Set with dialogue so challenging and exciting as the ear, they bite and transplanting ever, blushing with pleasure, elegantly mounted, and that even if some of its scenes, to get bogged down in too full of pathos that kills the drama, should have been avoided so that really be the end to end, I think especially to the sequence of dual deliberately lost by Valmont, liters and liters to these red blood coming out of his dying body and the snow scene in which they flow, as her glossy decor future death and white as purity found, by washing his sacrifice for all his sins, because they interfere, to meet for the first of excess tragic effects for the second and the threadbare metaphor, the poetry of highly desperate gesture he would make after losing, vanity, love of Madame de Tourvel, and masterfully played by Glenn Close, John Malkovich and Michelle Pfeiffer, yes, the film by Stephen Frears, committed in 1988 based on the novel by Choderlos de Laclos, is, despite some facilities staging, shining like a diamond ring Marquise.
But if the gem dazzled and seduced by its almost perfect form as he gave the British goldsmith, it is clear that the original stone which is carved turn is bleak, because it consists of three dramas, one of the Vicomte de Valmont, that of Madame de Tourvel and that of the Marquise de Merteuil, which can be be hanging in the fate of Cecile Volanges as the girl initiated the debauchery on the order of the Marquise and convinced that there was a good philosophy, seems to precede that of some years the fall of that which was in Ultimately the true false friend of her mother. And I wondered, after comparing and a bit of fun, which of the three was the greatest.
Was it one of Valmont? I really thought at one point, I must say, because his natural vanity and reputation of Don Juan he had to take the time to not disappoint his countless conquests - not to be that all Women looking almost does not downplaying it because in retrospect the victory of all those who had managed to put in their bed, and suddenly, does not it might attract back their mockery on them, even their anger ? - That in order not to lose face before the Marquise de Merteuil - the pact of mutual assistance, that bound him to her since their separation having distorted over time a kind of game that fratricide both wanted to win, in fact, required him to remain at the height of the remarks she had made one day "Love and betrayal, is not it there all your pleasure? " - forcing him to draw a definitive line on what was then more expensive: his love sincerely to Madame de Tourvel. "It's not my fault!" he would say, or rather repeat it to the woman at their stage of failure, unfortunately know that these words that he would rule on the request of the Marquise de Merteuil, canopy so anxious to rid his dear viscount of a love that, had he lived, would have been away from her, would express exactly what his drama or act against his own will, by the only fault of a role that, for both liked this a bit decadent nobility of the 18th century, it was now imposed.
I really thought at one point I said, in fact, as I had not noticed that Valmont's personal fortune was largely free of the binding link that bound to the company. With this money, the man had the key to his jail and with the love of Madame de Tourvel plenty to be consoled for the loss of his dual status as king and prince of the intrigues of alcoves, a loss that would have certainly earned that love, so of course it was consensual. Finally, keep both buttocks stuck on the two thrones by the will of his entourage, the drama of the Viscount was more than just a prisoner, but that of a voluntary prisoner. And drama, to my eyes, lost all its colors at once.
Was it then that of Madame de Tourvel? To pay dearly for his break with Valmont to values that are not, and be Standing toy paris frankly detestable, I must confess that his plight moved me deeply but at the same time that really weighs his drama when one realizes that her love for Valmont induces in sole purpose of not losing it, to accept anything from him, as well as his escapades and his thousand betrayals, and she dances, in what should be it for the feast of hearts, it also rampant and obedient always has been? In addition, to fall so easily into the arms of a man she knows cruel and shameless womanizer, his loneliness, sadly, does not excuse everything, not relegated Does not all its virtues, virtues which she boasts and boasts, the status of holy hypocrisy? "What a pleasure to see her betray everything that matters to her" tell her Valmont before the conquest, he did not know then that he would chose to love virtue as a refuge for lack love.
It remained that of the Marchioness. I gave my preference, even if this woman is not defensible to use weapons against others she did not want it used against her. And if I gave him my preference is simply because that his drama is built on a failed rebellion, a rebellion that has nothing foolish in fact, since it is simply a product of injustice of his time as all women of the 18th century, the Marquise de Merteuil was indeed destined to become a wife totally submissive to her husband, a husband she would, of course, could not choose. To fail in its desire for independence, to miss both freedom and love, the reasons for his revolt, the drama of the woman said loudly that he still takes more than iron will to live In this world, according to his tastes and desires, perhaps because one hates anyone who does not give rhythm to their steps on the beat machine.
This machine, which means we all walk in the same direction and do the heads beyond the fact that when it beyond itself, like a Valmont, we hear her screaming from the rest disagreement in the final scene of the film. Because it really means in this theater where she goes Merteuil after the death of Viscount and the improbable publication of his letters by Danceny is the crowd, the machine, which bans any of its elements its difference and insubordination.
"Obedience is boring, revolt impossible and uncertain struggle," could have said the Marquise after his fall if, of course, she had called Balzac.
0 comments:
Post a Comment