Rating
-
Cast & Crew
info:
Claire Danes
Maria
Billy Crudup
Ned Kynaston
Tom Wilkinson
Betterton
Rupert Everett
King Charles II
Edward Fox
Sir Edward Hyde
Produced by Rachel Cohen, Robert De Niro, Michael
Dreyer, Richard Eyre, Hardy Justice, Michael Kuhn, Amir
Jacob Malin, Jane Rosenthal, James D. Stern; Directed
by Richard Eyre; Written by Jeffrey Hatcher
Comedy/Drama/
Romance (US/UK); 2004; Rated R for sexual content and
language; Running Time: 110 Minutes
Official
Site
Domestic Release Date:
October 15, 2004
Review Date
01/12/05
|
Written
by DAVID KEYES To
see "Stage Beauty" in its full lively splendor
is to see a work of genius revealed on screen. The movie
is savage entertainment, written with the kind of panache
and wit that is generally absent in most modern period pieces,
and executed in a manner that allows little room for mere
suggestion but an array of opportunities to be both shocking
and unrestrictive with the material. From the perspective
of someone who, like yours truly, savors the deliciousness
of stories that take place amidst a vibrant and colorful
backdrop, it is a triumph of evoking the era - but for those
who care less about visuals and concentrate solely on a
narrative, it is also one of those rare multi-faceted accomplishments
that knows no boundaries when it comes to solid storytelling
or sophisticated humor. Like the very characters that fill
the celluloid of director Richard Eyre's latest opus, this
is the kind of picture that comes with challenges but is
not afraid to meet them - or indeed, overcome them - head
on.
Since its release
last fall, the movie has also drawn several comparisons
to that ever-so-famous "Shakespeare in Love" from
a few years back. Those contrasts are understandable; for
one, the premise follows a similar thread as John Madden's
award-winning romp through Elizabethan England, and for
another thing, it applies the same fundamental reasoning
to the story (which is that mastering the stage is such
a rigorous task that one is capable of losing themselves
in basic performances). But where these two costume endeavors
differ is in this: that 1998 vehicle wanted to be pure romance
with just slight twinges of humor, whereas Eyre's film is
so filled to the brim with a broad collection of emotions
- from sorrow to intensity to just plain morbid humor -
that it warrants a completely different response. It is
also a lot more politically incorrect film than the other,
a notion which is anchored early on as King Charles II (Rupert
Everett) tells a crowd about how priests blame stage acting
for things like homosexual behavior and sodomy. "They
would know a lot about that," he says. "After
all, they're priests."
A slight historical
knowledge on your part no doubt makes you well-equipped
to know exactly where this premise is going. In Charles
II's era, we are told, primitive laws that restricted women
from performing on stage in England were abolished, and
the men, who had dominated the art of theater performance
for centuries, were required to go back to their gender-specific
roles so that their counterparts could finally play alongside
them. Historians and feminists would no doubt cite the king's
revision of the old British laws as a major step towards
equality for the sexes, but could the process have really
been that simple? "Stage Beauty" argues an otherwise-unchallenged
perception of that. At the beginning of the film, we meet
Ned Kynaston (Billy Crudup), an actor who has played female
roles for so long in the theater that he has developed a
style of stage masquerade that literally follows him into
dressing rooms. He is lost in the words of Shakespeare's
tragedies, and a turn as Desdemona in "Othello"
marvels audiences for its sheer sense of nerve and trickery.
But stylized farce is his true ability here, not necessarily
raw talent; his costume mistress, Maria (Claire Danes) knows
this full well, and when she mimics his nightly performances
off-stage - reciting dialogue and all - she believes that
it takes more than an elaborate deception to be convincing
as a woman, of which Ned knows little about.
Nightly, in the
basement of a nearby tavern, Shakespeare's "Othello"
goes on for additional performances - this time, however,
with Maria herself assuming the role of the title character's
wife. News of this unlawful undertaking reaches the court
of the King, naturally, but being such a good-natured and
reasonable monarch (and not wanting to tee off his latest
young female companion), he tosses tradition out the window
and has the country's laws banning women from the stage
rewritten. This is an action which does not sit particularly
well with Ned, though, whose entire stage career has depended
on disappearing into the role of a woman - now that his
very own assistant has seemed to rob him of that opportunity,
his life in theater is suddenly ripped out from under him
(and with it, his very reason for being).
