Tag Archives: W./E.

The Devil’s Mistress or the Devil’s Whore

The_Devil's_WhoreI happened to catch this miniseries on TV this weekend and I found it really engrossing.  It was called The Devil’s Whore in most of the world, but we puritanical Americans needed the modified title of the Devil’s Mistress. Because if you pay her in the street she’s a dirty whore, but if you get her an apartment and buy her some gifts, she’s a classy mistress.  Apparently.

The miniseries is from 2008, and features a lot of well-known actors who have gone on to be quite famous. For the Doctor Who fans, we have John Simm (the Master) as Edward Sexby, and Peter Capaldi (the new Doctor) as the ill-fated Charles I.

Dominic West (the Wire) plays Oliver Cromwell, Andrea Riseborough (W./E., Oblivion) plays fictional Angelica Fanshawe, and Michael Fassbender (every movie ever) plays Thomas Rainsborough. Tom Goodman-Hill (Mr. Grove in Mr. Selfridge) plays Honest John Lilburne.

As you’ll have guessed (if you know even basic British history), this miniseries takes place just before and during the English Civil War.  If you haven’t learned basic British history, here’s the 2 cent tour of the era.  Charles I was a dictator of Scottish descent with a French wife.  That meant people thought he was too close to ‘Papists’, and that his policies would benefit Catholics at the expense of Protestants.  After all the bloodshed and confusion of the 16th century battle between Catholicism and Protestantism in England, the majority of the English were vehemently opposed to ‘Papists’. Charles I and Parliament engaged in a very long struggle for power, which ended with Charles I being beheaded in London.  Oliver Cromwell became the leader of the Long Parliament, and appointed himself ‘Lord Protector’.  Though he’d argued against monarchy, he very quickly established himself as a king in all but name.  This lasted until the Restoration of the monarchy with Charles’ son returning to England after Cromwell’s death.  The monarchy has existed without any real interruption since that time.

This miniseries starts with Angelica Fanshawe preparing to marry her childhood sweetheart, Harry. She’s wealthy and connected; King Charles himself attends and blesses her wedding.

Angelica Fanshawe3 (Andrea Riseborough)

We see brief flashbacks. Angelica was raised by a Catholic mother, during the very violent time just after Protestantism was established in England. Her mother abandoned her for God, and Angelica was (understandably) angry.  She proclaims that there is no god, and that is the first time she gets a vision of a demon.  She sees them all her life.

A lot is going on during the day of her wedding.  John Lilburne is whipped for distributing pamphlets arguing against the tyrannical rule of King Charles. Sexby sees Angelica and immediately falls in love with her, though he is quickly reminded that his social standing (lowly soldier for pay) prevents him from even thinking about her in an untoward way.  The ribbing of his friends causes her groom Harry to have a really pathetic problem with insecurity. He spends the rest of their marriage being jealous and angry, trying to make her give up her independence and her ability to make decisions.  To say I hate him would be an understatement.

Thankfully for me, Harry meets a sticky end at the hands of the ever-more tyrannical Charles I.  We see Angelica’s situation change overnight. She’s no longer wealthy or desired, she’s out on the streets. At the same time, Sexby, Cromwell, and Rainsborough are leading the charge against Charles; they are allied with Honest John Lilburne, but not for long.

article-1086202-027D020F000005DC-344_468x328Episodes 2 and 3 see Angelica change a lot.  She is forced to become independent and to examine the world she’s living in–rather than just accepting it as good based on her own privileged experiences.  *Cue Dylan’s ‘Like a Rolling Stone‘*  As a woman, this is a lot more difficult than for a man. She has no property, no money, no skills.  Starving, she accepts some soup offered to her by a wealthy man.  As soon as she is done eating, he tries to claim his ‘payment’.  After a bit of a tussle, she stabs him to keep him from raping her. Sexby turns up as Angelica is on the run, and helps to protect her from justice.

Angelica finally sees the bitter truth of life for those who aren’t as privileged as she has been.  Her loyalties change and she abandons the royalist cause and takes up with the Roundheads (aka those allied with Parliament in their conflict with the king.  The royalists were called Cavaliers).  She is drawn to Fassbender’s Rainsborough. He is a good mix between the too-earnest and impractical Lilburne and the severely pragmatic Cromwell. The two take up a love affair, but alas.  It’s not to be. Joliffe, the best friend of the man Angelica killed, is after her.  He wants to hang her as a murderess and a whore, and seems to take extreme pleasure in the idea of punishing a woman who wouldn’t give a man what he thought he deserved.

Things turn uglier as the miniseries continues.  Rainsborough and Angelica get married, but he is killed soon after–by his supposed friend Cromwell.  Angelica is pregnant and mourning a second husband, and is soon after arrested and sentenced to hang. She is due to be executed the same day as the king, newly convicted by a brutal Parliament and Cromwell, its leader.

