Review of Gormenghast

Ahh, Gormenghast. It is one of those movies, those special case movies, that everyone seems to either adore, or despise. But what is this element in the movie that makes it so? No it is not an individualistic, almost surreal character, that marks certain movies that some just can not appreciate, while for others they become absolute obsessions (as Lost Highway) No, there is a definite plot, brilliant characters, great costumes (thought not outlandish), and absolutely fantastically chosen actors. The controversial factor in this moving picture happens to be the `it'; the inevitable ancestor from which many movies lately spring to life. It is, of course, The Book..; in this case Mervyn Peake's cult classic, Gormenghast. (Actually a trilogy, though the movie is based on the first two of the books, Titus Groan and Gormenghast, and not the last, Titus Alone). Now, This trilogy is one of those, somewhat well known (in the UK from what I have gathered) and hardly ever heard of (in the US). In other words, if you Americans go to your local library there may be a copy… but don't count on the local book shop to sell it. Still, this is one trilogy that has a very tight mass of devoted fans. All of these, of course, saw this movie with, perhaps, apprehensive interest, and, undoubtedly, many felt that it was just not `the real thing'. It, or so I have discovered is almost NEVER `the real thing' to many people. Sometimes movies do come along that are JUST as good as the book, if not better, such as Clockwork Orange and Lolita 1997. Gormenghast may not be one of these. As you watch it, some aspects might seem different to the vengeful Gormenghast lover then what they pictured in their minds while applying eyes to the sacred text. For those who do not feel that the movie and books are `as one' may want to try and see them as totally separate accounts on the same story line. This may work better then trying to substitute the images in the movie while thinking of the book, and then getting frustrated and upset over the experience. I found this technique especially gratifying when, after long knowing the book Interview With The Vampire, suddenly stumbling on the movie. Both, I thought, were great, but the movie just was NOT the book. The movie was the movie, and the book stayed the book. With Gormenghast I had no such troubles, though some did. While reading the trilogy I try to comply with Peake's descriptions of Steerpike which, I know, are not physically all that accurate to Jonathan Rhys Meyers. And yet as I read he inevitably slips in to my image anyway. Same with Lady Fuchsia and Nanny. Still, the movie is `different' in some aspects then the book, however pleasing the characters, for example, the exterior of the castle. For some reason I just never can imagine it to be exactly like that of the movie, though I have no problem with it, and did not see any fault with the generated graphics. It is just that I pictured it differently, somehow, thought I am not sure how differently. I suppose it would be easiest to say that I fancied it to be darker, though, when one puts their mind to it, there is no reason for darkness. These people are pretending they are living content happy lives… this is not, after all, vampire town where all try to look as depressed as humanly possible. The one character who just didn't seem `comfortable' in the movie was Flay, who's minimal word speech irritated me. But, alas, you have to give the movie it's due, he HAD to speak so otherwise he would not be portraying the book, so what can one do? My favorite character was Steerpike (though this is probably prejudiced since I found out about this movie though him). Now, a word (or, knowing me, a couple) on this book that everyone is oh so found of. For one thing, it is not for everyone. Why? Well, two reasons. For one, it is a bit surreal (a big anti for some), also, it is ever so unbelievably elongatingly methodically stretched out that in the middle of `book one' (sorry to admit I am not a full pledged specialist) I find myself wandering whether Peake wasn't friends with Kafka. This, however, does not bother me for I love stretched out action to the point that it feels like action no longer but frame by frame showing. Also, some of the scenes, though written in the most lovely twists of the English language and most pleasant to read, are just unnecessary. Still, From what I read (up to the actual burning) the movie captured the events brilliantly! I especially want to point out the scene were Steerpike first meets the good doctor (and consequently Irma). In the book this scene takes up 23 pages. During these 23 pages I enjoyed every second (one of my favorite parts so far in the book, And also in the movie), but when it came right down to the overall impression of the scene this soapy spreadness made it hard to picture. In the movie, so I believe, they took the best of the book and captured it with more vigor and sharpness. On the other hand, the part where Slagg goes for a milker from the village she talks a lot less in the movie and I believed the scene is a bit rushed. Some of the superior attitude of Slagg to the carvers is, thus, lost. Another, if not rushed, then not properly expressed scene is where Steerpike climbs on the roofs. In the book utter suffering on his part is portrayed, while in the movie it was not so even with all of Jonathan Rhys Meyers hungry munching, panting and the collapsing walk. The scene may have gained somewhat by showing him hungry, cold, and dejected sitting on the roof at night (by the way, where's his pipe!). Right before this is the accidental, or not (?), drop from the window onto the clock. Alright, he unscrupulously dropped so then he had to climb up or, well, hang for ever. In the book his somewhat unscrupulous, though calculating nature is better shown with his looking up out the window and measuring out each step he could take if he so choose to risk his life by climbing out and escaping rather then staying and waiting for whatever Flay has in store for him. What has all this to tell us? Some love the movie, some the book, and some *gasp*, actually love both. Both have their minuses which stand out somewhat obviously for both when each fan meets it's object of affection's rival. I have found both to be rather brilliantly done, for all it's minor trivial downsides. And the last thing this movie is ever so long (especially when viewed in one sitting as I viewed it), but, it never gets dreary.