Sherlock S03E03: His Last Vow

sherlock_final_5277816_5277806

A garbled mess that has no idea where it’s going or why, His Last Vow is the last nail in Sherlock’s coffin; a fall from grace so precipitous and a crying shame so heartrending that the very idea of reviewing it is almost unbearable to me. Her Ladyship has, however, done appalling things for the good of her readers in the past – watching the first episode of School of Thrones and finishing that ghastly intellectual nonentity Labyrinth being among them – so she shall therefore endeavour to write her review without keeling over, screaming or dying. If the latter does occur, however: ‘To God [her] soul. To Rafe Sadler [her] books.’

His Last Vow gets off to a very promising start as we are introduced to our villain of the piece, news giant and serial blackmailer Charles Augustus Magnussen, who has been called before a committee to explain why Number 10 has been blessed with his presence more times this year than has been deemed appropriate. Played by an excellent Lars Mikkelsen, he loves to play on what he calls people’s ‘pressure points,’ and has an icy, creepy, unblinking and utterly revolting charisma about him that reminds you somewhat of Tørk Hviid in Miss Smilla’s Feeling for Snow. We’re soon apprised of the fact that he has a similar lack in scruples as he blackmails committee chairman Lady Elizabeth Smallwood (Lindsay Duncan) to rule in his favour, using some explicit letters that her husband once wrote to a fifteen-year-old girl as leverage. This leads Lady Smallwood to call at Baker Street and ask Sherlock to act as intermediary between them. A fatal mistake, it seems, as this is where the entire episode starts to collapse around our ears; a string of ridiculous coincidences involving Sherlock’s feigned relapse into his drug habits and his seduction of one of Mary’s bridesmaids leading to another string of ridiculous coincidences involving breaking into Magnussen’s office,  discovering that Magnussen is still in his office at the time of the break-in, smelling Lady Smallwood’s perfume on the air, assuming she’s there to kill him, and discovering that the lady with the gun is in fact Mary, who isn’t an adorable nurse, but an ex-CIA assassin who wants Magnussen dead because he’s threatening to blow the whistle. From then on out, the episode is plot point after ridiculous plot point, piled one on top of the other with all the grace of a university student’s laundry pile (or lack thereof); mercifully interspersed with one or two beautiful scenes and unmercifully overdosed with a huge pile of poorly-written, unrealistic, tiresome and pointless ones. Further pandemonium is then brought about by the fact that this is all held together by the spit and prayers of a line of liaison so fixed on where it wants to end up that it doesn’t care which convoluted, nonsensical and utterly stupid routes it has to adopt in order to get there…or at what cost.

lXuBrcc

One of the best things about the first two seasons of Sherlock was the scrupulous, almost medical cleanliness of the way each episode was presented: beautifully stark; impeccably precise; complex, yet minimalistic; an indestructible glass house with a baroque darkness about the people living in it; modern London as much a living, breathing predator to Sherlock as Victorian London is to Holmes. The first two seasons embodied everything that is best in British crime drama: heavy on plot, heavy on character, heavy in an inexplicably addictive and redemptive way. They also embodied everything that was best about the Sherlock-John relationship: the infectious camaraderie; the old-married-couple bickering; the almost-always-unspoken symbiosis of it, delivered with minimal words and much action. All of this complexity was kept so perfectly balanced that it probably wouldn’t have collapsed if plonked down on the end of a pin and left to fend for itself.

Oh, the good old days.

Oh, the good old days.

The problem with His Last Vow is that this characteristic sense of control and balance, indeed all sense of control and balance, seems to have disappeared across the board. The episode and its characters are allowed to run riot, and to create scenes of such havoc that one is often left wondering whether one is watching a TV series, or a particularly tedious piece of contemporary art with the aim of demonstrating the chaos that populates a writer’s head prior to a story’s actually beginning to take logical shape. Everything that this episode tries to bring to the fore – the depth of Sherlock’s affection for John, and for Mary; the depth of John’s love for Mary; Mycroft’s true feelings about his embarrassing little brother; Sherlock’s penchant for self-sacrifice and the limitlessness of his brilliant brain – all of it is done in a painfully obvious, lamentably unsubtle, sometimes out-of-character and incredibly over-the-top way that suggests that the script of this episode was not ready to be written, let alone filmed. The whole miserable business is still at the stage where it belongs nowhere but the inside of Stephen Moffatt’s head, or at the very limit, in a heavily-password-protected file in the depths of his computer where it can embarrass no one but him. All writers have one, so why not use it?

It’s all very well to sit here on high complaining about The Last Vow, but it isn’t entirely fair to do so without suggesting possible solutions. How, then, could the mess have been rectified? By a process of intense de-cluttering.

Step 1: Get rid of Lady Elizabeth Smallwood and her husband’s creepy letters. It’s a way of linking Magnussen to Sherlock that is just too round-about, wastes too much time and disappears so quickly into the general confusion that by the time we meet Lady Smallwood again at the end of the episode, we’ve almost forgotten who she is. Doing this would mean compromising on her excellent blackmail scene with Magnussen, and depriving us of the joy of seeing two fine actors like Mikkelsen and Duncan in the same scene, but you can’t have everything, and everything is something this episode already has too much of. So instead of introducing Magnussen through Lady Smallwood and then moving on, make his blackmail of Mary the premise from the start. Do a scene with him and her in which we don’t know who he is (or why he’s blackmailing her), only that she’s there to kill him. Ensure that she is prevented in some way:  do an ‘emails get sent to the press if I die’ thing if absolutely necessary – though with a man of Magnussen’s reputation it would probably take a lifetime for his henchmen to work out which one of the ten thousand ruinous emails he has waiting should be sent in the first place. Anyway, an opening scene of this kind gives Magnussen a chance to show off his initial creepiness, and Mary a chance to show off her new-found mysteriousness.

vlcsnap-2014-01-14-12h45m06s42

Step 2: Get Mary to ask Sherlock for help. Not only will this be an interesting investigation into their relationship (particularly if she blackmails him to keep him quiet; which seems more in character than simply begging him not to tell); but is also a good way to educate the audience about Magnussen without all that pointless mucking about with drug dens; Janine; breaking into Magnussen’s office, and Sherlock getting shot and hospitalised. Also, if you want to be really smart, don’t let the audience in immediately on what Mary’s being blackmailed for. All we need to know is that she considers it momentous enough to end her and John’s marriage, and that the evidence for whatever it is is being held in the vaults beneath Magnussen’s house.

