Prizefight: The Nanny Diaries Vs Devil Wears Prada

In the latest edition of Prizefight, i will compare The Nanny Diaries with the Devil Wears Prada, these films have quite a bit in common, they were both released around the same time, both adapted from hugely successful novels, both of which i have read, and both revolve around dealing with horrendous bosses. I will compare these films on their translation to the big screen, their casting and the hideousness of their bosses!

The novels they are based on both have their issues, that said, The Nanny Diaries is significantly more well written than The Devil Wears Prada, it is more intelligent, and has less narrative issues. The film of The Nanny Diaries follows much the same path as the novel does, the story is almost identical and the characters are much the same as they appear on the page, nothing significant is changed. The Devil Wears Prada however features significant alterations to the source material, the whole plot is reshuffled slightly to streamline it, and to make the characters more believable and empathetic. The character of Miranda is much more understandable in the film than in the novel, and in the book, she remains an out-and-out villain till the very end, in the film she eventually comes round, and we see their relationship as more of a power struggle, with both finally understanding the other. Thus The Devil Wears Prada despite requiring more effort in adapting it to the big screen, is a better adaptation, despite not being quite as faithful an adaptation.

Casting is hugely important in both of these films, the heroine of The Nanny Diaries is Annie Braddock, nicknamed Nanny, who is played by Scarlett Johansson. Johansson might seem like an odd choice for the role, and it is unusually plain for her, however she has the charisma to pull off playing such a mundane part, and she is oddly credible as a lower middle class college grad. The heroine of The Devil Wears Prada is Andy Sachs, again a college grad who goes to work for Runway, a high end fashion magazine. Again, she is well cast, although one feels that this role is a little less of a stretch for her than it is for Johansson, who is playing someone completely separate from anyone else she has ever played, and who never uses her sexuality, and, unlike Andy Sachs, who never has moments of looking pretty or attractive, in fact the whole affair is more a lesson in dowdiness, and Johansson is entirely refreshing in the role.

The bosses in the film are also impeccably cast, Laura Linney Plays Mrs X, a wealthy upper east side trophy wife, who takes little interest in raising her child, and who seems to have little worries in life. Meryl Streep plays Miranda Priestly, a thinly veiled Anna Wintour inspired magazine editor, who is fiercely professional, and who treats her assistants as disposable. Both are fantastic, and i love Laura Linneys portrayal of Mrs X, however Meryl Streep's performance is simply iconic, every note of her performance is perfect, from the cold "that's all", to the way she pats her grey hair, and her carefully pursed lips, everything is exact, and the results are stunning. As for the characters themselves, they are both fearsome creations, Mrs X is a woman who is unreasonable, cruel, has little time for her son and who wants everything from her husband. She is cold and unemotional, she treats her nannies like slaves and she expects them to do everything for her, her actions seem unrealistic, and she has no real motive, other than that being her nature. Miranda Priestly is more easy to understand, she has real motives, and she is motivated by ambition and impatience, and not by greed. Overall, Miranda Priestly is a more believable character, her motivations are more clear.

Both films are fantastic, despite not being Oscar worthy dramas they both feature great performances, and are great fun, they may not be great art but they are delightful distractions, and they do what they attempt successfully. However it is clear that The Devil Wears Prada is the superior film, well adapted and the better acted movie.

Dreamgirls

Forgive me if this post seems a little bitter, the VMA’s of Sunday night burned a bleeding hole in my soul so deep it will take months to heal, but I will soldier on regardless. Dreamgirls is a 2006 movie musical directed by Bill Condon and featuring an ensemble cast starring Jennifer Hudson, Beyoncé Knowles, Jamie Foxx, Eddie Murphy and Anika Noni Rose. The film remains the most expensive film ever made with an all-black cast, and one of the highest grossing musicals. Based on the Broadway musical, the film is essentially a film a clef about The Supremes, with the film being a story about a three part girl group from Detroit, who find fame and stardom, despite being entirely controlled by the group’s manager and lead singer.

