Saturday, August 24, 2019

The Favourite (2018) ****



As much as I hated Yorgos Lanthimos's film "The Lobster", that's how much I liked his latest feature, “The Favourite.” Based on historical events, it tells the story of Queen Anne, who ruled England from 1702-1714, and the two women who vied for her favor.

The tale begins with Lady Abigail, homeless and penniless after her alcoholic gambler of a father drove the family to ruin. With nowhere else to go, she flees to the royal residence, where her cousin, Lady Sarah (Rachel Weisz) is the closest friend and adviser to Queen Anne (Olivia Colman). Abigail is hired as a scullery maid, and her position in life is almost unbearable. She is completely cast out of the upper class of her birth, but the other servants won't accept her. Desperate to improve her situation, she mixes up an herbal remedy for the Queen's gouty legs. Initially punished for her impertinence, she is rewarded when the remedy works. Lady Sarah makes Abigail her personal assistant, and Abigail begins maneuvering to gain the favor of the Queen herself.

What do these two women use to gain favor and influence with the Queen? Lesbian sex. Turns out the widowed Queen embraces the love that dare not speak its name. Sarah is Anne's secret lover, but their relationship is pretty pathological. Sarah plays the role of best friend, adviser, and protector, but she actively guards the queen from outside influences in order to manipulate her power. Anne, lonely and in poor health, needs her friend, but she realizes on some level that she is being used. Olivia Colman does a brilliant job portraying this, which is why she won the Best Actress Oscar. There's one scene where Sarah and Anne attend a dance, and Sarah starts to really cut loose, dancing and flirting with the men. She's being cruel to her friend and lover, and Colman reveals Anne's hurt slowly, through subtle changes in her face. It's really impressive acting.

Once Abigail discovers Sarah's secret, she begins scheming to move up the ladder. She's a conniver, but really she has no choice. In a regimented class system, there is none so low as one who has fallen. Abigail intelligently realizes that Lady Sarah could cast her back down to the kitchens on any whim, so she does what she has to.

Once Abigail inserts herself into palace life, she finds herself in the midst of some interesting politics. The Whigs are the party of the merchant class, and eager to continue a profitable war with France. Those profits come from land taxes, so the Tories, who represent the landowners, would like to see the war end. Sarah has kept the interests of the Whigs front and center, but the disruption wrought by Abigail gives the Tories a chance to win the Queen's ear.

It's an interesting story, beautifully filmed. “The Favourite” deserved the many Oscar nominations it received, and probably should have won more. It's an artsy film, but more accessible than most. In the genre of films about gay, British monarchs, it's in the top tier.

4 stars out of 5

Saturday, August 17, 2019

Cruel Intentions (1999) ***



If there was ever a story ripe for a modern re-telling, it is “Dangerous Liaisons,” Pierre Chaderlos de Laclos's 1782 novel of a couple of French aristocrats one-upping each other in a series of cruel sexual games, leaving behind broken hearts and shattered lives. The tale, told in a series of letters, made a scandal in 1782, and some have suggested that its depiction of upper-class decadence helped fuel the French Revolution of 1789. The book has been adapted to stage and screen in numerous forms and languages, including the absolutely classic 1988 version starring Glenn Close and John Malkovich. (If you haven't seen this,you need to remedy that, immediately!) There's also a terrific 1959 French version staring Jeanne Moreau.

Roger Kumble's 1999 telling, “Cruel Intentions,” brings the story into the privileged world of wealthy, modern-day, Manhattan teens. Sarah Michelle Gellar and Ryan Phillippe play Merteuil and Valmont, a couple of bored, beautiful step-siblings, whose parents seem to be completely absent. Living in a beautiful mansion, the two play out their attraction to each other by sharing tales of their sexual conquests. Valmont is widely known as a bad-boy, but Merteuil hides behind a screen of virtue, a trusted student-body president who serves as a mentor for younger girls. Merteuil is angry at a boy who has broken up with her, and unwilling to be seen publicly seeking revenge, she seeks to enlist Valmont to seduce and despoil the boy's new, freshman girlfriend, Cecile (Selma Blair). Valmont, however, is more interested in the challenge of seducing an incoming transfer student, the daughter of the school's new headmaster. Annette (Reese Witherspoon) is deeply Christian and an outspoken proponent of purity. Annette is the perfect challenge for the notorious ladies' man, and he has no time to waste on the horny airhead Cecile. Cecile's mother, however, sabotages Valmont by warning Annette about his reputation. Valmont decides to avenge himself by seducing the saboteur’s daughter, and Merteuil sweetens the deal by promising to sleep with Valmont if he successfully seduces both girls. Thus the stage is set for a classic tale of sexual terrorism.

“Cruel Intentions” very closely follows the 1988 “Dangerous Liaisons” film, and I enjoyed picking up on the modern versions of scenes from that movie. As a fan of the older film, I may have enjoyed “Cruel Intentions” more than I would have otherwise. Viewed strictly on its own merits, the newer film suffers in the acting department. Sarah Michelle Gellar does a fine job as the icy Merteuil, but Ryan Phillippe is his usual, wooden self. As good as Selma Blair and Reese Witherspoon have been in other movies, they are pretty weak here. Despite all that, I found the movie quite fun. The source material gives it a rich, layered plot, and Kumble mostly manages to sell the idea that these teens' sex lives are deadly serious. This film has somehow gotten a reputation as being full of sex, but I'm honestly not sure how it got its R rating. As opposed to the 1988 film, there's no nudity here, and most of the sexual activity is only alluded to. It's trashy fun, but it's no “Wild Things.”

3 stars out of 5