TOO MUCH SCENERY: HOWARDS END


© Sean Gallagher

One might not expect literary adaptations, particularly those taking place before the 20th century, to cause divided opinion, since most of the time, that's not the point. Aside from any question of how well the source material is adapted, or those who wonder why stories about white people back then deserve to be told more than stories about others, a literary adaptation would seem to be tasteful, normally somewhat intelligent, and sophisticated. What could possibly be wrong with that?

The answer is in many adaptations of pre-20th century literature, you get directors who, taking their page from "Masterpiece Theatre," seem more interested in production values than plot and character and so forth. And just as the basest of Hollywood movies pander to the lowest common demoninator, these literary adaptations pander to those who think movies - hell, all art in general - should be good for you, instead of just good. They tend to forget that back in the day, people still ate, drank, slept, and picked their noses just like everyone else, even if they wore different clothes to do it, and had different means available to them. While it's not a bad movie, James Ivory's HOWARDS END is a good example of how this kind of movie can stultify more than stir.

E.M. Forster's novel, which was adapted here by Ivory's usual screenwriting partner Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, starts off with the quote "Only connect." In this, one of the great British novels, he certainly connects with us, telling the story of three British families. The Schlegel sisters, Margaret (Emma Thompson) and Helen (Helena Bonham Carter), are middle-class women who are bohemian in taste, and also looking for causes to get behind. One cause for them becomes Leonard Bast (Samuel West), a lower-class clerk who wants a better life, but only knows that life from novels. The third family is headed by Henry Wilcox (Anthony Hopkins), an upper-class banker. His son is briefly interested in Helen, but that breaks off soon enough. But another brief relationship, a friendship between Margaret and Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave), Henry's wife, sets off a number of repurcussions.

The title of both novel and movie refers to a house the Wilcoxes own. While her family sees the house merely as a status symbol, of wealth they have, Ruth sees it as home in every sense of the word (the movie opens with her walking around it, taking it in). In their brief conversation, though she disagrees with Margaret's progressive ideas (such as a woman's right to vote), Ruth feels a kinship for her, and feels she understands that feeling for the house. Therefore, when Ruth dies, she leaves Howards End to Margaret. Naturally, the rest of the family is furious about this, and decide she wrote this note out of delirium, so they agree to burn it and never discuss it again.

Go To Page: 1 2


The copyright of the article TOO MUCH SCENERY: HOWARDS END in Movies of the 90s is owned by . Permission to republish TOO MUCH SCENERY: HOWARDS END in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo