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 08:38 pm (UTC)Definitely, though, the meta aspect of this story really only works as a novel. For someone watching the film cold, the ending seems like a cheap nasty 'gotcha' device, I think, whereas I thought it was evilly brilliant in the novel. In fact, I had to kind of spoil it for my husband before we sat down to watch the film, because he is a dyed in the wool Romantic, and I KNEW he would get all focused on the love story, when the actual core of the story is Briony. After the film was over, he said he had enjoyed it, and found it thought-provoking, but would have HATED it if he'd gone into it expecting a typical romance.
I also found Atonement interesting in comparison to the adaptation of The English Patient, since both are very interior, time-jumping novels that aren't always doing what you think they're doing, story-telling-wise.
The English Patient is one of my top ten favorite novels of all time. I mean, I LOVE it. And back in the day, I could not fathom how it could be filmed. But that film-making team did something totally different than the Atonement team: they refocused and completely opened out the story, which I thought worked brilliantly well. More successful adaptation, I thought. Also, my husband hadn't read the novel and loved the film of The English Patient, so it probably worked equally well for either audience.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-06 10:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-06 10:45 pm (UTC)I recently started working through a monstrous "classical education I never had" reading list, padded at era-appropriate intervals with various other novels and non-fiction books I've been wanting to read. The list is now more that 2 double-column pages long and will likely take me the better part of a 5 years to work through, but Gatsby is on it, because I figured I should reread it.