Step 3: So Sherlock tells John, of course; or, as in the episode, finds a way for Mary to unwittingly reveal herself. He does this regardless of anything that he’s been threatened with, and John justifiably freaks out. Don’t switch locations halfway through these two occurrences: if anything, it cuts the tension in half instead of augmenting it. The build up to the conclusion that John’s attracted to psychopaths needs to be re-written completely: Sherlock asking him a bunch of questions and making his conclusions for him just doesn’t really cut it, and neither do John’s responses to him. Actually, since our present state of things doesn’t have Sherlock injured, or clueless as to Mary’s past, leave him out of the scene altogether. Make it a matter between John and Mary, and let them draw conclusions together. A bust-up between them would also be more evocative of character than the somewhat heartless ‘we decide if we want you’ scene. The idea of the flash disk key to Mary’s past is good: keep it.

article-2538272-1A9A7FB500000578-628_634x352

Step 4: Find some other way of getting Sherlock and John to Magnussen’s house. That entire Christmas scene, smoking scene, drugging the entire bloody Holmes family+Mary and taking a helicopter ride with Mycroft’s laptop in tow is both too much and too far-fetched for words. Of course this poses the problem of how to get their hands on Mycroft’s laptop without his noticing its absence, and how to barter it with Magnussen without Mary finding out about it (one assumes she would want to know something about how her salvation is being brought about, since in our version of events, she’s asked Sherlock for help). Since drugs clearly have to be in this episode somewhere, use them on Mycroft only and preferably at night, so that the contents of his laptop can be copied onto some mega flash disk à la the missile plans in The Great Game; otherwise onto an external hard drive. Totter off to Magnussen’s place; do the big reveal about his vaults being a mind palace, and hold on to the episode’s present ending if we absolutely have to see Sherlock commit another self-sacrifice. Otherwise, get Sherlock and John into the sort of trouble that usually befalls people who walk into psychopaths’ houses (preferably post-mind palace conversation) and do an ‘unknown shooter’ thing (as in A Study in Pink). Police are called, Sherlock and John go home happy, unknown shooter turns out to be Mary, to whom shooting through the bastard’s window had apparently never before occurred.

Step 5: End off with John saying he’s not going to read the flash disk about Mary’s past. Fin.

This version of events does deprive us of another chance to see Sherlock giving up everything for his friends, but after The Reichenbach Fall, even more self-sacrifice seems a bit excessive.

The Last Vow is not entirely shitty. It has some lovely moments, and a couple of truly brilliant ideas (i.e. Magnussen’s non-existent vaults beneath his home). Unfortunately, the way it’s all executed is so tangled, sloppy and headache-inducing that the good doesn’t even come close to redeeming the bad, and this season of Sherlock suffers for it; ending with a whimper rather than a bang.

Sherlock S03E02: The Sign of Three

p01nwbcq

Any wedding episode that manages to be totally lacking in corniness without having The Rains of Castamere on its playlist is a jewel, and while The Sign of Three is without doubt the most atypical of all Sherlock episodes in terms of just about everything, it has the distinction not only of being a jewel, but of being a remarkably well-thought-out and impeccably-structured rendering of a fiendishly-complicated plot, and a moving and hilarious bringing-to-light of everything that is good about the Sherlock-John relationship.

44139

It’s John and Mary’s wedding day, and Sherlock has found the build-up to the event rather distressing, for more reasons than one. Firstly, because of a deep-set fear (that he insists on denying) that John’s being a married man will spell the end of their partnership and will inevitably consign him to the gallows of haunting crime scenes with only a skull to talk to; secondly, because he has to make a speech as best man. His fears on the first count turn out to be groundless, most obviously because John can’t imagine a life without solving crimes, blogging about it and sniggering when Sherlock forgets his pants, but most importantly (and realistically) because John has had the good (and rare) fortune to fall in love with a woman who actually encourages their bromance (Sidebar: Mary is fucking awesome, she like totally sees that they’re both afraid things will change because of her, and likes to make them sneak around together like naughty schoolboys when she’s actually the person who planted the idea of doing the actual sneaking. But anyway.) As to Sherlock’s fears about the best man speech, well, those do turn out to be justified, and it is when confronted with a hall full of loud, half-drunk, oddly-shaped wedding guests and too nervous to be anything but himself, that Sherlock sets the ball rolling across a barrage of memorable cases, anecdotes and other totally sincere praises of the incomparable John Watson that takes an entire episode to navigate, and that soon transforms into one of the most important deductions of Sherlock’s life as it becomes clear that the wedding day is also one ingenious murderer’s personalised version of judgement day.

Target

Structuring an entire episode around a best man speech, and managing all the inevitable back and forth craziness incumbent upon such a structure, is a huge risk for any production to take: too much, and the audience can’t follow, too little, and the audience falls asleep. In the case of The Sign of Three, the risk pays off beautifully, and a sizeable chunk of the credit for that success goes to writer Stephen Thompson, who, despite his evident prowess and talent from a technical perspective, is also wildly imaginative and unfailingly good at bringing that imagination to the screen; most especially in the devices he employs to help us see what’s going on in Sherlock’s head; some of them classic, some of them entirely new. The most intelligent, and the most entertaining of these, is the lengthy scene involving Sherlock, a lecture hall full of women, Mycroft providing helpful hints from on high, and a surprise appearance by Irene Adler (defrocked), who is promptly told to ‘get out of my head, I’m busy!’ It’s a fantastic metaphor – and it looks good too.

Sherlock-The-Sign-of-Three-Irene-Adler

Whereas last week’s episode was definitely Martin Freeman’s in terms of acting, Sherlock belongs, this week, to Benedict Cumberbatch. Sherlock is utterly unpredictable in this episode (more so than usual, I mean); acting his charming, high-functioning-sociopathic self one minute, and unabashedly praising his friend with total and complete sincerity the next, to the point of making every person present burst into tears. The language might very well have seemed cringeworthy, and out-out-character in the hands of any other actor, but Cumberbatch delivers such a deadly combination of gravity, coldness, emotion and drama that the considerable amount of gut-spilling he does in the praising of John’s character is beautifully touching, and perhaps most importantly, perfectly believable in a character who prides himself on his own freedom from sentiment. Acting kudos also go to Amanda Abingdon, who is luminous, smart and hilarious as Mary, and to Alistair Petrie, who is tragic and charismatic as John’s ex-commander, Major Sholto.

Sherlock_S03E02_1080p_kissthemgoodbye_net_4685

A huge improvement from last week across the board, The Sign of Three does nevertheless leave one wishing that something more would have happened, or at least that things might have been a bit less predictable. It’s a problem that also popped up in The Empty Hearse, but The Sign of Three is simply too much fun for me to throw my toys out of the cot about it. And there’s always next week; which, considering the story on which it is based, will more than make up for these rather glaring deficiencies in plot.

‘The Mysteries of Udolpho’ Made Awesome in Six Easy Steps

9780140437591

It isn’t difficult to imagine why Jane Austen would want to satirise a novel like The Mysteries of Udolpho, which is, despite its fine romantic imagery, the huge role it played in defining the Gothic novel and Mrs Radcliffe’s general awesomeness as a successful female novelist in nineteenth century England, a rather silly book. Its characters are tiresome cardboard cut-outs in the habit of spontaneously composing perfectly-structured poetry, which they sometimes recite (mercifully when alone); its plot is engaging, then thrilling, then utterly flat; and the author often doesn’t seem able to make up her mind as to whether she’s writing a novel, a treatise on the Sublime, or what Lady Bracknell would call ‘a three [four?] volume novel of more than usually revolting sentimentality.’

Her Ladyship has determined that the task of reviewing this valuable, important, harmlessly fun and unappealingly preposterous book is far too large and complicated an assignment. She shall therefore undertake to suggest a few changes that might have made it a more entertaining read. Most of these would probably be unacceptable in nineteenth century society, would no doubt have seen the author excommunicated and forced into hiding, and will not take into account that Udolpho’s ridiculousness is entirely deliberate and appropriate to the genre at that time, but what matter? Her Ladyship is simply amusing herself.

Let us begin with a brief introduction to the characters most relevant to this little project.

Emily St Aubert: the novel’s protagonist. A sugary sweet, good as gold, virtuous, righteous, honourable, helpless little princess (not literally) with the constitution of a butterfly; overly fond of fainting and of trying to be rational.  She does, mercifully, have a strong but not overpowering spunk about her that prevents her from being utterly unbearable and even leads us to admire her every now and again, particularly in her confrontations with Signor Montoni .

Artwork by Three Panel Book Review on tumblr.

Artwork by Three Panel Book Review on tumblr.

Monsieur St Aubert: Emily’s father. Jean-Jacques Rousseau without the sulking.

Valancourt: Emily’s fiancé; the stereotypical passionate young lover. Self-pitying, narcissistic, eminently punchable, spends most of his time making Emily lose consciousness and feel dreadful about herself. He’s also good, then bad, then good, then not-so-bad-after-all, then good, and is simply not worth the trouble of puzzling it all out.

Madame Montoni: Emily’s aunt. Mrs Reed from Jane Eyre, only inclined to greed instead of jealousy (not that she’s without that either).

Signor Montoni: Madame Montoni’s husband, the novel’s villain. The most bearable character in the entire book, he is only rendered so by not possessing a jot of the golden virtue that most of the other characters possess ad nauseum. Callous, cruel, amoral, dissolute, brooding and greedy: stereotypical gothic bad guy.

Count Morano: Montoni’s friend; the embodiment of every bad thing the English have ever thought about Italians (lustful, overly-passionate, can’t take no for an answer, blah blah blah).

Udolpho not being the most popular book in the universe, we shall now take a look at a bland and poorly-written introduction to plot points relevant to our purposes:

Emily lives happily in Gascony with her parents; Emily’s mother dies; Emily’s father takes her on a tour by coach to the Languedoc and the Pyrenees; they run into Valancourt on the road; Valancourt and Emily fall in love on the road; Emily’s father dies on the road; Emily is put into the care of her heinous aunt Madame Montoni, who says that she can’t marry Valancourt, then that she can, and then that she can’t; Emily is taken away to Italy by Madame Montoni and her creepy husband Signor Montoni, who has an equally-creepy castle in the Apennines called Udolpho; they settle in Venice, where Emily meets Montoni’s dishonourable friend Count Morano; Count Morano never stops trying to get into Emily’s pants; Montoni tries to marry Emily to Count Morano, Emily refuses, Emily is told she will be forced to marry Count Morano; on the morning of the wedding, Montoni unexpectedly takes Emily and Madame Montoni away to Udolpho.

Artwork by zen_parvez-d5trhut

Artwork by zen_parvez-d5trhut

Udolpho turns out to be a terrifying edifice where supernatural things go bump in the night; Montoni turns out to be a bit of a jerk who is trying to force Emily’s aunt to give her fortune to him instead of Emily when she dies; Madame Montoni refuses to sign over her fortune; Montoni finds time, between his commission of various grievous crimes including getting drunk with his friends, associating with bandits and carousing with ladies of the night, to employ a number of cruel and unpleasant means to get his wife to succumb; Emily spends most of her time crying, fainting, wishing Valancourt would rescue her, and interceding with Montoni on her aunt’s behalf when the old lady has been nothing but a bitch to her; and…well. Her Ladyship does not intend to summarise the entire book.

Let us begin.

The Mysteries of Udolpho made awesome in six easy steps

Make Emily edgy.

Make her a more flawed version of Elizabeth Bennett; or make her someone who seems perfect, but is hiding something, or running from something; or if she absolutely has to be a stereotype, make her a tomboy. It’s a less annoying stereotype than that of the princess.

tree-climbing-woman-girl-Favim.com-474740

Cut down on the random poetry recitals.

Yes, making characters spontaneously write poems in their heads is a very original idea, but unless your characters are literary geniuses, oral poets, or from Middle Earth, it’s not realistic, and doesn’t even make us want it to be realistic.

Make Emily think about escaping Udolpho on her own steam.

Sure, it’s difficult to do any kind of spontaneous running when you’re trapped in a castle on a mountain. It’s not difficult to find out all you can about the surrounding country, or to know when the guard is changed, how many guards there are per watch, what routes they take, what weapons they carry, which ones are drunks, which ones are idiots, which ones fall asleep on duty (hey! I’m sounding like Arya Stark!). Even if it’s just the thought of bribing someone, stop all this waiting for Valancourt or Ludovico (the novel’s stereotypical Italian servant) bullshit and let the girl use her brain. Better still, let her try to run away. It’s a stupid idea without the aforementioned preparation, but at least she’d be rendered a little less pathetic.

Make Emily see Valancourt for the self-obsessed little creep he really is.

Valancourt’s strategy, both in a fight and out of it, is to blame Emily for absolutely everything and then to use a diabolical kind of reverse psychology and paint himself in the worst possible light. This inevitably makes Emily feel awful, start crying and not want to lose him, and while we can certainly give her the credit of not yielding to most of his entreaties, she kind of spoils things by making it clear that she wants to. Then there’s the way that he talks to her, expresses his love for her and woos her, which is so disgustingly sentimental that even your standard male participant in a medieval courtly love relationship would find it either hilarious or distasteful.

