos ingleses e ainda ter que ouvir até hoje nas ruas algum passante gritar "Shameless!" pra ele. Na época um jornal inglês fez uma pesquisa a respeito dos jovens solteiros mais cobiçados da Inglaterra, e deu James na cabeça - batendo até o Príncipe William! - embora o ator, sempre muito consciente, tenha afirmado que as garotas que votaram não estavam apaixonadas por ele, e sim pelo largadão, charmoso e afetuoso Steve. Modesto, o rapaz...





"Shameless", 2004 - 2005

 
James não ficaria solteiro por muito tempo. A melhor coisa que ficou de "Shameless", segundo ele, foi ter conhecido sua futura mulher, Anne-Marie Duff. Sim, ela era Fiona, a namorada de Steve, e os dois protagonizaram algumas das cenas mais quentes da televisão britânica, com direito a nudez e sexo no chão da cozinha logo no primeiro episódio! Na época seu relacionamento de nove (!!!) anos com uma também jovem atriz estava desmoronando. James estava entrando numa espécie de depressão, incerto sobre os rumos de sua carreira de ator, ainda incerto se ERA mesmo um ator. Anne-Marie, 9 anos mais velha, surgiu como uma espécie de amiga e conselheira e se transformou na pessoa mais importante de sua vida. Quando ganhou o prêmio Bafta como Revelação Britânica em 2006, James disse "Quero agradecer à Anne-Marie, pois ela me ensinou a respeitar a vida." Anne-Marie é ela mesmo uma atriz premiada, mais voltada para as excelentes miniséries da BBC e para o teatro. O casalzinho está firme e forte desde o casamento em 2006.


Um dos próximos posts vai ser dedicado aos filmes de James!


 

Previous 20

Advertisement

Customize