Atonement - film review
Jul. 6th, 2008 01:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatJust finished watching the film Atonement, courtesy of netflix, and based on the bestselling novel by Ian McEwan of the same name. I liked the film better than the novel, but that is not saying much since I despised the novel. My pal Wales, who read quite a bit of McEwan's earlier stuff, before he hit mainstream, told me once that she found McEwan to be a cold writer, who did not like people very much and certainly did not like his own characters.
His word choice, she said, was cold and distancing. I agree. He writes in what can best be described as a stand-offish academic style, which distances the reader from the characters to the extent that one feels as if one is judging them as opposed to living the story through them. It is an academic style of writing that I often feel is more about communicating the accomplishments and brilliance of the writer than it is communicating information or a story. Look, how brilliant I am, look at how great my vocabulary and sentence structure can be. Yet, if you look at the bare bones of the story, it's not all that interesting in of itself - it's a tale of two star-crossed lovers who can never be together, separated by War and class and the lie of a silly 13 year old girl. What is interesting and worth commenting on is the style, the word choice, and the point of view.
The film in some respects does a better job with the point of view than the book did and it is as a result more believable. At least the front matter is or the set-up, in which Briony tells her lie and sentences the handsome and erstwhile, if somewhat niave, Robbie to jail and eventually to WAR, taking him away from the medical career he cherishes. In the novel, Briony appears to control the proceedings, much more than in the film. To an extent, that I found the character and the one's surrounding her so distasteful, I barely could make it to the next chapter. In the film, we see how the chain of events surrounding Briony place her in the position in which she finds herself, as a result she is a bit less distasteful.And in far less control. Her cousin Lola, Paul Marshall (the true culprit and the rich successful friend of her brother, Leon), and Robbie himself to a degree aid her in her fanciful lie. Robbie by mistakenly giving the girl a letter that was not meant for anyone's eyes. (It talks about how he would 'like to kiss Cecila's ( her sister's) sweet cunt, in those exact words.) And we are shown, not told, in a few quick scenes, that Briony herself has a bit of crush on Robbie. Then in the dark, hunting her small cousins, who have run off, all by herself - she stumbles upon her cousin Lola being molested by Paul Marshall. It is too dark to make out much more than his form, the suit (similar to Robbie's), and her cousin in tears. So she flies to the assumption that Robbie molested and raped Lola. Neither Lola nor Paul Marshall correct her. The fact that Robbie shows up sometime later with the two little boys coming from the opposite direction - does not help his case, since at that point, Briony's parents have already read the letter he had sent Cecila, provided by Briony, and have tried and convicted him.
All of this is shown to us in a group of quick scenes. Throughout, it is clear that part of what we are being shown may not be true, may in fact be written by our unreliable narrator. The film gets this across partly through music, the tap-tapping of keys on a typewriter. We see Briony tapping away at the beginning of the film. Towards the end, we learn Atonement is a novel written by Briony, and much of the film we've been watching has happened inside Briony's head, leaving it unclear which parts happened and which did not, since Briony herself is suffering from dementia, bits and pieces of her memory being ripped away by a series of strokes. What is true is that Cecila and Robbie never got together, both died separately in the WAR, their dreams unrealized. Briony herself, never got the chance to make amends to either person, specifically her sister, who remained estranged from the family.
Briony states that she decided to write a happy ending for her sister and Robbie in her novel, that she felt the truth/reality served no real purpose. That it was pitiless. And perhaps she could atone for what she did by providing them with a happy ending in fiction if not in real life. Leaving the viewer and the reader with a bit of a chill down the proverbial spine. Briony at the very end of her life is as narcissitic and egotistical as she was towards the beginning, seeing herself as a sort of God, with the power to grant happiness or take it away. When in truth, she was but one of many participants in the tragedy of choices that had played out.
The filmmakers in some respects are far more sympathetic to the characters, than the writer is. Perhaps because film can get across a false sense of romanticism that writing doesn't always accomplish without causing disdain? I don't know. A lot of people I've met adored Atonement, the novel, and many obviously adored the film - or it would not have been nominated for multiple Oscars, winning few. It is not as good a film as No Country For Old Men, but then I suspect it is not as good a novel either. Cormac McCarthy may or may not be a better writer than McEwan, but he is certainly a warmer one, who uses words to infuse his characters with life and substance. Perhaps in the end it is a class thing, McEwan's writing seems to be largely about class and the coldness of that distinction. Reading him and watching this film reminds me of why I find myself looking at those who have graduated from Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Brandeis, with a measure of disdain, wondering if their educations at such lofty and prestigious institutions have done anything to broaden their perception or in truth merely narrowed it to the width of a pin. (ETA: Okay that admittedly came off as a bit harsh - was attempting to do a satirical take on that type of lingo, demonstrating how off-putting it truly is.)
Okay, off to spend the day with Wales. Not a film I highly recommend, but then I didn't think much of the book, either.
His word choice, she said, was cold and distancing. I agree. He writes in what can best be described as a stand-offish academic style, which distances the reader from the characters to the extent that one feels as if one is judging them as opposed to living the story through them. It is an academic style of writing that I often feel is more about communicating the accomplishments and brilliance of the writer than it is communicating information or a story. Look, how brilliant I am, look at how great my vocabulary and sentence structure can be. Yet, if you look at the bare bones of the story, it's not all that interesting in of itself - it's a tale of two star-crossed lovers who can never be together, separated by War and class and the lie of a silly 13 year old girl. What is interesting and worth commenting on is the style, the word choice, and the point of view.