Many of the characters in the film are partially based upon real life individuals, Jamie Foxx’s character; Curtis Taylor Jr. is strongly based upon Berry Gordy, the real life owner of Motown Records and the manager and producer of The Supremes. Knowles’ character is strongly based on Diana Ross, like Deena Jones, Diana Ross was neither the strongest or best singer of The Supremes, nor was she the original lead singer of the group. Jennifer Hudson’s character mirrors the story of Florence Ballard, the original lead singer of The Supremes who was later fired by their manager and replaced.

The film succeeds largely due to the performances of its talented and charismatic cast. Knowles, despite easily being the weakest singer of the group, is perfectly suited for the part, and despite her film performances in the past and since having been savaged, this role perfectly suits her, although her voice is weak and often thin, she comes into her own during Listen, when she isn’t forced to compete with stronger singers, and when her voice really soars. Jamie Foxx is also great as Curtis Taylor Jr., despite Taylor Jr. being the obvious villain of the piece; Foxx plays him with a complexity and a sense of malice that keeps the character from becoming two dimensional or camp. Eddie Murphy’s performance is unusually restrained, and he imbues the character with a comic tragedy. Anika Noni Rose, despite not being given a huge amount to do gives a fine performance, and her scenes with Eddie Murphy in addition to the characters emotional evolution throughout the film are a highlight

The standout performance of the film is that of Jennifer Hudson, who, in her feature film debut, who was awarded an Oscar for her performance. She is superb in this film, she has one of the best voices recoded since Aretha Franklin, and her voice is strong, clear and powerful, she infuses it with a heartbreaking sense of tragedy. Her performance of And I Am Telling You is now the definitive recording, and she portrays Effie as someone fragile and gentle, who is hurt easily, and who has her heart broken by a man attracted to mere beauty, and who has her career stolen by a woman far less talented than she.

Dreamgirls succeeds as an adaptation of the hit show and as a standalone movie; the film is a fascinating look at the Motown music scene of the sixties, and the history of the Supremes. It is also slightly validating to see Beyoncé out sung in every scene by an American idol alumni (who didn’t even win). Dreamgirls is fun, visceral and energetic. A perfect movie musical featuring perfect performances.

The Order of the Phoenix

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is the fifth film in the Harry Potter saga, and this film marks my renewed commitment to reviewing all the films in this series by the end of the summer, or at least before i have to go back to university in september. The Order of the Phoenix represents Harry's fifth school year at Hogwarts, and his first since the rebirth of Voldemort (sorry, spoiler) and the death of Cedric Diggory (sorry, more spoilers).

The landscape of The Order of the Phoenix is significantly darker than that of previous Potter films, the wizarding world is gripped by a possible threat from Lord Voldemort, the press is attempting to smear Harry Potter and Dumbledore at the request of the ministry and the ministry in interfering at Hogwarts, making Dolores Jane Umbridge Hogwarts high inquisitor, and later headmistress. The film introduces the Order of the Phoenix, a secret organization headquarter at 12 Grimmauld Place, Sirius' family home. The film shows the characters' evolution, and them finding their independence.

The visual landscape of the film is also darker, the film continues the trend of each film becoming lass and lass saturated, with less and less colour, showing the growing bleakness overtaking the world of the films, and the darkness that seeps into the stories. The world of Hagwarts becomes equally bleak, Harry describes him feeling alone, Dumbledore ignores him and Umbridge makes his life a misery. Starring the same cast as the other movies, this film adds Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange, despite not having many lines, her presence in the film is unmatched, and her performance is note perfect. Imelda Staunton stars as Dolores Umbridge, imbuing the part with such malice and evil that she is almost, if not more hated than Voldemort. and finally Evanna Lynch plays Loona Lovegood, a kooky character that treads a fine line between endearingly queer and just plain wierd.

The film also presents several new environments, the climax of the film takes place in the department of mysteries, a series of rooms beneath the ministry of magic with an unknown purpose where prophecies are kept. The department has an unnatural blue tinge, and one of the first battles takes place in the hall of prophecy, an expansive room in which glass spheres line the walls containing prophecies which can only be taken by the keeper of the prophecy. The climactic battle takes place in the Death Chamber, a circular room featuring a stone arch in the center, at the top of a small hill is a stone archway, featuring a veil through which the dead can be heard. The environment of the department of mysteries remains elusive, and the large amount of CGI used to bring this environment to life works to it's advantage, giving the department a lack of lucidity.

