Categories
Film/TV Film/TV/Etc. Blog

My Cousin Rachel

Femmes fatales in film are regarded as misogynist for their kneejerk evil but feminist for lacking the doormat and sounding board qualities which define the majority of cinematic female characters. We don’t know whether the title character in the period suspense drama My Cousin Rachel is one, or just a woman subject to the whims of an obsessive suitor. Philip (Sam Claflin), our main character, treats her alternately as angel of light and an exotic figure of suspicion. First we hear about her in letters which imply she poisoned his cousin/adoptive father in Italy, after marrying him. When she arrives, she is gentle and charming, although with a penchant for serving people vats of specially made tea. An offscreen doctor says her husband died of a brain tumor which made him paranoid.

Rachel Weis and Sam Clafin in My Cousin Rachel.

Philip, who heretofore spent his scenes detailing the harm he will cause Rachel (Rachel Weisz), is immediately smitten. An orphan entering his mid-twenties, he notes he has “never seen a woman cry,” and his need for love overrides his caution. Weisz must play Rachel both as a widow getting over her loved one’s death by hanging out with someone who looks like him, and also as a figure of mysterious Italian letters, unexplained horse rides and inquiries about the will. The film’s only problem is Philip’s inexperience and gullibility which, while provoking suspense, are a little repetitive. The family attorney (Simon Russell Beale) and his godfather (Iain Glen, a.k.a. Jorah Mormont, in best unheeded counselor mode) warn him again and again, yet he seeks to woo Rachel with the wealth he will soon inherit. It’s hard to root for someone who only makes bad decisions to further the plot, which weights our sympathies with the possible murderer.

Notably for a period film, Philip’s servants are visible. Outnumbering him, they live lives unconcerned with his affairs, eating, cussing and getting paid all while knowing to steer clear of his drama. (They also find time to ominously sing the British folksong “The Three Ravens”, about birds discussing a knight’s corpse abandoned in a field. I would have preferred The Twa Corbies.)

Director Roger Michell (Changing Lanes, Notting Hill) and cinematographer Mike Eley start with what looks like most British period dramas, but as Philip loses focus, so do they, using objects blocking the frame, rack focuses and a handheld camera to mirror Philip’s mental state. The editing speeds up as things get more intense, and overall the film holds you in suspense. Based on a novel by Daphne du Maurier, it nevertheless is a bit old-fashioned. Du Maurier provided the basis for two Hitchcock films, but not for the one this film most resembles, Suspicion. Because the character of Rachel remains too elusive, the psychology is old hat. We never leave Philip’s viewpoint, and Rachel’s ambiguity is never big enough to let Weisz make a complete portrayal. She suggests a grieving woman constrained by her time and relationships, via half-sentences and shyness. The film is best as a haiku-like sketch of a widow in need of different social norms.

My Cousin Rachel

For a more vibrant period drama suspense thriller, I would recommend Chan-Wook Park’s The Handmaiden, which replaces that director’s appetite for violence with sex. Here Weisz’s “limitless appetite” is alluded to a few times as warning to Philip, but during the only sex in the film she stares at the sky and thinks of England. For a more adventurous movie with Weisz, I’d recommend Yorgos Lanthimos’ The Lobster, which segues from a meditation on socialized monogamy into a critique of how everything is socialized. My Cousin Rachel is enjoyable but not ambitious. Its sex is restrained, its deaths hidden. The tactfulness that just happens to beits style is also that of the endless wave of British period dramas that have washed on our shores every year since before I was born.

Categories
Film Features Film/TV

Me Before You

We begin our story in the women’s restroom of the Paradiso movie theater. I am peeing. I am also listening to the sound of five or six teenage ladies crying — full on, chest-heaving bawling. One of them is angry: “Why would they think that ending was OKAY?!”

I am ashamed to leave the stall. I did not cry at all during Me Without You, the summer’s romantic-tragic blockbuster about assisted suicide. I listlessly examine my ply of toilet paper and ask myself: What’s wrong with me? Am I even human? How did I get here?

Surely, it’s the algorithm’s fault. In bleak mid-winter, I began to see the ads every time I opened my browser. The plot of Me Before You is adeptly summarized by the estimated 18,000 different versions of the trailer, pushed to my smartphone via Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, whatever. Checking my feeds for the past few months has been like walking around wearing a human billboard that reads “EILEEN IS GONNA PAY 11 BUCKS TO SEE THIS SHIT.”

Me Before You starring Emilia Clarke and Sam Claflin

You can learn this much from 30 seconds of nested advertisement: Louisa Clark (Emilia Clarke, or the Mother of Dragons) is a kind, small-town woman with wacky taste in sweaters and few ambitions. She becomes a caretaker for total babe Will Traynor (Sam Claflin), a paraplegic man whose life of wealth and success has been cut short by a spinal cord injury. He has a bad attitude, but Lou brightens it. You can tell when they fall in love because Lou starts wearing sexier outfits. Then we learn that Will has been planning to kill himself. Can her love save his life? Has it saved hers?

There should be an adjective for rom-com movie plots that are just Pride and Prejudice with modern gilding. We could call them Pri-prejudicial. They work off the Austenian premise that when a blank-slate woman meets a rich and smart and inevitably rude man, she can teach him about having a heart. He, in turn, will neg her into a broader understanding of the world.

These Pri-prejudicial plots are usually successful because women like myself pour ourselves onto the shell of a female lead. The fantasy is that we don’t need to offer anything, not even a whole human personality, in order to be loved by a man with limitless hotness and power. We are relieved of the burden of our own growth. When Lou proclaims to Will, “I have become a whole new person because of you,” it reverbs through an echo chamber built inside the hollow husks of a century’s worth of empty women characters.

This is where MBY gets interesting. Spoilers ahead. Instead of the usual ending, MBY kills Will Traynor. He sacrifices himself so that Lou can have a full life. He leaves her a trust fund and instructs her to enjoy herself.

We have our usual all-knowing paternal archetype in Will, a father, boyfriend, and omnipotent God wrapped into one, who teaches Lou to love classical music and watch movies with subtitles. But in order for Lou to fulfill the character growth portended by her sexy mid-movie makeover, the dude has to actually die. We get a Lou, then, that is both the perfect wife/caregiver heroine AND the perfect independent woman. Is this a radical feminist tale in which Lou, mother spider, must eat her husband post-consummation to gain her full power?

It is, at least, a working excuse for why I exited the bathroom and raised an eyebrow at my weeping peers. Toughen up, ladies. We’ve got some men to eat.