Add Jane Campion’s rich, sensuous, quietly thrilling Bright Star to the very short list of admirable films about writers. In this case the writer is John Keats (Ben Whishaw), the Romantic poet who died at age 25 believing himself a failure. The movie, set during his last several years, focuses on his playful friendship with and evolving love for Fanny Brawne (Abbie Cornish), the independent-minded young woman who lived next door in Hampstead Village and was, in her own fashion, an artistic spirit. Completing an ineffably fraught constellation–not exactly a romantic triangle–is Keats’s host Charles Armitage Brown (Paul Schneider), who loves, esteems, and regards Keats with both pride and envy, and engages in an unstated rivalry for Fanny. All three performances are superb, with Whishaw adding to his gallery of artist figures (the olfactorily obsessed murderer in Perfume, one of the Bob Dylans in I’m Not There), and Cornish and Schneider taking top acting honors for 2009. As in Campion’s The Piano, others are party to the central story, and they have identities, personalities, and claims to intelligence and understanding that we appreciate without having it announced in dialogue. Kerry Fox (redheaded wild girl of Campion’s An Angel at My Table nearly two decades ago) evokes Fanny’s mother with a few brushstrokes, and Fanny’s young sister and brother are watchful presences and de facto co-conspirators in the courtship. In addition, Bright Star is the rare period movie to convey–without being insistent–what it was like to be alive in another era, the nature of houses and rooms and how people occupied them, the way windows linked spaces and enlarged people’s lives and experiences, how fires warmed as the milky English sunlight did not. And always there is an aliveness to place and weather, the creak of boardwalk underfoot and the wind rustling the reeds as lovers walk through a wetland. Poetry grows from such things; at least, Jane Campion’s does. –Richard T. Jameson
Buy “Bright Star” For Only $17.98
January 17, 2006
#1
As for my opinion on the artistic merits of this film, ignore my 1-star review. “Bright Star” is one of the best films of 2009, its visual beauty made all the more profound by its surprising avoidance of poetic cliche. The way Fanny’s physical world is transformed by her passion for Keats creates a deeply moving portrayal of female subjectivity. It’s also just plain-and-simple gorgeous.
That said, Sony’s cancellation of the Blu-Ray release for this film is completely indefensible. Despite the fact that no other film from 2009 deserves inclusion in my video collection more than “Bright Star,” I refuse to purchase this edition. This decision is probably due to some sort of market analysis of the film’s sales potential, yet even this doesn’t make much sense considering that Sony has released far less notable independent pick-ups (“The Damned United,” anyone?).
If any film in recent memory would benefit from the boosts given to color fidelity and image detail by Blu-Ray, it is “Bright Star.” As a standard-def release, this disc may be quite good for all I know, but the lack of a Blu-Ray release is quite a slap in the face to BD owners. Sony Home Entertainment should be ashamed.
To anyone living in the Chicagoland area, Doc Films (the University of Chicago’s terrific student-managed film society) is showing “Bright Star” on 35MM on Friday, February 19 at 6:30, 9, and 11:30pm, followed by a matinee screening at 1 pm on Sunday, February 21. Doc Films is located on the first floor of Ida Noyes Hall at 59th and Woodlawn in Hyde Park on the South Side of Chicago. Admission is a steal at $5. I’m not affiliated with Doc myself, so I hope they appreciate the free publicity.
January 17, 2006
#2
This movie is more on the theatrical side.
I do not know how close to the real love story but considering that there is nothing extraordinary or flashing going on during the movie (more typical in Hollywood movie) witch some might find it a little bit boring, the love story is probable accurate in details.
It is a beautiful love story between Frances Brawne “Fanny” and poet John Keats, who’s true talent was never recognize during his life time, and yet many will say was to some degree equal to Byron’s and Shelley`s.
The action is slow and Keats poetry is the ” background voice” of many scenes .
Personally, in many scenes I did not felt the year of 1818 as it was in Jane Austen literature.
Fanny was a 18 year old beautiful and talented seamstress ( by pleasure and not profession) who was living with her widow mother and her two siblings. Her clothing where showing a more eccentric 1818 fashion ( witch was intended ) but her hair style was more an 1860 fashion.
The mother had a very modern relationship with the daughter, and some times almost an unnatural behavior as a mother. She has NEVER give any advice, she NEVER show any concern, or clear objection to her daughter’s choice, something that one would expect in the begging of 19 century, when a mother would have a much more powerful influence in a daughters life and in many cases MAKE the decisions for her. But the part that strike me most was when Fanny receive the worst news and the mother did not rush to comfort her until was call several times. The mother, through out the movie was more of shadow moving from one scene to another and who occasionally had a line or two.
Fanny had a 14 year old brother Samuel and a 9 year old sister Margaret “Tots”. The brother was always following her quiet and never had a line. There was something about this appearance that I really liked, he was almost like a guardian angel always watching over her.
Fanny’s infatuation with Keats was clear and well portrayed by the actress, but I NEVER felt Keats passion for her.
His words and his poetry for Fanny where full of passion but his acting and facial expression where very cold. There was no fire burning inside his heart or eyes and the occasional scenes where we should see his passion and desire for Fanny where not express very well by the actor. To me he seem very cold.
Overall this movie is one of those movies that you either love or hate. For some is a passionate love story, sprinkle with 19 century poetry, while for others is a long, boring and depressing movie.
[...]
January 17, 2006
#3
This movie is very well done. The clothing and sets are wonderful. The acting is great. The problem is that that story line is dark and depressing. I don’t like the character of John Keats. He was so self-absorbed and boring. His work partner is horrible. It’s very slow and even though it’s supposed to take place in a 3-year time period, it jumps around so much that it’s hard to know when things are taking place during that 3-year span. I watched the entire movie but came away feeling like I’d wasted my time. Just not my cup of tea.
January 17, 2006
#4
I watch alot of BBC productions and this was by far not my favorite. It moves slow and I couldn’t get into the characters. I could care less if John Keats found true love or not, wrote great poetry or not, or if he passed away completely unknown. I enjoy period films and history, but couldn’t enjoy this one.
January 17, 2006
#5
I just watched this movie and love it. This is one of my favorite romance movies and would recommend owning it. The scenery and passion the characters have is inspiring and moving a must see.