The sarcasm is not added to the cowardly not to my taste: I do not and will not tolerate. When I have something against someone mocks him. Do better: I take revenge. (Marquise de Merteuil)
A preface to the first edition of Dangerous Liaisons, by Choderlos de Laclos 'epistolary novel set in pre-revolutionary France, now considered one of the masterpieces of French literature, bears these words:
L' author, although has tried to seem plausible, then destroyed itself from this verisimilitude, placing the events of his story in modern times. How can we believe in fact that they could live to this day people so bad when you know that our century is the century of philosophy and enlightenment, and wisdom, having spread to every where its beneficial effects, has, as everyone knows , all honest and respectable men and women all mannered and modest?
A book, therefore, morally necessary, at least according to de Laclos, but seems to express itself in an almost ironic. And if this was indeed irony in his intentions, or is perceptible only the eyes of the reader learns that this introduction with a slight smile, we can not know. What is certain is that the publication of Liaisons, with all the conditions imaginable, for ever threw a sinister light on the general Laclos, who was rather a shy, discreet, tied up his wife, as confirmed by a letter from the Baroness de Sinno :
Taranto, Monday, July 11, 1803.
Dear friend,
two days, we receive as a guest in our building, General Laclos. I see you smiling already, dear friend, the news that the author of "Dangerous Liaisons" is staying in our house. You must not cheat. I think, in fact, that has been paid a lot of poison Laclos on this poor and do not see in him nothing of the grim Valmont. He is a tall, good looking, but the dreamy eyes. He arrived in this house very tired and a bit 'sick. We did find the food fresher and more delicate, but has not shown a great appetite. It is very discreet and confidential. Back in the evening, dinner slightly and passes the rest of the time to write long letters to his wife. You see, sweet friend, because the bad reputation of this book could have harmed the career of this person. The accused have the same malice of Monsieur de Sade. Queen Marie Antoinette did not write his name, nor the novel's title on the cover of copy he had. General Laclos was disavowed by the French nobility refused to recognize the traits in his characters.
What, then, the dominant features of these notorious characters, the protagonists of a much-discussed and long-banned book?
Without a doubt the vice. But even cynicism, chutzpah and a subtle hint of wickedness. Yet it is these features that make this one of the great masterpieces of literature, there is therefore no 'Dangerous Liaisons' without the intrigue of two of the greatest literary characters of all time: the Marquise de Merteuil and the Vicomte de Valmont.
Linceziosi, intriguing, dissolute libertine ... Theirs is a relationship of absolute complicity, born on the ashes of a violent and passionate love, which perhaps has never switched off entirely. Hidden under the guise of pious widow her, proud of his reputation as a vicious, they both live their sexuality in a totally free, confiding in their sins and sustaining pride in each other's pranks against third parties.
So, the day on which the marchioness decides to take revenge on her lover should get married with Cecile de Volanges small, innocent schoolgirl just out of the convent, the first is aimed at by the Vicomte de Valmont. The plan is simple to implement: steal the innocence of the girl to make the future cuckolded husband even before marriage. For
as a seducer Valmont, however, the company turns a boring game, because he has other projects, such as to seduce the Countess de Tourvel woman famous for their devotion. But the Marquise, angry and perhaps even slightly jealous of the attention of the Valmont Tourvel, will not give up so easily to their own plans, offering a challenge to the viscount too tempting to pass up. The relationships that develop between the characters, as a result of this conspiracy, in fact become very 'dangerous', dragging the players to ruin, in line with its own moralizing author. From
de Laclos's masterpiece were taken four films: two entitled Dangerous liaisons, one of the other of Vadim and Frears, Milos Forman's Valmont and Cruel Intentions Kumble.
I have seen to that of Frears and Forman, both well done, although very different from each other.
The film by Stephen Frears and that of Milos Forman were shot almost simultaneously, but Frears has one of the most successful, thanks to a more prestigious cast:
John Malkovich (Vicomte de Valmont), Glenn Close (Marquise de Merteuil), Michelle Pfeiffer (Madame de Tourvel) Uma Thurman (Cecile), Keanu Reeves (Danceny).
Dangerous Liaisons (1988) film is a very elegant and accurate in describing the events of the book, discostandovisi but only for a few, but significant details. Costumes and photography are masterpieces, the acting is excellent, but the actors chosen, in my opinion, not centered with the book by de Laclos. The Marquise and the Vicomte, in fact, even be described as mature people, not to exceed thirty (actually in the eighteenth century was considered already at an advanced age), while Madame de Tourvel has just twenty years, it little Cecilia is fourteen.
Also, the message of the book is slightly distorted by the last words of Viscount, nonexistent book, which alter the profound meaning of the story, leaving spattatore to believe that he is genuinely in love with Tourvel, when in fact all it was tied to the Marquise de Merteuil.
With its Valmont (1989), Milos Forman does a great job, although some also deviates from the plot. But innovations in his film, are consistent with the spirit of the original: the profound relationship between the Marquise and the Vicomte, fueled by a passion that has never turned off, the freshness and candor of Madame de Tourvel, ingenuity and Cecile Chevalier Danceny. Perfect characters, then, and almost maniacal attention to every detail: costumes, photography, dialogue, the result of a careful study of eighteenth-century customs and traditions. And although the ending is different from the original lot, Milos Forman manages to introduce a class assignment and a beautiful reconstruction of the era, with a touch of romanticism in his own way never hurts.
And what can we say about Colin Firth in the role of Valmont? Absolutely perfect. The scene in which the Marquise wants the pledge agreed following the victory over their bet has become a cult.
In conclusion, I would give a seven on the Frears movie, and that of an eight-Forman, and recommend them both to all fans of this era.
0 comments:
Post a Comment