Beliefnet
Via Media

So, what with today being the one day in a 15-day period that Michael was around, we decided to try to do something – a movie. How about it? Of course, this is the Late Winter Dregs, so there is really not a lot out there (There Will Be Blood is gone already…durn!). We settled on Vantage Point.
We parked, walked up to the theater at about 5 for the 5:05 show. Michael went to the ticket kiosk, which told him the 5:05 was sold out. We looked around. There were two people in line at the ticket office and the lobby was empty. Private party? Buying out the 5:05 of Vantage Point on the last day of February?
So we went up to the ticket office and I said, doubtfully, “The 5:05 of Vantage Point is really sold out?”
“Oh! Were you coming to see that movie?” said the girl at the window.  Um, yes. “Just go into the lobby and I’ll send the manager out to talk to you.”
What? Had we stumbled upon some secret gathering? Were we suspected of something because we were going to see a movie about a political assassination in Spain? Had we inadvertently uttered a code that was going to get us entrance into a Secret Chamber in which they show late winter releases that don’t reek?
No, the manager (a guy who might just have been the lost twin of he nervous physicist in Lost) explained – the time stamp on the print was messed up – it had something to do with it being February 29 – and so it wouldn’t run. (But…who are you? Penny?!) So we could go see any movie we wanted, no charge.
Very nice, except for the whole “Late Winter Dregs” concept still being in effect. Gee, what shall it be? Semi-Pro? Fool’s Gold? Darn, I can’t decide.
We ended up at The Other Boleyn Girl, which didn’t displease me, even as it didn’t exactly thrill Michael.
My verdict?

  • It’s loosely based on a novel which is loosely based on history, so what you basically have is a core – Mary Boleyn had an affair with Henry first, then Anne followed, then Anne was executed – that was historically accurate, but precious little else. I mean – Mary Boleyn wasn’t even present at her sister’s execution and certainly did not stalk off afterwards carting away little Elizabeth to raise in the country. I agree with Barbara Nicolosi that the central theme is a good one – the horror of the Boylens using their daughter as chattel in the quest for power – but the truth of the situation is far more complex than the movie allows.  I think what interests me is that both of the sisters’ characters are stripped of their strength and sophistication and given more total victim status than history hints they actually had. Anne was far more accomplished and substantive than she is in the film and Mary’s character, in particular, is much different in the film than what history seems to indicate she was really about.  As in – in the film, she’s portrayed as an innocent handed over by her family to Henry, when in fact she’d been around the French court a bit, history indicates, long before.  
  • It was pretty to look at, but oddly rather claustrophobic.
  • Fairly good acting, although I felt Henry could have been a stronger character and the American actresses – Scarlett Johannsen and Natalie Portman…well, the characters should have been portrayed by Englishwomen. Except not Keira Knightly. Please.
  • We decided that from now on, we really prefer that the  all British historical dramas be acted out completely by the cast of Rome.  That would be best. Thanks. 
  • All that said, I enjoyed it. Maybe I’m just desperate to get out of the house. And mind you, I’ll not be taking responsibility for your opinions if you rush out and spend your eight bucks on it.  Because, remember, I saw it for free.  That makes everything better, in my book.

Advertisement

Previous Posts
Join the Discussion
comments powered by Disqus