sovay: (Lord Peter Wimsey)
sovay ([personal profile] sovay) wrote2015-05-21 09:01 pm

I will need to send for more books

So I'm not talking much about my life outside of movies because right now it's very difficult and things are very uncertain and I don't know how next month is going to work at all. I will not be at Wiscon this weekend. With any luck, I will be with friends and family at Canobie Lake Park.

1. Courtesy of [livejournal.com profile] moon_custafer: an ideal Lord Peter Wimsey. This continues to delight me.

2. Courtesy of [livejournal.com profile] strange_selkie: Crassus' moray.

3. [livejournal.com profile] ladymondegreen sent me a care package containing, among other things, a children's graphic novel about Houdini and a DVD of the Lloyd Alexander documentary.

4. I really like this poem: Paula Meehan, "The Solace of Artemis."

5. I didn't manage to post about it last night, but I have now seen the first episode of the BBC's Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (2015) and to my great surprise and relief, it was very good. My make-or-break moment was the first appearance of the gentleman with thistle-down hair, here played by Marc Warren; I am delighted to report that I wouldn't have put leaves on his coat, but he is otherwise excellently otherworldly, menacing without apparent awareness of intimidation and capricious without camp. His hair is not only the right color, but the right shape for a thistle-head; he has silver-winged eyebrows and his ears are not pointed. His fingernails are opaque, white as teeth. (A touch I don't remember from the novel, but it's much more unsettling than it should be, like a photograph with the eyes put back in upside-down.) He has inhuman cadences in his voice; there is some post-production effect that whispers and hisses in the lower range, but clears suddenly when his voice rises in a tone of clarion carelessness, so either is equally uneasy to listen to. The adaptation sadly omits his initial address to Norrell in effusive Latin, but I understand there's a specialized audience for that joke (antiquarians and other people who study dead languages but don't expect to have to use them conversationally). It is probably inevitable that he should slightly recall David Bowie's Jareth, but I've never been sure that Labyrinth (1986) didn't get into the DNA of the original novel, so that's all right.

The casting on the whole is very good. I don't have much feeling for Bertie Carvel's Jonathan Strange yet, but Eddie Marsan has the right anti-charisma as Mr Norrell and the right air of dry suspicious irritation with everything outside his orderly library; possibly as a byproduct of casting, he's more immediately sympathetic than Clarke's Norrell, a very shy and didactic man rather than a strictly passionless and secretive one, and I am curious to see how this quality will interact with later chapters when he starts doing really stupid, dangerous things as opposed to just bargaining with fairies for the dead.1 I was surprisingly taken with Edward Hogg's John Segundus: he has a pale, slightly apprehensive face and a sheepish nod after questions he knows are "wrong" and he smiles in pure wonder as the stones of York Minster speak, terrifying nearly every other member of the Society of Magicians. Childermass as played by Enzo Cilenti is a rough-grained, magnetic, mysterious presence, hiding secrets in plain speaking; his Tarot-sharping scene with Paul Kaye's Vinculus is a highlight. We haven't seen much of Stephen, but Ariyon Bakare has a beautiful face and a grave well-turned voice and I am hoping. I have a similar optimism about Charlotte Riley's Arabella and Alice Englert's Emma Pole.

And the mise-en-scène is great. The interiors are accurately colored, the clothes are lived-in, the wigs are frequently terrible, and the regional accents are themselves. Nobody has been flattered by Georgian costume if it wouldn't have looked good on them to begin with and let's face it, Empire dresses aren't for everyone. People have stubble and wiltingly crimped hair. The 1995 Persuasion is the only other contemporary piece I've seen put so much time into looking ordinary rather than a showcase for historical design. I don't like the score, but that's mostly because it insists on telling the audience when the magic is going to happen rather than letting it discover them. I'm reserving judgment on the tone until I've seen another episode at least. So far it's more comic than I was expecting—it's not broad, but it gets a lot of pointed mileage out of the disjoint between the confines of respectability and the lawlessness of magic, Mr Norrell's extravagant reputation and his shabby anonymous person, the incongruity of aimless Jonathan Strange finding his calling in magic, which he didn't even believe in before he tried it. My complaints are mostly to do with subtlety, the places I don't feel the script or the direction trusted it. The stones of York Minster are startling, but not especially numinous; the only real charge of strangeness comes with the arrival of the gentleman with thistle-down hair, which is why I was gripping [livejournal.com profile] derspatchel's hand, praying the series wouldn't screw him up. I don't think it did. I hope it can keep it up. My standards for the numinous onscreen are crazily (Derek Jarman, Peter Greenaway, Powell and Pressburger) high. The scene in which Strange performs his first piece of magic works perfectly because it is shot without any unusual emphasis at all.

So, yeah. That was really pleasant. I'm hoping it continues not to suck.

I have work to do now.

1. One of the major reasons the story feels in direct descent from Hope Mirrlees' Lud-in-the-Mist (1926). There are not that many modern novels that so clearly associate the two worlds, but it's here straight from the start.
yhlee: a sewer cover in Kyoto (I am not making this up) (Kyoto)

[personal profile] yhlee 2015-05-22 02:49 am (UTC)(link)
*support support* Thinking of you.
thistleingrey: (Default)

[personal profile] thistleingrey 2015-05-23 03:18 am (UTC)(link)
Strange and Norrell sounds promising!

I hope that the uncertainties right themselves.
thistleingrey: (Default)

[personal profile] thistleingrey 2015-05-26 03:44 pm (UTC)(link)
the complexity of the characters and their relationships has not yet collapsed

SO KEY.

[identity profile] asakiyume.livejournal.com 2015-05-22 01:14 am (UTC)(link)
Can I see this too? It looks like I can--it says "watch now." If I hit it, will it play? The thing is, we've got in Night Nurse to watch, so maybe I'll wait to hit play until *after* watching Night Nurse. But it would be a most glorious and wonderful thing to be able to watch Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell!

So very glad you have a copy of the Lloyd Alexander DVD ♥

(And I love-love-loved the moray!)

ETA: Just finished Night Nurse--so, so good! Everyone loved it. Then tried to play Jonathan Strange, but was told it was only available in the UK. (You have mad skills--or a special cable channel!)
Edited 2015-05-22 03:48 (UTC)

[identity profile] ethelmay.livejournal.com 2015-05-23 06:26 am (UTC)(link)
I really liked Night Nurse as well. Wish I could have seen it with my mother (who qualified as an anesthesiologist in the 1940s and would have seen rather similar operating rooms). But those kids sure didn't look very underfed!

I didn't know chauffeurs wore jodhpurs. That uniform was something else. And the Chrestomanci dressing gown with polka-dot pajamas!

[identity profile] asakiyume.livejournal.com 2015-05-24 11:05 pm (UTC)(link)
No, they looked pretty healthy. I was impressed that they used a real-live newborn in the delivery scene--back when they didn't worry about things like that, I guess... but I guess their cinema verité didn't extend to finding some actually malnourished children :-P

The operating room, with the hand-powered respirator, was so cool.

I thought it was amusing that they identified the Chinese speech as merely "foreign."

[identity profile] ethelmay.livejournal.com 2015-05-24 11:28 pm (UTC)(link)
Lots of kids that age are quite skinny despite being perfectly healthy -- with the right makeup my son could have looked pretty malnourished (indeed, the minute he came down with a cold or something he instantly looked as though he'd never had a decent meal in his life). But clearly there was a great desire for Shirley Temple types, even before Shirley Temple.

[identity profile] asakiyume.livejournal.com 2015-05-25 12:58 am (UTC)(link)
They'd reminded me of Shirley Temple too! There's something about the way she, and they, say vowel "o"--both the way their faces go and also the pronunciation.

Good point about skinny kids; you're quite right.

[identity profile] asakiyume.livejournal.com 2015-05-25 02:36 am (UTC)(link)
No! The version you had gives a translation?

On the version I saw, it just says "foreign speech," which is like, duh. Thank you, subtitles.

Oh wait: I should add that we watched it with English subtitles on (we often do this because of old ears, ancient TV with poor sound quality, and to compensate for sound idiosyncrasies in the DVD.

So maybe if we hadn't already had the English subtitles on, it would have given us a translation of the Chinese.

What were they saying?

[identity profile] ethelmay.livejournal.com 2015-05-25 04:38 am (UTC)(link)
I was mentally translating it as "Rhubarb, rhubarb!", only more complicated.

[identity profile] moon-custafer.livejournal.com 2015-05-22 01:56 am (UTC)(link)
1. One of the major reasons the story feels in direct descent from Hope Mirrlees' Lud-in-the-Mist (1926). There are not that many modern novels that so clearly associate the two worlds, but it's here straight from the start.

That's one of the things I've always loved about Mirrlees -- I wonder how much of it had to do with her archeological connections.

[identity profile] snowy-owlet.livejournal.com 2015-05-22 12:57 pm (UTC)(link)
Ooo, I'm looking forward to JS&MN. I'm glad to know it looks so promising.

Enjoy the trees this weekend.