Saturday, May 13, 2006

Orlando


Having again watched Orlando (1992), a movie adaptation of Virginia Woolf's novel Orlando: A Biography (1928), I find that I am once again moved and intrigued. The movie is superbly done in both art and form. The wonderfully androgenous Tilda Swinton pulled it off with such aplomb, that it takes my breath away. The movie explores the ideas, acceptances and meaning of masculinity and feminity in England and Europe over 400 years, beginning in 1600. It has no plot it has no story, but it explores and congitates and imagines. The tone and detachment as played by Tilda Swinton is marvelous. And the fact that Quentin Crisp played Queen Elizabeth I is a remarkable nod to the story itself.

I feel I've neglected an author and her works far too long, having never turned a page of a Woolf novel. Instead, I have opted for the quick novel, the mystery, the science fiction of little moment or meaning. Yet to see this movie has a nourishing effect, while at the same time it leaves one feeling thirsty.

(Warning: Potential Spoiler Alert!)


There was one bit that was over the top for me. While I enjoyed the music immensely, especially at the end, the hokey angel could have been done more in keeping with the whole of the movie. Instead it was a caricature, and was out of place. I understand the idea, and the emotion, but the implimentation seemed as an afterthought. The scene begged to be done in keeping with the rest of the movie. A sad way to end a very creative endeavor.

Nonetheless, I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys feasting on cinmatic art and an interesting, off-the-beaten-path story.