The film in some respects does a better job with the point of view than the book did and it is as a result more believable. At least the front matter is or the set-up, in which Briony tells her lie and sentences the handsome and erstwhile, if somewhat niave, Robbie to jail and eventually to WAR, taking him away from the medical career he cherishes. In the novel, Briony appears to control the proceedings, much more than in the film. To an extent, that I found the character and the one's surrounding her so distasteful, I barely could make it to the next chapter. In the film, we see how the chain of events surrounding Briony place her in the position in which she finds herself, as a result she is a bit less distasteful.And in far less control. Her cousin Lola, Paul Marshall (the true culprit and the rich successful friend of her brother, Leon), and Robbie himself to a degree aid her in her fanciful lie. Robbie by mistakenly giving the girl a letter that was not meant for anyone's eyes. (It talks about how he would 'like to kiss Cecila's ( her sister's) sweet cunt, in those exact words.) And we are shown, not told, in a few quick scenes, that Briony herself has a bit of crush on Robbie. Then in the dark, hunting her small cousins, who have run off, all by herself - she stumbles upon her cousin Lola being molested by Paul Marshall. It is too dark to make out much more than his form, the suit (similar to Robbie's), and her cousin in tears. So she flies to the assumption that Robbie molested and raped Lola. Neither Lola nor Paul Marshall correct her. The fact that Robbie shows up sometime later with the two little boys coming from the opposite direction - does not help his case, since at that point, Briony's parents have already read the letter he had sent Cecila, provided by Briony, and have tried and convicted him.
All of this is shown to us in a group of quick scenes. Throughout, it is clear that part of what we are being shown may not be true, may in fact be written by our unreliable narrator. The film gets this across partly through music, the tap-tapping of keys on a typewriter. We see Briony tapping away at the beginning of the film. Towards the end, we learn Atonement is a novel written by Briony, and much of the film we've been watching has happened inside Briony's head, leaving it unclear which parts happened and which did not, since Briony herself is suffering from dementia, bits and pieces of her memory being ripped away by a series of strokes. What is true is that Cecila and Robbie never got together, both died separately in the WAR, their dreams unrealized. Briony herself, never got the chance to make amends to either person, specifically her sister, who remained estranged from the family.
Briony states that she decided to write a happy ending for her sister and Robbie in her novel, that she felt the truth/reality served no real purpose. That it was pitiless. And perhaps she could atone for what she did by providing them with a happy ending in fiction if not in real life. Leaving the viewer and the reader with a bit of a chill down the proverbial spine. Briony at the very end of her life is as narcissitic and egotistical as she was towards the beginning, seeing herself as a sort of God, with the power to grant happiness or take it away. When in truth, she was but one of many participants in the tragedy of choices that had played out.
The filmmakers in some respects are far more sympathetic to the characters, than the writer is. Perhaps because film can get across a false sense of romanticism that writing doesn't always accomplish without causing disdain? I don't know. A lot of people I've met adored Atonement, the novel, and many obviously adored the film - or it would not have been nominated for multiple Oscars, winning few. It is not as good a film as No Country For Old Men, but then I suspect it is not as good a novel either. Cormac McCarthy may or may not be a better writer than McEwan, but he is certainly a warmer one, who uses words to infuse his characters with life and substance. Perhaps in the end it is a class thing, McEwan's writing seems to be largely about class and the coldness of that distinction. Reading him and watching this film reminds me of why I find myself looking at those who have graduated from Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Brandeis, with a measure of disdain, wondering if their educations at such lofty and prestigious institutions have done anything to broaden their perception or in truth merely narrowed it to the width of a pin. (ETA: Okay that admittedly came off as a bit harsh - was attempting to do a satirical take on that type of lingo, demonstrating how off-putting it truly is.)
Okay, off to spend the day with Wales. Not a film I highly recommend, but then I didn't think much of the book, either.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-06 06:23 pm (UTC)I enjoyed the book although it’s not one I’d re-read, it had interesting and subtly angry things to say about class and the war and the period fascinates me. However, the main point McEwan wanted to make seemed to be one about the temptations of writing fiction and the almost godlike powers that can feel as if it gives the writer, which was entirely lost in the movie with the change of medium. The film was very beautiful but in only at one point even tried to be about what it is to be a film maker. It felt almost like fanfic, like someone saying this is what I saw in my head when I read the book.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-06 10:01 pm (UTC)Interesting McEwan went to Sussex. But isn't Sussex also considered a "lofty" institution in its own right? I know Berkely is. Unlike the lesser knowns such as CUNY or Univeristy of San Diego, or Penn State. Not that it matters, the snobbery is still there, intact.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-07 03:19 pm (UTC)As for Atonement my point wasn't that the film and book made you feel differently about Briony, she's a fundamentally flawed character in both. In the film though it's possible to view her dispassionately, the genius of the book is that it lures the reader into becoming complicit with her, you want her fantasy of Robbie and Celia surviving to pass judgement on her to be real as much as she does, you make it with her. It gives the book a whole other dimension beyond the yearning and "the rich are different" themes of Gatsby, although I do think Gatsby's the better book.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-07 04:44 pm (UTC)I have no idea how many degrees McEwan had, but I'm guessing it's more than a BA. His writing style feels "taught" to me. As if he studied others styles and adopted it.
As for your second point about the book being more successful than the film in getting across the complicity of the reader with the author in wishing a happy ending? I'm not sure I agree. First off =-Briony's novel is a "memoir" not a work of fiction. McEwan's is fictional - but the book inside that Briony has written is "memoir" - so the point he is making is about "memoirs" not fiction per se.
Two - when I read the book, I more or less figured out long before the last chapters, that Briony wasn't going to get it, that the scene between the sister and Robbie was false, and just Briony's hope for a happy ending - so did not feel the complicity that you mention. I think the same can be said for anyone watching the film who knows the story ahead of time. Those who did not know the plot twist -well, we have no way of knowing how they would have reacted. That's the problem with twists - if you figure them out too soon - it ruins the experience.