The Order of the Phoenix is the most complete of the Harry Potter film yet, the tone is dark and mysterious, and the new additions to the cast are perfectly chosen, and Imelda Staunton gives a near perfect performance as Dolores Jane Umbridge. The way the cast and the tone of the series has matured is impressive, and The Order of the Phoenix is an impressive film. Rating: B+

Lord Voldemort: You've lost, old man.

Marie Antoinette

Marie Antoinette is a 2006 historical drama, written and directed by Sofia Coppola, starring Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman and Rose Byrne. The film is a highly loose adaptation of the life of the French queen, and represents the life of the queen, from the age of 14 when she was promised to the dauphin, the future king of France, up until the French revolution, when she and her husband were forced to leave Versailles.

The film is a highly loose adaptation, and style clearly takes place over substance in this adaptation. Kirsten Dunst shines as the young and troubled young queen. The film is a highly humanizing portrait of the young queen’s life, and elements of the film are intentionally modernized in order to humanize the characters involved, rather than portraying Marie Antoinette as a selfish and spoilt girl, Coppola presents her as a deeply flawed young woman, entirely cut off from reality, and trapped within a world she had no control over. Jason Schwartzman also stars as Louis XVI. The film also has the distinction of introducing the world to Rose Byrne, who plays Yolande de Polastron, a beautiful and extravagant duchess, a favorite of Marie-Antoinette.

The film is a visually stunning and lavish representation of pre-revolutionary France, and of the court of Versailles, the production had unprecedented access to the court of Versailles and its grounds, and it is of huge advantage to the film. The film is infused with the essence of Versailles, something which could not be achieved if the sets had been constructed for the film. The film is also lavishly costumed, and won an Oscar in 2007 for Best Costume Design. The film often sacrifices historical realism for character development, and the clothes are used intelligently to give us an idea of who these characters really are as people, rather than simply putting them on a pedestal. Marie-Antoinette’s character is developed largely through costume, at the beginning of the film, her costumes are used to show her naiveté and innocence, she wears dresses in blue and pink, with little hats and necklaces, her make-up is also highly subdued at this point, showing that she has not yet reached an age of sexual maturity, and that she is essentially a little girl. Towards the end of the film, as Marie-Antoinette becomes more rebellious and free, her style changes as well. Her make-up becomes darker, more flirtatious, with redder lipstick and more blush, showing her blossoming into a freer and emancipated woman. Towards the end of the film her wardrobe changes also, and she begins wearing darker colors, more daring silhouettes. She also begins to dress in a far freer way; she begins to wear simple, shepherdess dresses, showing her desire for a more liberated, less conservative existence.

Supporting characters are also introduced largely by their wardrobe, Madame Du Barry, a prostitute and favorite of the king is shown with dark defined make-up, and modern avant-garde clothing, looking highly unlike the rest of the nobility, ensuring that she is seen by the audience as an outsider, given that she is not a true member of the nobility. Costume is also used to show the sheer extravagance of the royal family, Manolo Blahnik created hundreds of pairs of shoes for the production, and at one point in the film, we see a pair of modern Chuck Taylor’s, in pale blue under a table, showing that Marie Antoinette is essentially still a young teenager, even if she is the Dauphine of France. Also important in the film are wigs, Marie-Antoinette brought in a fashion for wigs in France, and in the film Marie-Antoinette beginning to wear wigs is a turning point in the film, as her extravagance begins to become inappropriate. Her wigs also show her innocence, that even though she was a grown woman by this point, even though she was queen of France with responsibilities and children, she was still immature and childlike, willing to try odd and even downright ridiculous things.

The film is a highly humanizing portrait of the doomed queen; Marie-Antoinette is portrayed as being entirely cut off from reality, Versailles is depicted as an entirely cut off world, a world in which she was endlessly trailed by courtiers and servants. Marie-Antoinette is portrayed as a woman who couldn’t possibly know about the troubles of the working people of France, because she was entirely cutoff from reality, and as a woman who desperately longed for a simpler life. She is described as essentially a woman who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and who cannot be blamed for the financial woes of France. Marie-Antoinette is shown to be a woman who cares deeply for her country, despite not having been born in France, and as a woman who accepts the position she has been put in despite it not being her fault.