If you absolutely have to pair Emily with someone, pair her with Montoni.

Turn it into an ‘irresistible chemistry between cruel older man and innocent young girl’ thing. And, if you want to be really original, don’t make her reform him or discover that ‘deep down he’s vulnerable and just wants to be loved,’ or anything like that. Keep him bad, and keep her good and virtuous, but unable to help herself: the sort of thing that Angela Carter does in The Bloody Chamber. For one thing, the sheer raciness of the idea would make the entire novel a thousand times more entertaining, and would provide a lot more opportunity for character development in Emily, i.e. she’ll have a choice between staying in a destructive relationship, or taking charge and walking away.

Yes, she’s in a castle in the middle of nowhere, but can’t we just pretend?

Make the ghosts real.

living-with-ghosts

Or at least make us unsure that they’re not. A ghost story that provides rational explanations for every thrillingly creepy incident (albeit at the end, so it’s not that bad) is just plain disappointing. The triumph of reason is a very sensible and very noble literary theme, but in a gothic novel? It doesn’t really work unless it’s cathartic in some way, and though ghosts are laid to rest by the novel’s end, we aren’t seized by any kind of emotion or catharsis, because the author decides to devote a chapter to explaining everything. This would be fine if it was done through the mouths of the novel’s characters. What we get instead is an utterly-emotionless step-by-step provision of reasons why none of the shit going down is actually supernatural. It’s both yawnable and disappointing.

That being said, Her Ladyship has now adequately amused herself and is retiring for the night. I would say something to the tune of ‘Farewell, dear reader,’ but that would just be irritating.

Sherlock S03E01: The Empty Hearse (Review)

6pNbWwMBhr

Her Ladyship takes time off from her wanderings in the dark corridors of fan fiction to watch the premier episode of Sherlock season 3 and to reason from what she sees.

A singularly-strange and enjoyable little episode that feels a lot more like the product of the hugely-hyperactive and oft OTT pen of Steven Moffat than the darkly-intelligent work of its actual writer, Mark Gatiss, The Empty Hearse is big on chemistry, hugely entertaining and very promising of more awesomeness to come; yet falls a little flat in terms of plot, and of the mishandling of a few subtle but entirely basic Sherlock character traits that doesn’t quite seem pardonable in a show run by a pair of Holmes junkies.

Sherlock_S03E01_1080p_KISSTHEMGOODBYE_NET_0089

The Empty Hearse has a lot of fun ridiculing the many fan theories (both plausible and preposterous) that have popped up since the deeply-moving rooftop scene in The Reichenbach Fall that had most of us crying and screaming into our pillows for days after it was shown. None, however, is quite so much fun as the one we are introduced to first, in the episode’s engaging and utterly-badass opening sequence that brings us everything from the strategically-placed cyclist, to the bungee-rope-not-bungee-rope in Sherlock’s coat, to the Sherlock mask on Moriarty’s corpse; as well as a range of other awesomeness of which we shall not speak (except Sherlock crashing through the mortuary window and sticking his tongue down Molly’s throat. That part was too much fun not to mention). After the opening sequence, the show loses no time in informing us that Sherlock has been fully exonerated, post-mortem, of the charges trumped up by Moriarty, has spent the past two years dismantling the criminal genius’ network, and has been recalled to London from the depths of a Serbian torture chamber by his brother Mycroft, who wants him to investigate an imminent terrorist threat to the city. This, of course, means being reunited with John, who is newly-engaged, still grieving the loss of his best friend to the point of not having contacted Mrs Hudson for two years, and will probably be none too pleased that Sherlock has knowingly allowed him to go through hell. John’s reaction to the discovery that Sherlock is alive constitutes the main crux of the episode, and it is, most unfortunately, a double-edged sword of a focal point.

sherlock-episode-3-01-the-empty-hearse-full-set-of-promotional-photos-12_full

First up, John. Martin Freeman’s acting is beautifully, movingly and vividly realistic. In John’s day-to-day existence he dons the grin-and-bear-it mask that so many bereaved people wear every day of their lives no matter how much it hurts. In his quieter moments of remembrance with his fiancée Mary (Amanda Abbingdon), and in the touchingly-garbled and emotional conversation that he has with Mrs Hudson when he finally works up the courage to visit 221B after Sherlock’s death, he starts to let us in more and more as to what he’s been thinking and feeling in coming to terms with the ‘aloneness’ of a world without Sherlock. It’s in his interaction with Sherlock himself, of course, that all hell truly breaks loose, and the naturally-volcanic chemistry between Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch makes for a whole lot of highly-emotional, heartrending and side-splitting scenes together, as John alternates between listening to Sherlock trying (and failing) to explain himself in an acceptable manner; and attempting to murder Sherlock in a variety of ways for what he has done.

vlcsnap-2014-01-02-18h30m40s215

It is Sherlock’s half of the equation, regrettably, that just doesn’t feel right, and the problem lies in the script’s characterisation of him. Yes, we all know that Sherlock is a sociopath and has a near-autistic inability to understand or consider the feelings of others; and this may very well lead us to make the same conclusions, in terms of his character, that Gatiss has made in the script, i.e. Sherlock believes that John will be ‘delighted’ to discover that he is alive; doesn’t display anything that could reasonably be called remorse; is quite at a loss to understand why his friend doesn’t forgive him immediately; and is willing to resort to the most callous (if typical) of theatrics to bring John’s true feelings about him to the fore.

waiter

‘If his theatrics are typical, then what’s the problem?’ The answer to that question is in the Reichenbach Fall itself. The pathos of that scene; the incredible emotion and tragedy of it; Sherlock’s willingness to destroy both himself and his reputation for the good of his friends; the fact that we see him crying towards the end of it; the usually stunted nature of his emotions transformed in the face of death, even though the great detective almost certainly knows, at that point, that he will not die: the idea of those emotions being simulated is, to Her Ladyship at least, absolutely unthinkable. Watching it, you’re really seized with the idea of separation being just as painful for Sherlock as it is for John (even if it isn’t, John not being about to die), and as a viewer, you’re granted a rare opportunity of seeing that, unburied beneath all Sherlock’s usual bullshit. I’m not saying that I wanted Sherlock to break down and be an emotional wreck for most of The Empty Hearse. Emotion is not something he does easily or lightly: but just one, tiny particle of a millisecond of acknowledgment of how hard it must have been for him to know that for two years, his friend was just a text away from being spared complete misery and heartache, would have rendered the Sherlock we see in this episode just a little more human, and would have ensured that the Reichenbach Fall itself, arguably the greatest scene ever between Sherlock and John, was not so shamelessly trivialised.
sherlock.2x03.the_reichenbach_fall.hdtv_xvid-fov 413
The original short story on which this episode is based, The Empty House, succeeds marvellously at this particular aspect of Holmes’ character, even though he is faced with an entirely forgiving Watson who does nothing more alarming that faint at the sight of him. The short story manages to preserve both Holmes’ character, and the uncharacteristic expression of the depth of his regard for Watson. Let’s look at a quote:

