An Education & Bodyguards and Assassins
Posted by SpikeFeb 14
Just watched An Education, a film with a 95% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a film that stands to be fondly remembered for several reasons. First there is the engaging performance by newcomer Carey Mulligan, whom everyone is comparing to Audrey Hepburn after this, and she’s been nominated for an Oscar as best actress for her performance here. And a terrific performance from Peter Sarsgaard, who does a very good job of walking the tightrope that his role demands. The film is based on a brief memoir by British reporter Lynn Barber – you can read the original story here – and marks Nick Hornsby’s first adapted screenplay. Director Lone Scherfig is a “graduate” of the Dogme 95 movement but she has clearly moved beyond that.
Here’s what casual viewers of the film might miss. First, that it takes part in a very different era, an era before women’s liberation, an era where the glass ceiling for women was a lot lower than it was today and an era where “class” meant more than it does today. It’s 1961 and a woman’s place is in the home and though Jenny is hoping to go to Oxford, her father sees that merely as a way for her to meet and marry a man of means. It’s an era where it’s okay to publicly announce that one hates Jews and where one Jew takes advantage of overt racism to get rich. So it functions as a time piece, a bit of bittersweet nostalgia, almost a Mad Man-ish look back at a time and attitudes that we’d like to think we’ve left behind (even if we really haven’t).
And perhaps more uncomfortably, it’s an era in which no one blinks at the notion of a thirty-something year old man dating a 16 year old schoolgirl – the parents perceive the man as worldly, sophisticated and rich and don’t protest even when he asks to take her away for a weekend because he represents another step, even a shortcut, in the upward mobility they’re seeking for their daughter. You know where this film is going, even if you don’t know the story, but it’s the way in which it gets there – the steady pacing and rhythm, the way in which it gradually unfolds and opens up like a flower or a puzzle box. We see a 16 year old girl become an 18 year old older-but-wiser woman, her lesson about life and what really matters, and the final line, which I won’t give away here, that in just a few short words brilliantly sums up what she’s learned.
The film has received three Oscar nominations – best picture, best actress and best adapted screenplay and while it probably won’t win in any of those categories, the nominations are well-deserved.
Yesterday, as I mentioned, we watched Bodyguards and Assassins, the first half-way decent Hong Kong film not directed by Johnny To that I’ve seen in a few years. Directed by Teddy Chan and produced by Peter Chan, this film stars almost everyone in Hong Kong cinema – Donnie Yen, Leon Lai, Tony Leung (Ka-fai), Nicholas Tse, Eric Tsang, Fan Bingbing, Jacky Cheung, Michelle Reis – but to a certain extent is stolen by mainland actor Wang Xueqi. At any rate, it’s a halfway decent film because the first half is all history and family drama while the second half is a rolling series of kick-ass battles.
One problem is the story – it’s 1906 and Sun Yat-sen is making a visit to Hong Kong to plot the Chinese revolution. The Empress Dowager sends a general to Hong Kong to plot Sun’s assassination. Hong Kong people rally to protect Sun and eight heroes will give their lives to the cause. The problem is that this story is 100% fiction!
On the other hand, one has to admire the producers. They have made a film that has all the good guys pleading for democracy and has lead characters advocating violent revolution – and been able to get China financing and get the film on mainland screens – did the Chinese censors really not see the metaphor? In the first half, I enjoyed the CGI effects to present views of Hong Kong as it may have looked 100 years ago. In the second half, I enjoyed the expertly staged action scenes. But like too many Hong Kong films, the direction is weak on exposition and overly strong on sentimentality and I had a hard time staying awake during the first half of the film.
So basically, if you like this kind of thing, then this is the kind of thing you’ll like.



8 comments
Comment by Hendrik on February 14, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Yes, I also enjoyed watching An Education, as the acting in the movie seems natural to me. The director and screenplay writer(s) really deserve a compliment that they managed to make an attractive movie out of a very thin not-so-warm story. This is why the movie might win an Oscar. The plot is so predictable. As not much really happens, the film has plenty of time to share with us why the main characters do what they do. But, we don’t find out much more background about or some insight in why this guy is doing what he does and why she – supposedly a smart student – so easily falls for him. It just happens. Is it just because times were like that, as Spike describes ? Were girls in 1961 like her ? Maybe not.
Comment by Spike on February 15, 2010 at 10:56 am
Oh, I think we find out exactly why Jenny and David do what they did. David was clearly a serial adulterer with an attraction to very young girls, and that Jenny was special to him because she was so young, a virgin, most likely prettier and cleverer than the girls he’d been with in the past.
She falls for him because girls mature faster than boys and all the boys she knew her age were immature and insecure. She lay in her bedroom every night dreaming of Paris and sophistication and David opened the door for her to all of that. He was handsome, confident, drove a fancy car, wore a Rolex watch, wasn’t afraid of her father, took her to classical concerts and real restaurants and Paris. Some girls were like that in 1961 and some girls are still like that today.
And that’s part of the point of the end of the movie, that she no longer sought such sophistication in relationships; that young, immature but sincere boys were enough for her.
Comment by Hendrik on February 15, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Sure, all the “why” is answered in terms of what we see. I would have liked some insight in how the guy became the adulterer – his friends are not – and why the girl has these dreams while her class mates apparently don’t. The movie starts at a moment that both are ready to undergo their romance, without sharing with us how they got there. Both characters are described as a bit flat, while the story would need otherwise. Don’t get me wrong, I thought the movie was enjoyable.
Comment by Spike on February 15, 2010 at 9:52 pm
Come on Hendrik, do you need to “see” everything? Fill in the details with your own imagination. The movie is the girl’s story, not the guy’s and the girl has dreams her classmates don’t for the same reason as any other person has their own dreams.
Comment by Hendrik on February 16, 2010 at 6:05 am
Okay, I get your point. But I think the backgrounds of these 2 people is not a detail. Why them ? Because her father is so different from other fathers ? No. Her mom is so different ? No. His background is hardly mentioned. You made the point yourself in describing England in 1961, worrying that casual viewers might not see this. Then there much be something with her. And if I need my own imagination to fill that in, then to me the story is not complete.
Comment by Fernando on February 16, 2010 at 5:59 pm
Saw An Education earlier this week. I agree that the acting was very strong. Not just the leads (I was impressed years ago by Carey Mulligan in the adaptation of Bleak House), but also some of the supporting cast (especially Olivia Williams who did a lot with little screen time as the teacher). Also agree that the film needs to be seen in context, for the period it depicts.
I found it interesting as a portrayal of the role of women in that time (especially the way the father’s ambitions for his daughter change when a suitable suitor appears) and the issue of schoolgirls dating older men (what happened in the film was not uncommon in my school days).
But, in the end it felt trite. Too much happens too quickly, especially her “realisation.”
Comment by Dan on February 17, 2010 at 12:28 am
Does Hendrik review for IMDB?
Comment by Hendrik on February 17, 2010 at 7:13 am
Dan, no, I don’t.