Dangerous Liaisons
Dangerous Liaisons was made in 1988 by Stephen
Frears and it features both John Malkovich and Glenn Close in the
lead parts.
John Malkovich plays the devilishly handsome Vicomte de Valmont,
Glenn Close plays the manipulative Marquise de Merteuil.
The action in a nutshell: Valmont(Malkovich) returns to Paris to
spend some time with some of his “lady aquintances”, a thing of
which he has somewhat many, and bumps into the Marquise de
Merteuil(Close) who has a small favour to ask him.
This favour she asks him is to take her cousin's daughter's virginity
to get back at the cousin the Madame de Volanges(Kurtz) and The count
Bastide who used to be Merteuil's lover but who is now going to marry
Cécile Volanges(Uma Thurman). At first Valmont declines to do it, but
then Merteuil offers him a reward, herself, and he says yes.
So he goes out to his aunt's mansion where another lady lives, The
Madame de Tourvel, who Valmont has set out to conquer to win Fame
among his friends, because she is a lady known for her strict morals
and love for her husband who is a judge.
Only problem in this is the fact that Valmont ends up falling in love
with his intended victim, Madame de Tourvel(Pfeiffer).
And this gets him killed in the end.
Valmont comes across as being such an arrogant pig but underneath he's
only a hopelessly romantic man, hoping to find true love.
The battle of the two, the seducer and the husband in him is almost
the same as the battle in the Jekyll&Hyde story, the battle of good
and evil.
In this story good wins.
Dangerous Liaisons is based upon a successful play by playwrite Christopher Hampton, a play which in itself is an adaptation of the classic novel by French author Choderlos de Laclos(which was made into a movie by Roger Vadim in 1960).Its origin has no doubt been used in the new movie(The movie was based on the famous novel "Liaisons Dangereuses") by Stephen Frears, it’s clear to all viewers that this is supposed to be seen in the intimate surroundings of a theatre or something similar. The accentation of the acting and hence the plot, the representation as a form is made to clearly reveal the performance. Which is why, I think, Stephen has chosen the actors he has. Most of them do have theatre pasts, but especially John Malkovich is a capable theatrical man.
This fact reveals itself most clearly in the dialogue which attracts attention exactly because it seems to have been chemichally cleansed of any everyday lingual nuance. There are absolutely no "Ehrm…s", no voices break and no silences occur unless it serves some intricat purpose.
Diction as used in the theatre helps the plot’s details come to their fullest. This certainly does have the charm of retorics, but here it’s merely used as one of the elements with which the movie paints a picture of the decadent noblemen, who’s time was only spent on nurturing vanity and invent intrigues.
Another thing is the use of symbolism.E.G: The play/movie is about masks, about feelings that have to be mastered, facades that have to be kept(but they do however crumble at the sight of the anarchic power of true love).
This is demonstrated throughout the movie by the Marquise’s careful morning toilette in which she is carefully disguised with all the splendor and by all rules of the allonge periode, and by the last scene in which the Marquise sits alone and shaken in her dressingroom(her diabolique scheme failed, her feelings penetrated the hard surface)removing her make-up, revealing her true face.This type of symbolism appears shallow, because on one hand it wishes to indicate a depth and at the same time it tries to keep a firm grip on "onesidedness". In this way, no room for the viewer’s imagination is given, only is the supposed essence of the plot’s symbols forced upon us, and we get pulled into the world of Stephen Frears, and the world of the pre-revolution nobles. And so we sit watching as either passive viewers or as active participants.
And here’s where the charachters come in. Through their acting, mimics, gestures and mere appearence the banditlike passion and deep honesty/love come across Prima Facie.
The reptile-like face of the Vicomte de Valmont(John Malkovich) is no coincidence, his face expresses all of the manipulative behaviour he must possess to be a master of seduction. From the moment you see this man you just know that he’s supposed to be a mean S.O.B. and that he won’t shy away from anything to achieve precisely what he wants.
This man does however go through a sort of miracoulous change towards the end of the movie, as he is lying in the snow, bleeding from the cut inflicted by the Chevalier’s blade realizing his life’s emptiness. This scene, which is crosscut with the scene of his only true love lying in the hospital, ready to die is made with the same thick poetry, tells us of the tight bond of blood flowing and the vigour of feelings.
We believe this change, only because it’s delivered with such feeling and strength. We experience a budding feeling of compasion for the poor Vicomte, who’s broken so many hearts through the movie, we pity him now for having his broken too. We pity him for not realizing his mistake, we realize that we've begun to hate the Marquise for having manipulated him for so long, we pity the Madame de Tourvel for having her heart broken by the Vicomte and we blame the Chevalier for having killed such a lovely man. Our feelings seem reversed at the end of this movie, and we look back on the experience and cannot believe how we felt before, how were we so misled? Why didn’t the Vicomte see the Marquise’s real nature?
Maybe he did, perhaps so did we. What the viewer feels connects him/her with the Vicomte at that particular moment is the feeling of stupidity. Why didn't we see her for what she was from the very beginning?
|
|
|
A piece of conversation from the movie:Marquise de Merteuil: And you wanted a chance to make my cousin suffer. Vicomte de Valmont: I can't resist you. Marquise de Merteuil: I made it easy for you. Vicomte de Vamont: But all this is most inconvenient. The comtesse de Beaulieu has invited me to stay. Marquise de Merteuil: Well' you'll just have to put it off. Vicomte de Valmont: Well the comtesse has promised me extensive use of her gardens. It seems her husband's fingers are not as green as they once were. Marquise de Merteuil: Maybe not, but from what I hear, all his friends are gardeners. Vicomte de Valmont: Is that so?Another piece of conversation, also between the Marquise and Valmont:Valmont: Isn't it a pity that our agreement does not relate to the task you set me? Rather than the one I set myself? Merteuil: I am grateful, of course! For that would have been almost insultingly simple. One does not applaud the tenor for clearing his throat! Valmont: laughs.
This is from my favourite scene in the movie.... Valmont: Let's just get ourselves more comfortable, shall we?
Go to Mary
Go to Film and Bio
Go to Interview
The man in the Iron Mask
Go to Con Air
My Jokes Page
Thoughts
More Dangerous Liaisons here-Check it out!
Official Dangerous Liaisons Page
This The
King's MITIM Webring site is owned by
Christina Pedersen.
Want to join the The King's MITIM Webring ?
|
|---|
| [Skip Prev] [Prev] [Next] [Skip Next] [Random] [Next 5] [List Sites] |