“I had only one confidant – my brother Mycroft. I owe you many apologies, my dear Watson, but it was all-important that it should be thought I was dead, and it is quite certain that you would not have written so convincing an account of my unhappy end had you not yourself thought that it was true. Several times during the last three years I have taken up my pen to write to you, but always I feared lest your affectionate regard for me should tempt you to some indiscretion which would betray my secret (…) I came over at once to London, called in my own person at Baker Street, threw Mrs Hudson into violent hysterics, and found that Mycroft had preserved my rooms and my papers exactly as they had always been. So it was, my dear Watson, that at two o’clock to-day I found myself in my old armchair in my own old room, and only wishing that I could have seen my old friend Watson in the other chair which he has so often adorned.”

In contemporary English: ‘I was scared that you’d do something stupid if you knew I was alive. I knew what you must have been going through, I missed you like hell, and I’m sorry.’ The short story preserves Holmes’ charming narcissism and high opinion of himself, while still presenting us with a touching apology and a sincere admission of guilt. Will somebody please explain to me why this could not be done convincingly in The Empty Hearse? True, Victorian men were much more vocal about their affections for their friends than contemporary ones, but the Moffat/Gatiss Sherlock could easily have portrayed emotions parallel with those of the Conan-Doylian Holmes even without saying a word, and this could have been achieved with just a tad more attention to detail and subtlety in the script. I find it very hard to believe that a writing and production team working with an actor of Benedict Cumberbatch’s calibre could not find some way of doing this properly.

Sherlock3

But now I’m acting as though the entire episode was ruined by this one thing; and that is very far from the truth. Most of the scenes between John and Sherlock are an absolute joy to watch, thanks to the aforementioned Freeman-Cumberbatch chemistry, and as the original storyline of the terrorist plot on London becomes more and more submerged in the interaction between their characters, we find that we don’t mind very much at all. There is a wonderful scene involving Sherlock, John, a bomb and a railway cart (V for Vendetta?) that makes for phenomenal viewing thanks to its powerful acting (I don’t ship Sherlock and John as a couple, but I must confess to harbouring sentiments distinctly of the ‘just kiss him, already!’ persuasion while watching it). A pleasant surprise is the instant and seemingly-mutual respect that springs up between Sherlock, and John’s fiancée Mary, which should provide us with plenty of interesting interactions in future episodes; particularly in terms of the way it will no doubt develop when the time actually comes for John and Mary to get married. An unpleasant surprise is the recourse to terrible jokes and clichés for no apparent reason (what exactly was the point of making such a terrific fuss about Sherlock getting his coat back, à la Captain Jack Harkness in Torchwood: Children of Earth?). But, ultimately, The Empty Hearse is well-acted enough, and entertaining enough, to keep us wanting more, and to make us give the showrunners the benefit of the doubt thanks to the awesomeness of their previous material. Her Ladyship shall return next week, to find out if the game is afoot, or over.

Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel: Book Review

81fKXcKlJML._SL1500_

Her Ladyship commits the not-uncommon indiscretion of reading Wolf Hall after Bring Up The Bodies, and begins to think, as she does sometimes.

Though Hilary Mantel’s publishers do her the great disservice of plastering the back cover and spine of her masterpiece with recommendations from two ludicrous sources who know less about literature than Sherlock Holmes on a good day (Kate Mosse and The Daily Mail); there is absolutely nothing else wrong with Wolf Hall. While Bring Up The Bodies resembles a hard, tightened fist, and a stunning, plummeting fall (or rise); Wolf Hall is like the hilly country of an open hand. It leads us on a merry chase across the years; racing ahead and occasionally doubling back on itself in its mercurial, yet impeccably-controlled portrayal of the rise to power of Henry VIII’s formidable First Minister, Thomas Cromwell.

Like its illustrious successor, Wolf Hall is sparse, but sprawling; sparse in its descriptions of externals, and sprawling in its characterisation; relying on reader imagination to drape the appropriate characters in silks, velvets, gold and jewels and only taking to the descriptions of such things when they reflect something about the character’s internal state. It is in the vivid representation of this internal state that Mantel’s true genius lies, as she takes us right into the heart of a man largely considered to be one of the cut-glass villains of Henry VIII’s reign and gives him his own voice. It is an extraordinary voice.

A powerful, distinctive and almost compulsively interesting protagonist, Mantel’s Cromwell is one of those characters that you constantly wish you could plonk down somewhere and talk to for hours. He is a man with a string of faces and identities that stem from the multiple countries, languages and cultures he has known from adolescence, yet he is also, firmly, himself; the beautiful, resounding ‘he, Cromwell’: a man in a perpetual state of learning and observing, but with a natural gift for applying that learning to intrigue, organised thought and getting his hands dirty that cannot be taught. He is fiercely well-educated and ruthless, but is just as fiercely human; his humanity not only extending to his family life, but to the way he constantly talks to people as he has had to do all his life; how he takes in, trains and raises up young men from nowhere in every part of his household that can be imagined; taking the time to identify each one’s particular gifts and to prepare them for the day that they may be called out of the kitchen and into the counting house; as he was as a young man. One of the best things about him, especially upon entering Henry VIII’s service, is his refusal to make pretensions at nobility or to claim to be from any other part of society than the one he stems from. He’s used to his descent being constantly ridiculed, but one nevertheless gets the feeling that he’s got a little black book somewhere up his sleeve, along with the knowledge that being a blacksmith’s son doesn’t stop you from ruling the world; even if everyone else is intent on thinking so.

As an author, Mantel has the rare ability to convey great passion, sadness and complexity through minimal, yet beautiful prose; stripping Tudor England down to the raw, violent blackness of its inherent self without accoutrements and without excessive romanticism; dispensing with appearances and leaving us with the truth; the insides; the organs; the blood of its characters and its era. The high quality of the prose works together with the glorious experience of seeing Tudor England through the eyes of such a fascinating and utterly unusual man to create a mesmerising read that draws you in from the very first page and makes it difficult to put Wolf Hall down until you’ve finished it.

The Game of Thrones Emmy’s

dany

In celebration of tonight’s Emmy Awards, Her Ladyship invents an awards show showcasing the best (and some of the worst) of Game of Thrones season 3.

