Review for the Color Purple

The Color Purple Review

Spoiler alert

“You better not never tell nobody but God.  It’d kill your mammy.”

The Color Purple is another book to film adaptation that is next on my list.

What’s it about: The Color Purple is set in rural Georgia between 1903 and 1936.  Its protagonist is Celie (Whoopi Goldberg) who as a young black woman is at the bottom of the social hierarchy.  She is constantly abused by her stepfather until he marries her off to Mr Albert Johnson, a much older respectable man with unrespectable intentions.  Albert only marries Celie so that she can tend his home and family and satisfy his sexual desires.  Celie suffers under his abuse for years until she finds comfort and escape in two independent and strong women: Shug Avery (Albert’s Mistress and a club singer, played by Margaret Avery) and Sofia (Albert’s son’s first wife played by Oprah Winfrey)

The good: I was glad to see that the film followed the book’s structure.  The book is told through letters written by Celie and addressed to God.  As such, Celie also narrates the film giving it a very personal feel.  The film also did well conveying the violence and prejudice present within the novel.  Even though violence doesn’t happen in the film, when it does, it is very shocking and disturbing.  For example, on a number of occasions Albert reprimands Celie by slapping her.  Also, the scene where he effectively rapes her was also particularly disturbing.  

However, my favourite scene is when Celie’s sister Nettie is walking to school and Albert follows her and tries to force himself onto her.  Albert’s predatory advances are punctuated by his sinister laughs and Nettie’s timid protests that she has to go to school.  For me, this scene really epitomised and exacerbated just how evil men can be.  I’ve always like Whoopi Goldberg for the naturalness and authenticity that she bring to acting.  This is present as ever in her breakout role.

The bad: Even though the film stayed faithful to the novel’s structure and shocking examples of violence, there were a couple of things it changed that I didn’t like.  Within the novel, there are two major characters who we don’t see much in the film.  Firstly, there is Celie’s stepfather whom other than appearing in the film’s shocking first scene, but hardly appears after this.  Secondly, there is the character of Harpo’s (Albert’s first son who married and was left by Sofia) new girlfriend Squeak, whom despite having a major role in the novel, is largely left out of the film to such an extent that I questioned why she was there at all.

The Ugly: Nettie’s repeated protest of “I have to go to school” was very chilling.

Rating: Good

This is a brutally honest and graphic depiction of what life could have been like for young black women at this time, yet I didn’t fell the film used some characters as well as others and this is why the film is only “good.” It still depicted Celie’s spiritual journey and her desire to escape from Albert’s wrath. 

Review for Ulysses

 SPOILER ALERT

EXPLICIT CONTENT ALERT

And so we have come to another film that is a little different.  At university I studied and read James Joyce’s Ulysses and I was very curious to see how a film-maker would portray the fragmented narrative and stream-of-consciousness of the novel, so I thought I would watch this 1967 adaptation.

What’s it about? Ulysses takes place over a single day: June the 16^th 1904 and is set in Dublin, Ireland.  The two main characters are Stephen Dedalus, a young schoolteacher who returns to Ireland upon failed ambitions of being an artist in Paris and Leopold Bloom, a middle-aged author and journalist.  The film follows these two men, as they travel around various places in Dublin, including Sandymount Stand Beach, a brothel and Davy Byrne’s pub.

The good: I think the film did well portraying the complicated and confusing literary structure and style of Ulysses.  In writing Ulysses, Joyce parodied and emulated a number of different literary styles and techniques.  For example, chapter 3 is narrated by Stephen Dedalus’ internal fragmented stream of consciousness, which jumps around from topic to topic.  The film portrayed this well by having this particular scene narrated by Stephen whose thoughts jump around as much as they do in the film, as they do in the book.  Two more examples include the last two chapters of Ulysses.  Chapter 18 where Bloom invites Dedalus into his home after the latter has drunken too much and is narrated in the form of a religious catechism.  This is portrayed well in the film, as rather than hearing the character’s dialogue, Bloom narrates the scene in a question and answer format.  Finally, Chapter 8 is narrated by Bloom’s wife Moly in eight sprawling sentences.  The film’s final scene is narrated by Molly in an internal monologue that is over fifteen minutes long.  I also think the film did well in presenting the novel’s fragmented narrative structure.  As the book jumps from scene to scene with little to no explanation,as to why, so does the film.

The bad: As the majority of the book’s action is internalised and takes place in a character’s mind or in their dream’s or fantasies, which the film portrays, I feel it vastly unfair to criticise Ulysses for being dull or lacking in action.  However, I will criticise the film for how much the narrative jumped around.  I know that I just praised the film for staying loyal to the book by doing this, but I feel that if you haven’t read Ulysses and don’t know what it’s about, then the fragmented, disjointed structure would be too confusing to follow.  Hell, even I got lost at times and I’ve studied this book for a semester.  When Ulysses was first published, there was a massive uproar over its explicit and graphic sexual content, especially in Ireland, where it was branded as pornographic. 