Louis XVI however is portrayed in a highly unsympathetic light; he is shown to be pompous, unfriendly and uncaring towards his wife. His inability to consummate the marriage is of considerable pain to his wife, and yet he makes no attempt to console her, the film also places the financial ruin of France solely in the hands of Louis XVI, given that it was him who sent troops to America to fight the British, a move inspired wholly by ego. The film’s use of music is also superb, as is traditional for Sofia Coppola films; the film uses a soundtrack of new age and post punk music, which although anachronistic, really allows us to empathize with the characters. The use of anachronistic music, which although being de rigueur today, was relatively unheard of in the early 2000’s, allows us to see Marie-Antoinette as a young teen, and gives us a way to relate to the film.

Although being lightweight and frivolous, Marie Antoinette is a well-produced, visually sumptuous and deftly acted drama; the film finds a way to allow us to empathize with these historical characters, by taking them off their pedestals and humanising them greatly. Marie Antoinette is a harrowing and personal view of the doomed queen, a woman who despite being spoilt and selfish, is not guilty of either the financial ruin of France or the downfall of the monarchy, and who has been made to pay for the faults and flaws of the monarchy as an institution. Sofia Coppola shows that she again is a highly capable director with a real voice and opinion, and is successfully able to translate this overly told story to the big screen, giving it a new perspective and enlightenment. Rating: A

Marie-Antoinette: Am I to be Austrian or the Dauphine of France?

Factory Girl

Factory Girl is a 2006 biopic of actress, model and muse Edie Sedgewick, and her relationship with Andy Warhol. Sedgewick first met Warhol whilst working as an art student in cambridge, she moves to New York City in order to pursue her career as an artist, she ended up appearing is a number of his films during the 1960's and became his muse for a while. Her relationship with Warhol led to her becoming a worldwide celebrity and icon, and she tragically passed away in 1971 at the age of 28.

The film is shot very much like a documentary, the camera, whilst always being in the right place at the right time, is never flashy, and never overbearing, this gives the whole film a cinema verité feel, where the camera is simply observing, and is never a feature of the film. The narrative of the film is also documentary like, as in Grey Gardens, the cameras simply roll and watch the drama play out, there is no attempt to streamline the film into a distinct and linear narrative, whilst the action is all chronological, there are huge jumps in time and narrative and the film takes place over an indeterminate period of time.

The film features undeniably fine performances, and Sienna Miller is surprisingly good in the leading role, i will admit to not having seen a lot of her work, and knowing of her largely from her relationship with Jude Law, her affair with Daniel Craig and her featuring in The September Issue, however she is oddly perfect in the role of Edie Sedgewick, a woman who is fragile, vapid and foolish, who places all her trust in Warhol at the begining of the film, and whose blind faith will ultimately lead to her being cast off and left for ruin. Despite the film being filmed and told in a cinema verité style, the film is nonetheless very much told from Edie's point of view, the audience is expected to understand and empathize with her despite the carelessness of her actions, and we are supposed to blame her entourage for her situation, and her subsequent decay.

However the real star of this picture is Guy Pearce, who plays Andy Warhol, few actors have the confidence to take on such a hugely iconic and challenging role, and yet Pearce pulls it off with style and panache. What is so impressive about his performance is that we really feel like we know him, despite the fact that he rarely, if ever takes off his sunglasses, Pearce's performance is so deft and powerful that he takes an icon down from his pedestal, and makes him human, he penetrates the sunglasses and the wigs, the blind stares and ironic glazed voice and makes a real character whilst remaining faithful to the status of such a powerful and influential artists.

Factory Girl is a film which succeeds on the strength of it's performances and its visual pastiche, whilst the story suffers, and is reduced to a mere series of vignettes, the lack of narrative is interesting to follow and gives the film an interesting flair, however the film is simply unable to craft a convincing or understandable story from it's wonky narrative. Rating: C+

Edie Sedgwick: To me, New York was Jackson Pollock sipping vodka and dripping paint onto a raw canvas.