Best episode: The Rains of Castamere

8495951

The closest thing to perfection that this show has ever seen, The Rains of Castamere’s flawless structure permits it to glide effortlessly, beautifully and appropriately from one scene to another with not a word, a note, a cry, a sword or a split-second out of place. The build-up to the Red Wedding is such a masterpiece of classical suspense that right up until the moment that the first blow is struck, we’re left thinking ‘maybe this isn’t going to happen,’ and the show’s producers show a talent for idiot-proofing their work that rivals that of Peter Jackson; every last aspect of why the Red Wedding takes place and why it is wrong conveyed to us on an incredibly subtle, emotional and artistic level without it ever being shoved down our throats.

Worst episode: Valar Dohaeris

A stinking pile of dragon poo-poo from start to finish, Valar Dohaeris is probably the worst episode in the series’ history and is a horrible gamble for a premier episode in that it makes you think that Game of Thrones has finally succumbed to the ‘money over art’ philosophy that has besmirched so many other excellent shows. Badly-written to the point of compromising characterisation, badly-acted as a result of being badly-written, and with the most pathetic excuse for a climax that could possibly be countenanced, it is only saved from being confined to the black cells below the Castle of Mediocrity by the stunning scene between Tywin and Tyrion that is probably one of the most heart-breaking and anger-inducing of the entire saga.

Best actor: Nikolaj Coster Waldau

got0305-1480

In his portrayal of Jaime’s psychological breakdown and transformation after the loss of his hand, Coster Waldau is mercilessly raw, shattering, excruciatingly emotional and vivid to the point of ruthlessness. His glorious command of facial expression and ability to make agony throb and spill and burn right out of his eyes weds seamlessly to a volcanic natural charisma and an evocative speaking voice that pulls you so deeply into the moment with Jaime that it seems to slice right through you. He also proves himself to be an absolute master of comedy in his more light-hearted banter with best friend/worst enemy Brienne, and does an exquisite job of turning our entire perception of the character completely on its head, just as GRRM intended.

Best actress: Maisie Williams

05-Arya

Each time we think that the divine Miss Williams couldn’t possibly get any better, she knocks us all off our chairs and kicks the shit out of us for our presumption. She has reached the point in her performance where her fist seems to be closed right around Arya’s heart, so that she can feel every nuance, every ounce of pain and where it comes from, and then bring that crashing out into a face that can be numb, practical and intolerant of feelings one moment and then display an anguish so profound and so personal that it makes us want to turn away from her. Above all, Williams has captured Arya’s darkness; that love and near-worship of Death and revenge that makes her wake up every morning and go to sleep every night; that vicious, adult ruthlessness that makes us love her, but that also disturbs the more subtle of us for its brutality. But somehow, at the same time, we never lose sight of the fact that Arya is a child trying to find her family again, and has so much love inside her that she doesn’t know what to do with it. Her performance post-Red Wedding in Mhysa is a masterpiece of shock, suppressed emotion, deep, insurmountable anger and boundless talent for the taking of life that improves each time she seems to become more and more dead in her own estimation. An absolute genius of an acting prodigy who outstrips many actors twice her age.

Best supporting actor: Charles Dance

GoT - S3E10 - Tywin

In last season’s touching and now-iconic interaction with Arya Stark, we saw the softer, more human side of Tywin: a tiny pinprick of light in a dark and ruthless mess. This season, the great Tywin Lannister once again reasserts himself as one of the most terrifying, brilliant, hateful and inexplicably-endearing characters on a show that is already full to the brim with inexplicably-endearing characters. Dance is a towering presence and an effortlessly-kingly figure and plays the many facets of Tywin’s complex character up against one another with a near-carnivorous prowess; notably in his interactions with Tyrion, which range from disastrously-hurtful to grudgingly-respectful; and in his utter disrespect for any kind of emotion that is nevertheless contradicted by his own deep love for his family name. A masterpiece interpretation of one of the most fiendishly-difficult characters ever written.

Best supporting actress:  Lena Headey

got_wallpaper__cersei__season_three_by_mcnealy-d5ujhm6

Headey has always been fabulous at portraying Cersei’s complexity and fucked-up-ness, but in this season she has added the constant threat of her character’s future follies to the mix, with dazzling results. She is a sweepingly power-hungry woman who finds her power being taken from her inch by inch by Tywin’s return to the capital, and lashes out against it with her characteristic spite, but with a touching and oddly heart-breaking desperation in her murmured plea ‘Father, don’t make me do it, please,’ when her usual screaming fails to make Tywin change his mind about marrying her to Loras Tyrell. On top of this vulnerability, her behaviour towards Tyrion has become even more despicable and her moments of triumphant glee even more unbearable to watch, but we never quite lose sight of the fact that despite her limited intelligence, low cunning and unimaginative cruelty, Cersei is still a highly bred and beautiful woman who would have a talent for diffusing tricky situations if she would only take the time to stop creating them. Headey juggles all this prodigiously, and while she makes us hate Cersei most of the time, she still succeeds in making us feel sorry for her every now and then; the mark of a truly great actress.

Best partnership: Jaime and Brienne

got-jaime-brienne

Arguably possessing the greatest chemistry on the show, Nikolaj Coster Waldau and Gwendoline Christie are a casting director’s wet dream, and are brilliant at exploring Jaime and Brienne’s development and similarities by virtue of their togetherness. This partnership has absolutely everything: the shared love of fighting, the shared sense of honour, the shared depth of the love that exists between sister souls, comrades in arms and people who have been through hell together; all expressed in ways that are polar opposites and yet extremely similar. There’s constant, hilarious bickering to conceal identification and depth of feeling, there’s grudging respect that only reveals itself when that respect risks being violated by a third party and there is, of course, that unspoken, powerful knowledge that the one needs the other more than anything that bleeds out through every word they exchange and every action they take.

Worst partnership: Jon and Ygritte

game-of-thrones-recap-jon-snow-ygritte-600x337

After a promising start in season 2, this partnership descends into utter, unconvincing chaos from the word go, though the chemistry does recover slightly in the second half of the series. From an acting perspective, the most significant reason for this decline is that Rose Leslie blows Kit Harington out of the water in terms of acting ability, which causes all sorts of mischief, the worst being the painful scene where Ygritte, broken-hearted and in tears, shoots Jon multiple times for his treason while he wails pathetically on about how much he loves her. From a writing perspective, Jon and Ygritte suffer by virtue of poor adaptation of their relationship’s nature in the books; a relationship exemplified by the beautiful line: we look up at the same stars and see such different things.’ The show’s writers do make an effort to bring up the cultural differences between Jon and Ygritte, but these differences are regrettably not represented as being a serious enough obstacle to their relationship to make us understand how their love for each other transcends those cultural differences.