As he can generally be expected to do, Sexby turns up to save Angelica. I won’t spoil what happens in the 4th episode, but it doesn’t turn out particularly well for anyone. I will say that at least one person dies, Sexby has at least one more chance to save Angelica from a terrible fate, and a baby is born at the end.

Here are a few things that struck me about this miniseries:

1-The more things change, the more they stay the same.  Under Charles I, John Lilburne is imprisoned for causing trouble, there is corruption and tyranny from a despotic ruler, and women are under the proverbial boots of incredibly awful men. After Charles I is killed and Cromwell takes over…it’s all the same.  It was a time of great revolution in England, but the changes seemed to be superficial and ineffectual.  Certainly nothing seemed to change for the better. John Lilburne rots in prison for criticizing Charles I, but he dies in prison under the governance of his supposed friends.

2-I have mixed feelings about Sexby.  I think he’s quite heroic and certainly a friend a girl wants to have if she’s going to constantly be in danger of being raped/murdered/executed.  His long slow burn of pining love for her is romantic, when it’s happening on screen.  But if it were real life, I don’t know that I’d feel the same way.  If the miniseries was set in modern times, I feel too much that he would be wearing a fedora and complaining that the girl he liked kept him in the ‘friendzone’. Side note, if you’re unfamiliar with the trope I am discussing, look at a few pages of this tumbr (or this one) and you’ll learn a new breed of  men to avoid. Sexby is a loyal and good friend to Angelica, but it’s quite clear he spends each moment hoping for more, and-once-gets unjustifiably angry and almost violent with her for not feeling what he feels.

While I find Sexby quite engaging and interesting, Angelica tells him she can never love him, and then ‘realizes’ her feelings for him almost the very next time she sees him.  Who wrote that? I have never once had that sort of reversal of feeling. Any women reading this: has this ever happened to you?  Did a man write this? Because I find it really hard to believe.

3-Note to self: do not attempt to lead a happy life during Civil War or revolution.  Both Angelica and Sexby get fucked around by the royalists and the roundheads, and the system in general.  There’s no hope for a happy ending.

4-Why on earth did they make her see the devil?  A lot of the miniseries paints Angelica as a liberated, almost modern, woman, which was very dangerous and could be considered demonic during that (literally) puritanical period.  She’s seen by several of her opponent’s as the Devil’s Whore, because she’s living a life outside social norms.  That’s all pretty powerful and makes me feel so grateful I don’t live in the 17th century. I would have been burned or drowned long ago.  The whole hallucinating a demon thing just seems like a strange distraction. It lessens the lunacy of their claims that she is the Devil’s Whore, and almost gives their accusations some weight.  I don’t understand the purpose of it at all.

Despite my reservations, I think it was a good miniseries.  I found it engrossing and easy to watch, and I did learn some things I never knew about that period of English history.  I take it all with a grain of salt, but a little bit of history and some entertainment are (in my book) a good way to spend an evening.

W./E.

Despite some terrible reviews, I decided to give this film a chance because I really find the whole abdication scandal of Edward VIII very interesting, and this did have a very different spin on it than all of those History Channel specials talking about how Edward was a Nazi sympathizer.  I think a lot of the terrible reviews come from people who dislike Madonna, or dislike her as a filmmaker.  Because while it wasn’t a great film, there were parts of it that were nice (the music, the visuals, the costumes).  It certainly doesn’t deserve the same Rotten Tomatoes rating as Showgirls.

The film follows two similar stories.  One is that of Wallis Simpson, an American woman who was married and divorced twice before the King of England decided he wanted to marry her (actually she was still married to the second guy when they really fell in love).  The PM, the British people, his family didn’t want Edward to be with her, and he ended up giving up the throne so that they could be together.

The other story is of a very wealthy American housewife, Wally (Abbie Cornish), married to a workaholic philandering abusive doctor in Manhattan.  She was named after Wallis Simpson, and she jokes that her parents ‘wanted her to marry a Prince’.  That probably influenced her in marrying her dreadful husband.  She is drawn to the story of Wallis and Edward, because of her namesake and her similar situation, so when there is an exhibit and a Sotheby’s auction selling many of their personal possessions, she goes every day to …well basically to imagine herself living out Wallis Simpson’s life.  She meets a security guard there, who is really a Russian intellectual, named Evgeni (Oscar Isaac).

The 1920s half of the story is infinitely more interesting than its modern counterpart.  Wallis Simpson’s abusive first husband makes you sort of immediately sympathize with her and excuse most of her behavior. I found both actors who portrayed Wallis and Edward (Andrea Riseborough and James D’Arcy) to be really charming and believable.  You understand immediately why Wallis is fearless, is a survivor. You also understand why Edward would be drawn to her when he’s surrounded by sycophantic socialites.

When the 20th century equivalent Wallis is abused and cheated on, however, you just wonder why she doesn’t just leave him.  She complains he made her give up her career when they got married, and she does cliché housewife crap like secretly take IVF drugs to try to get pregnant.  All I was thinking was why doesn’t she just leave him, get her job back (or a job), and have a kid on her own.  Or something. Do something. It doesn’t make me empathize with her, it makes me dislike her.