If there is a
slight satisfaction to be had for Mr. Kynaston, though,
it is that Maria herself does not play a very convincing
Desdemona. In fact, instead of realizing the full sensibility
of the role, she basically replicates all of her former
teacher's on-stage mannerisms, offering no new perspective
to the personification whatsoever. England's first true
theater actress is not directly playing a female character
here, but rather channeling herself through the mind of
a man in order to play it. Audiences are marveled by the
fact that a woman is finally taking the helm of such a role,
yes, but the critics are easily turned away by her lack
of craft. Likewise, he as an actor is unable to find himself
comfortable in male roles; during a soliloquy meant to prove
his capabilities as the lead male in Shakespeare's tragedy,
he veers from the required delivery and eventually falls
back into the woman-like mannerisms he mastered for so long
before. The script by Jeffrey Hatcher certainly makes no
judgment calls in terms of the cultural change (yes, women
should have been allowed to act in the theater), but it
does contemplate the specifics. Being the first of your
kind is no doubt an important responsibility to carry, but
just what kind of impression does it leave if the actress
cannot reach a level of performance that is on a different
wavelength from a man's well-known trickery?
Whereas
a lot of movies might have stressed that discussion point
beyond acceptable terms, however, "Stage Beauty"
knows exactly when to provoke the dispute and when to stand
back to let the audience contemplate the issue. The screenplay
is brilliant in the regard that it does not treat its viewers
like some kind of ignorant push-overs; likewise, it expects
those with a firm interest in the material to arrive at
a stance long before the final curtain is brought down.
Such a task couldn't have been entirely possible without
the assistance of motivated actors, but thankfully Crudup
and Danes his all the right notes here. Their performances
capture a certain level of arrogance and uncertainty here
that drives the material well into its third act; when they
are friends - and sometimes lovers - they have irresistible
charm, but when they are sworn enemies, their chemistry
is so intense (both apart and together) that the surrounding
players willingly drift out of sight of the camera. Inevitably,
the movie will demand them to come to terms with the problems
of the past and force them to face the challenges ahead,
but Hatcher's script devises one final scheme along the
way that results in one of the most enjoyable (and tense)
sequences seen in a film this past year. The sheer burst
of energy that comes from this twist (which I shall not
reveal here) is literally heart-pounding, and the satisfaction
level afterwards is so great that I left the room with nothing
less than a big grin.
The film's comedy
doesn't always depend on complexity to arrive at a punch
line, naturally, but nearly all of the big jokes are consistent
in one regard - the viewer is generally left feeling shocked
and awed by their sheer sense of candor. Some of this material
will no doubt drop a few jaws on more than one occasion.
In a picture with the visual flair of a traditional period
piece, the last thing you expect to see is something savage
and forceful in terms of comic delivery, but it is there
all the same. Characters engage in all sorts of mischievous
gestures here, like blunt sexual confessions, profanity,
embarrassing incidents and even exercises in mass hysteria.
Some of it is crude beyond belief, but none of it is so
extreme that it ventures outside the lines of acceptability.
In fact, you find yourself laughing hysterically at things
that you know full well you shouldn't. And hey, you know
what should be said about daring comedies - if a movie is
able to undermine your resistance long enough for you to
chuckle at something that is otherwise very crude, then
it has done a service that is not easily ignored.
Eyre's intensity
as a director here makes the final result a wonder on too
many levels to count. Consider the film's sharp but offbeat
visual flair, for instance; characters dress in costumes
that are both rich and over-the-top (like a king's assistant
whose powder wigs practically make his face disappear),
and the photography tends to capture its players in situations
that are not always the most flattering, at least to the
casual eye. Likewise, he is also able to draw solid performances
from even the most seemingly-inconsequential supporting
characters; I especially liked Rupert Everett's turn as
a whimsical English monarch, who is less content with living
in rude luxury and seemingly more motivated by the privilege
of doing something right - or at least different - for establishment.
But what is his ultimate virtue in this ambitious and observant
tale, though? Simple: his ability to marry brilliant drama
with brilliant comedy, and then furnish it with a deep sense
of social relevance. This is a movie that can be enjoyed
on so many levels, can provoke and inspire its audience
in a relentless number of ways, that its appeal is magnified
beyond the set standards for this genre. "Stage Beauty"
is without a doubt one of the finest achievements in moviemaking
I have seen in a long time.
© 2005, David Keyes, Cinemaphile.org.
Please e-mail the author here
if the above review contains any spelling or grammar mistakes. |