Best unexpected interaction: Arya and Melisandre

vlcsnap-2013-05-06-09h23m50s233

‘I see a darkness in you. And in that darkness, eyes staring back at me. Brown eyes. Blue eyes, green eyes. Eyes you will shut forever. We will meet again.’

The moment when Melisandre looks into Arya’s eyes and murmurs ‘I see a darkness in you,’  in her gloriously-accented voice never fails to turn the viewer’s blood to ice for the way it points both to Arya’s future as a killer, and particularly as a killer post-A Dance with Dragons. The volcanic charisma of both Maisie Williams and Carice Van Houten adds to this and succeeds in making it one of the most bone-chilling moments this season.

Best ‘oh fuck, this is not happening’ moment: Gendry is taken from Arya

ScreenShot016

No one, not book fans, not series fans, saw this one coming for two seconds together, so from the moment Arya shouts ‘What are you doing? Let go of him!’, this scene goes down in history as one of the cruellest breakings-up of an onscreen partnership ever; the worst part, without doubt, being the way that Arya turns away from threatening Melisandre to observe Gendry being carted away without having had a chance to say goodbye to him. It’s a horrifying compounding of Arya’s loneliness, and the look on Maisie Williams’ face at the scene’s closure reminds us, once again, how young Arya is, how much she has come to depend on Gendry, and how her burden is made harder every day by the way that she loses the people she cares about.

Best ‘oh shit, oh shit, ha ha’ moment: Tywin and Joffrey

61051-Tywin-Joffrey-DmnH

Tywin puts an end to Joffrey’s posturing and bullshitting about ‘many important matters requiring a King’s attention’ by doing nothing more threatening that climbing the stairs in front of the Iron Throne. Jack Gleeson is fantastic in this scene, making it perfectly clear that the only word passing through Joffrey’s head in that moment is ‘shit shit shit shit’, and Charles Dance is just as fantastic, his natural screen presence and icy-cold yet fiery Tywin showing the little creep precisely who’s boss, and entertaining us immensely at the same time.

Best dressed male character: Petyr Baelish

got0306-1998

Award is given by virtue of this stunning cloth of gold and light blue ensemble that possesses the double virtue of being a dazzling article of clothing and making Aidan Gillan look even more gorgeous than he already is.

Best dressed female character: Sansa Stark

Game-of-Thrones_Peter-Dinklage-Sophie-Turner-wedding-dress_Image-credit-HBO

Sansa sports a variety of beautiful costumes this season that compliment her extraordinary height and evoke her romantic nature, but none is quite so lovely as her wedding dress, which is rendered all the more exquisite by the deep crimson of her wedding cloak.

Most over-used character: Robb Stark

As mentioned previously on this blog, Richard Madden seems to have devoted the past two seasons of Game of Thrones to completely destroying the impressive and understated kingliness of presence that he so successfully brought to life in season 1, and season 3 is no exception to this rule. Most of the time he just hangs around trying to be tough, vulnerable or sexy, but does not manage to be any of these three things despite a number of scenes that had excellent potential. To add insult to injury, the excess of screen time afforded his character only compounds the poor man’s predicament and makes things worse than ever. A crying shame and a disgrace!

Most under-used character: Tyrion Lannister

Tyrion’s importance to the progression of the saga does not diminish at any point in A Storm of Swords, so the considerable reduction in screen time this season does nothing if not baffle. The development of Tyrion’s character after losing the Handship and his descent into constant worry, bitterness and depression, particularly after his wedding, is one of the saddest, most moving and most annoying things in the books, and is also extremely important in understanding his character post-Purple Wedding. Glancing over all of this and constantly shoving it into a corner, as was done in season 3, is not only an action of questionable intelligence in terms of character and story development; it is also a scandalous under-use of a phenomenally-gifted and powerful actor.

Best totally badass moment: Daenerys feeds her dragons in front of the Yunkish envoy.

So we’re snoring loudly as Razdal mo Eraz craps on about many an army having broken against Yunkai’s walls, when Daenerys takes a piece of meat from a jar next to her and throws it into the air. The resulting lightning-fast catfight and cacophony of shrieks as all three of the dragons go after it mid-flight scares the pants off poor Razdal mo Eraz and makes us whoop in delight, even more so when Daenerys hardly spares them a glance and remarks ‘Good. My Unsullied need practice. I was told to blood them early.’

Best fight scene: Sandor Clegane versus Beric Dondarrion

got-game-of-thrones-33950927-896-504

It’s the psychological issues behind this already-great fight scene that make it so infinitely superior to other fight scenes this season: it’s Sandor’s fear of fire brought to the fore when facing a man with a burning sword; it’s his insane courage and willingness to keep fighting in spite of that, and it’s Arya on the side-lines screaming ‘Kill him!’ with a chilling savagery that doesn’t belong in someone so young, pinning all her hopes on justice finally being done on this one encounter, and trying to kill Sandor herself when it fails.

Best monologue: Cersei tells Margaery the story of House Reyne of Castamere.

Seething with innuendo and suppressed violence, this monologue is a blood-chilling and gorgeously-written warning in the very best tradition of Tywin Lannister that fucking with the Lannisters causes nothing but trouble. Lena Headey’s Cersei is icy cold, regal and very, very frightening; the cruelty in her voice rendered all the more awful by the blinding courtesy of her facial expressions.

Best one-liner: ‘Then you’ll be fucking your own bride with a wooden cock.’

Tyrion explains to Joffrey that there will be no bedding ceremony in language that the little shit understands. Thrilling not only because of the irate tension (and the look on Joffrey’s face) that it creates, but also in terms of the depth of Tyrion’s respect for the downtrodden (Sansa, in this case)

Best adaptation of a great scene

It is tempting to give this award to the bath scene or the Sack of Astapor, but nothing, regrettably, beats the horrifying butchery of the Red Wedding. It’s a masterpiece of psychological horror: raw, unglorified, no slow motion and no pretty music, and traps you right inside it with a magnetic X-factor that makes you stay right to the end despite it’s being almost impossible to watch; not, as we observed in our review of the episode, because of the blood and gore, which we’re more than used to, but because of the way that the Starks’ love for each other and instinct to protect each other even in the face of certain death emerges in the most poignant, heartrending and horribly upsetting ways.