As I said before, the film is really visually appealing, particularly the period half of the plot.  There were also a few really interesting scenes that made me think about what it is to be a woman.  Wallis (the original) talks about how people have never called her beautiful. They’ve called her attractive, which is the polite way of saying she has done the best she can with what she has.  She also says something like…if I couldn’t be the most beautiful, at least I could dress better than anyone else in the room.  It is so sad and so true that so many women feel that the best they can hope for is to have people notice the effort they put into their appearance, even if they never feel confidence spring out of all that effort.  And the really sad thing is that a woman like that is probably better off than most women who don’t put in any effort, because they are too busy despising themselves for having chubby ankles or non-photoshopped ab muscles.  But I digress!

I did find myself being bothered by some of the glossing over of facts.  I mean, Edward and Wallis did meet with Hitler in 1937, and Edward gave a full Nazi salute during the visit.

The film sort of palliated this whole incident as rumor and malicious gossip, but there’s …there’s a fair bit of evidence that Hitler, at least, thought that Edward was sympathetic to the Nazi cause. I read an article that said the FBI was conducting surveillance on the couple, and that there were suspicions that Wallis had an affair with a Nazi, to whom she passed secrets.  Of course the FBI haven’t released any of these files, to my knowledge, so it’s still all conjecture. Still that puts a rather unpleasant spin on what the film calls an incredible love story.

Not that the movie is trying to paint it as a fairy tale, especially for Wallis.  It’s very obvious that the abdication crisis meant that neither Wallis nor Edward would be able to be together without giving up a lot of their lives.  In fact, they were never allowed back to England again–Wallis came back for Edward’s funeral in 1972, but they were never brought back as a couple.  They both were sort of miserable (in the film) because though they could now be together, they couldn’t really live their lives.  Edward’s brother, the new king George VI, wouldn’t take his calls or allow him to return home.  Tabloids (and apparently the FBI) followed them everywhere.  And, as the film points out, after such a monumental sacrifice, it was impossible for either of them to end the relationship, even if it soured. They were rather stuck together.

The film also really deifies Edward as a doting, loving husband and a genuinely good man who was forced to choose between his country and the woman he loved.  Some of that may be true, but it also makes you wonder about that choice.  If you consider that his abdication came in the mid 1930s, when the entire continent could already see that another horrific war was coming. In that same year, Nazi Germany invaded the Rhineland, radical forces took over Japan, Italian forces started to expand into neighboring territories, the Spanish civil war began, Italy, Germany, and Japan became de facto allies–this was all during one year! It was a full 3 years before WWII officially began, but it’s as clear as day what was going on.  This is the moment that Edward decides to leave his post, his country, his duty.  To leave it to his poor brother, George VI, played recently by Colin Firth in The King’s Speech.  As a younger brother, George (known as Bertie by his family) had never expected to have to be king, and here was the responsibility heaped on his shoulders less than 1 year after his father had died, with a world preparing for an epic disaster. Not to mention his speech impediment and his discomfort in the public arena. In the movie and in real life, Edward doesn’t seem to have put much thought into what that meant for his brother, his family, his country. That’s not a man that I think I could love.  I’m not one for duty, traditionally, but in situations like that your responsibilities are not only to your own happiness.  And the film just…glazes over these facts, painting Edward as someone who wants to help in the war and contribute something, but isn’t allowed to.

So the film is naive at best.  It also seems sort of…self-indulgent.  I’m not enough of a film buff to really describe why I got this impression. I don’t have pretentious words to describe the choices directors make in setting up shots or whatever. I found the period half of the movie interesting, even if it was unrealistic.  The 20th century part of the movie was just …pointless.  Predictably, Wally eventually leaves her abusive psychotic husband–though I must point out that she only leaves him when Evgeni comes and takes her away from their apartment to his own.  So, really, she gets rescued.  And he takes her back to his apartment in Queens or Brooklyn or similar, and he has one of those apartments that is meant to look Spartan and bare, and be the opposite of her posh Upper East Side place with her husband.  So there’s exposed brick and a grand piano and lots of second-hand paperbacks.  But in reality, people pay thousands and thousands of dollars for their apartments to look exactly like that.  So it’s bullshit.  Then the two of them, again, predictably, start dating and she’s so much happier that she abandons her Chanel dresses and starts wearing newsboy caps and playing pool at bars.  Okay then.  Because if you change men, your wardrobe changes immediately too.  Or maybe I’m just supposed to believe she was really hip the whole time and now her true self can come out.  Either way, I found it nauseating.

I think you could make a really amazing film out of just the period parts of this movie, and that it would be 1000 times better for eliminating the modern equivalent altogether.  It’s an interesting subject, especially when you consider if he had not abdicated, whether England would have had a Nazi sympathizer for a king and a pacifist for a PM.  How would modern Europe look if that had happened?  That’s a far more interesting topic than one silly housewife and her need to compare her life to the woman she was named after.