To my memory, there are four such incidents in the text: Bloom defecating loudly, Bloom voyeuristically and publicly masturbating over girls at Sandymount Strand Beach, Bloom fantasising about being a woman and being dominated by a mistress and a brothel and Molly, thinking in crude and explicit detail about how Blazes Boylan (her singing partner whom she is sleeping with) is a much better lover than Bloom in size, technique and stamina.  Whilst the film portrayed the latter two in explicit and, in regards to the prostitution incident, quite disturbing detail, it either omitted or watered down the first two incidents, which I didn’t like.  In writing these things, I think Joyce was showing how he isn’t afraid to push the boundaries of his predecessors and I don’t like how the film left these parts out.

The Ugly: The incident where Bloom is fantasising about being a woman and dominated was as unpleasant to watch, as it is to read in the book.

Rating: Meh

Overall, I think this film is a commendable adaption of Joyce’s work, but I would only recommend it if you’re a Joyce aficionado, otherwise it will be very difficult to understand.  Even in black and white, this film is still colourful enough to be an intriguing watch.  

As always thanks for reading and as me old dad used to say “you can’t stop there.  I was just getting into that.”

Review for Secretary

Spoiler alert

Explicit content alert

So in reviewing Stephen Stainberg’s 2002 film ‘Secretary,’ I am reviewing something a little different.  Secretary is an erotic thriller in much the same vein as 50 Shades of Grey.  I had the misfortune of watching 50 Shades and I would agree with many reviewers who say that not only is Secretary cinematically superior to 50 shades, but also a more accurate depiction of BDSM.  I was initially hesitant about reviewing this film because of the risqué nature of its content, but I felt that as a reviewer I need to stay objective and not be concerned about the content matter of a film.  Furthermore, modern society has become so desensitised to sex, due to the proliferation and over-saturation of it that I think that more should be done to educate people about lesser known sexual practices, rather than feign ignorance of their existence.  I guess this is perhaps the only good thing that came out of 50 Shades of Grey.  I will be comparing the two throughout the review, but I’ll save any detailed critique of 50 Shades for a proper review

What’s it about: Maggie Gyllenhaal plays Lee Holloway a ditzy, nervous and socially awkward young woman with a history of self-abuse.  Upon her release from a psychiatric institution, she becomes the secretary of the attorney Edward Grey (James Spader) and the two then begin a BDSM style relationship.

The Good: I liked certain elements of Holloway’s and Grey’s characters.  I felt that Holloway was suitably nervous and insecure about the relationship, but also has the curiosity and initiative to research BDSM.  This in stark contrast to Ana Steele whom despite being told by Christian to research BDSM doesn’t have the initiative to google what a buttplug is.  Edward Grey wasn’t anywhere near as creepy, controlling, stalkerish, unethical or rapey as Christian Grey.  

I also really liked how Secretary focused much more on the romantic side of Edward and Lee’s relationship, rather than the physical side of it.  I felt that 50 Shades concentrated so much about showing off explicit, kinky sex that it got a little off-putting at times.  Secretary isn’t like that at all and the sexual content is much more subtle and implicit.  The one time that complete sexual intercourse was portrayed was an awkward, comedic affair between Holloway and her sexually vanilla boyfriend Peter.  I also really liked how Secretary had Holloway’s internal voice narrating it, which I felt 50 Shades lacked.

The Bad: Whilst there were parts of Holloways’ character that I liked, there were also some that I didn’t.  Most noticeably, I really didn’t like her treatment of her boyfriend Peter. (Jeremy Davies) Whilst he might be a spineless wimp, he certainly didn’t deserve being cheated or even jilted, which is effectively what Lee does.  Whilst Grey does make an explicit point about not having sex with Lee until she is ready, I would still count having your boss spank you or finishing over you, as cheating, or at the very least, wildly inappropriate behaviour.  On this note, I think Holloway could have been more hesitant or irritated at her employer’s actions.  Regardless of how shy and timid you might be, you would still protest if your boss started spanking you.  

Whilst I think the film did well in not being explicitly about BDSM sex, I’m not sure whether it went far enough in actually defining what BDSM is.  In 50 Shades, there is considerable screentime devoted to the importance of Ana approving her contract and being fully informed of what BDSM actually is and what it entails.  As Secretary didn’t mention these aspects at all, I wasn’t entirely sure when Holloway and Grey actually began their BDSM relationship.  Although that notwithstanding, I did like the film’s conclusion, where Grey gives appropriate aftercare to Holloway, which Christian Grey doesn’t do to Ana Steele.  Finally, after the climax of the film, which I would argue is the slow-motion montage of Holloway doing secretarial tasks in manacles and being spanked, the film’s pace begins to taper off.  I argue that the climax of this film came too prematurely and the rest of the film was uninteresting, over-long and thin denouement.

The Ugly: Does Lee Holloway only own the one pair of underwear?

Rating: Meh

So, I felt quite indifferent about this film.  Whilst it is lightyears better than 50 Shades in every regard, it isn’t perfect.  Holloway was an annoying, unlikeable character at times and the film isn’t explicit enough in its BDSM themes.  If you are going to watch a film of this nature, then don’t be like Ana Steele, take the initiative and do a little research first.  A concept like BDSM much like certain books like Ulysses is extensive and complicated and you’re unlikely to fully understand it or be able to fully immerse yourself in it if you don’t know what it’s about beforehand.