Worst adaptation of a great scene

screenshot-jon-snow-and-ygritte-kissed-by-fire

I’ve raved about this before, but seriously, how could they? The cave scene is GRRM’s magum opus of sex scenes. It makes A Song of Ice and Fire’s fat pink masts, Myrish swamps and variations thereupon worth it. It’s a coming-together of two people from different worlds, it’s Jon realising that vowing to remain celibate was probably the stupidest thing that someone with his capacity for love could have done, and it never fails to make you feel like your pants are molesting you. The TV adaptation is utterly boring and yawnable. A large part of this is the chemistry problem between Jon and Ygritte in the first half of season 3 (which miraculously and inexplicably recovers after this mediocrity takes place), the other half is…I don’t really know what. This scene is supposed to be an explosion. What it’s become is something like a sneeze.

Best throwback to season 2: Jaqen’s leitmotif.

A beautifully-evoked leitmotif that takes place after Arya and Sandor’s encounter with the Frey soldiers in the woods. Arya bends down to earth to pick up the iron coin given to her by Jaqen at the end of season 2; her hands drenched in blood and her eyes still numb with the shock of the kill. As she contemplates the face that decorates the coin’s surface, her eyes suddenly come alive as she murmurs the words ‘Valar Morghulis,’ and Jaqen’s exotic and chilling leitmotif seems to fill her up with his essence and memory. Absolutely gorgeous, and very, very thrilling.

Her Ladyship ends there to pray to the old gods and the new that Game of Thrones wins in its nominated categories tonight.

A sufferer of chronic treatment-resistant depression reviews ‘Side Effects’ and is not impressed.

Side-Effects-poster

Every now and again, I watch the first half of Side Effects and somewhat wistfully pretend it was a good movie. All the potential for it is there. Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) descends into a suicidal depression following her husband’s return from prison for insider trading. When she attempts suicide – twice – her psychiatrist Jonathan Banks (Jude Law) reluctantly prescribes a new miracle drug called Ablixa, whose unfortunate tendency to induce sleepwalking leads Emily to stab her husband to death while she sleeps. The consequences of this drag Emily and Jonathan down into the deep water between the Scylla and Charbydis of institutionalisation and prison, where proof that Ablixa was responsible for the murder becomes the only thing that will save both Emily’s sanity and Jonathan’s all-but-destroyed reputation.

side-effects-movie

Rooney Mara, who dazzled us so spectacularly in the otherwise-mediocre The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, is stunning in this role. Her simultaneously deadpan and stricken face realistically embodies the hunted, yet empty look of depression; and the deep-set hysteria and sluggishness that it inflicts on the human form are evocatively conveyed in the huskiness of her voice and the freneticism of her movements. Some aspects of the script are equally good at conveying what depression can feel like and look like: the constant, torturing knowledge that if things do get better, they’ll almost certainly get bad again at some point in the future; the aversion to standing up because it hurts too much; the way your head feels too heavy for your neck and always makes you want to lean it back against something; the way that death can seem a friend, or at least a pleasant alternative; how things get lost on the way from your brain to your mouth; how you constantly feel like you’re running from something (but never towards something) and how much you want to punch out the teeth of people who claim (meaning well, of course), that they have a fucking clue what you’re going through and presume to give you advice on how to cope. All the pieces are in place for a dark, but cathartic piece of art-house cinema about a woman overcoming the worst thing that this disease can offer a person: having to suffer it while dealing with the loss of someone you love and knowing, all the while, that you’re the one who killed them.

m2cdIHe

What we get instead is a descent into far-fetched lunacy when it emerges that Emily isn’t sick at all and is conspiring with her lover and former therapist Victoria Siebert (Catherine Zeta Jones) to make a killing off Ablixa stocks, which have plummeted since the murder. It’s quite literally a case of ‘I’m a therapist, so I’ll teach you how to be depressed; your husband is all into insider trading, so you can teach me that; we’ll make a lot of money and have lots of sex; and you get to kill the son of a bitch who ruined your life into the bargain.’ Some people call this a clever twist. I call it stigmatising a disease that already has enough of a stigma attached to it in the first place. Sure, there is no such thing as the right not to be offended, and it says clearly in the film that Victoria teaching Emily ‘how to be depressed’ is a long and torturous process. But let’s think about the connection between depression and pretending that still exists in the consciousness of the vast majority of people today; and the implications that a film like this has for this connection.

sideeffects1

We live in a society in which depression is still widely considered an inadequate excuse for not attending work, a function, a meeting or a family gathering.  Often the sufferer will be told to cheer up, to get a grip on themselves and to stop being so full of nonsense. It will sometimes be whispered behind the sufferer’s back that their depression is a synonym for laziness, an excuse to get out of something, or a form of attention-seeking or hypochondria. And in many cases, and this is far and away the worst part of the problem, the sufferer will often believe this themselves, and will subject themselves to the most horrifying forms of mental torture by brazening out whatever hellish occasion they need to attend regardless of how anguished, despairing, frail and exhausted they feel. Many will even manage (somehow) to pretend that everything’s fine in order to save face with other people and with themselves; and none but the most attentive observer will notice that anything’s wrong with them at all.

video-movies-effects-02082013-articleLarge

Millions of people with depression do this kind of pretending all day every day: we pretend for spouses, for parents, for children, for colleagues, for employees, and for ourselves. We even do it when things get desperate enough for us to call in sick or to stay home because the thought of leaving the house, or even the bed, seems like the equivalent of an apocalypse of the soul. So we lie and say we’ve got the flu or a migraine, because telling the truth exposes us to the infinite variations on ‘cheer up and get a grip’ that are described above. My psychiatrist once said something to me that I’ve never forgotten: ‘If a diabetic collapsed in front of you, would you tell them to cheer up and stop being pathetic? Of course you wouldn’t. So why do people do the same thing with depression? Depression is a disease, just like diabetes is a disease.’ She shocked me, because this very simple, very sensible thought about my own condition had never occurred to me. I don’t for a moment claim to speak for every sufferer of depression, but if this doesn’t even enter the head of someone suffering from depression, then movies like Side Effects aren’t going to generate a whole lot of understanding or empathy from those who do not suffer from it. In a climate in which the links between depression and ‘faking it’ or ‘pretending’ are probably stronger than they ever were, films like Side Effects, that portray depression as something that can be taught and expertly pretended and transform depression into a deception that can be used by a pair of con artists, encourage the myth, however small and careless such encouragement might be. They ensure that the wheel of ‘you’re a hypochondriac ’, ‘cheer up and ‘you’re pretending’ keeps right on turning with no end in sight.

Millions of depressed people are indeed pretending every day of their lives. But we’re not pretending to be sick; we’re pretending to be fine. Perhaps someone should make a movie about that.