It's such a slow burn but an interesting, emotional story with great performances. I've seen Nicole in period dramas before so it was no surprise to me she would nail this, fantastic lead actress! Barbara Hershey's only Oscar nominated performance and I might risk to say but she's the real scene stealer in this movie. John Malkovich is so charismatic how can someone be attractive and so mad at the same time even though John is not a typical stud but he can sell every role he plays so well.
There is no perception of Kidman because she`s a mimic and a very good one. She changes in every role. Now about playing Henry James. I did my thesis on James so I know a bit. Love him alot. James is a seminal psycholgoical narrator. His characters are Freudian conundrums and part of the suspense is playing out that Freudianism in the course of the story. Hitchcock would have been perfect to direct James but then he always plumped for simple books which he then could embellish with nuance and observation. Both `Portrait` and `Daisy Miller` were turned into Hollywood films. Some of the other works have been produced by the BBC are are okay. But `Portrait` and `Miller` are both flagrant disasters having been big productions. I would love a crack at one of James`s novels; even doing it for tv would be a satisfying experience. Look at `Poirot`...I would do it the same way. Late 19thc early 20th. London still has much of the architecure and the interior design. James was a friend of the Stephens`s sisters Virginia and VAnessa who appeared to him as `potential old maids`.
@@nitpicker12 James is hard to adapt. The complexities of his characters are hard to denominate. The concealment is so great. You`d need an Anne Bancroft playing them all to get James`s sense of sub-text. Nicole Kidman and Cybill Shepherd are too transparent, to superficial. I saw Redgrave and Christopher Reeve in a theatrical adaptation `The Aspern Papers`. Very good. Vanessa can do it. Definitely. Vanessa can do it. This is why I love James and why I`d like a crack at doing one of the novels as tv adaptation. The levels of psychology..Freud before Freud. (His brother pursued medicine) Hitchcock reminds me of James. The levels of ferocity underneath the calm patina. So true. So real. Actually though reality is much worse. Much worse. We all carry so much emotional baggage.
@@sandrashevey8252 wow I'm i.pressed. you know a lot. My Ph.D. thesis was also about creative writing and I studied James and POAL. I love that film. Nicole looked so beautiful in it. I can't believe they were going to co sider someone else to play the role. Yes James is hard to adapt but at least an effort is made to adapt his stories and write them for the big screen. I think Laura Jones did a commendable job. But too abd the ending is a bit confusing. what did u make of it?
@@nitpicker12 Look luv, I should be teaching at Harvard and if there was any justice in this world I would be. Now about Kidman. Wrong for the role. Too transparent, too superficial. I think James perceived American women (Isabel Archer and Daisy Miller) in the way Nabokov portrays Dolores (Lolita). HARD CORE with a soft core patina. I HATED the film. James is so abstruse. His characters are real killers but the steel hand in the velvet glove. THe antagonisms rage as in Hitchcock films. But they rage beneath the surface. On the surface all is calm, all is bright. I`d love to get my paws on a James novel, even to do it for TV or Netflix. James did a short story I love Hitchcock should have had it adapted for the TV series. Takes place in Paris at one of the bistros that was so wonderful in the old days. Still a few around today. A man passes this place day after day and each time he passes he is enthralled by the looks of the cashier. Finally, eventually he plucks up the courage to have meal there, to meet the cashier. He goes in, orders a meal, finishes and then goes to pay. He is reluctant, holds back because of the amour. Finally he confronts the object of his amour. He looks. He looks again. He is stupefied. Why? She is a wax dummy!!!!!
@@sandrashevey8252 wow I'm more impressed by your knowledge. You know a lot about this topic. I epersonally loved the film. It's dark dramatic and Kidman wss beautiful jn it. I loved Barbara Hershey as madame serena merle. what's your take on the ending. Nice comment you made ablut James' word. the dummy thing is surprising
i love nicole kidman so much in portrait of a lady back in 1996 !!!
Lovely Nicole
It's such a slow burn but an interesting, emotional story with great performances.
I've seen Nicole in period dramas before so it was no surprise to me she would nail this, fantastic lead actress!
Barbara Hershey's only Oscar nominated performance and I might risk to say but she's the real scene stealer in this movie.
John Malkovich is so charismatic how can someone be attractive and so mad at the same time even though John is not a typical stud but he can sell every role he plays so well.
There is no perception of Kidman because she`s a mimic and a very good one. She changes in every role. Now about playing Henry James. I did my thesis on James so I know a bit. Love him alot. James is a seminal psycholgoical narrator. His characters are Freudian conundrums and part of the suspense is playing out that Freudianism in the course of the story. Hitchcock would have been perfect to direct James but then he always plumped for simple books which he then could embellish with nuance and observation. Both `Portrait` and `Daisy Miller` were turned into Hollywood films. Some of the other works have been produced by the BBC are are okay. But `Portrait` and `Miller` are both flagrant disasters having been big productions. I would love a crack at one of James`s novels; even doing it for tv would be a satisfying experience. Look at `Poirot`...I would do it the same way. Late 19thc early 20th. London still has much of the architecure and the interior design. James was a friend of the Stephens`s sisters Virginia and VAnessa who appeared to him as `potential old maids`.
Nice remarks. I like Henry James a lo. why do u say that portaitwas a disaster? Cuz not many saw it. It got 2 oscar nods
@@nitpicker12 James is hard to adapt. The complexities of his characters are hard to denominate. The concealment is so great. You`d need an Anne Bancroft playing them all to get James`s sense of sub-text. Nicole Kidman and Cybill Shepherd are too transparent, to superficial. I saw Redgrave and Christopher Reeve in a theatrical adaptation `The Aspern Papers`. Very good. Vanessa can do it. Definitely. Vanessa can do it. This is why I love James and why I`d like a crack at doing one of the novels as tv adaptation. The levels of psychology..Freud before Freud. (His brother pursued medicine) Hitchcock reminds me of James. The levels of ferocity underneath the calm patina. So true. So real. Actually though reality is much worse. Much worse. We all carry so much emotional baggage.
@@sandrashevey8252 wow I'm i.pressed. you know a lot. My Ph.D. thesis was also about creative writing and I studied James and POAL. I love that film. Nicole looked so beautiful in it. I can't believe they were going to co sider someone else to play the role. Yes James is hard to adapt but at least an effort is made to adapt his stories and write them for the big screen. I think Laura Jones did a commendable job. But too abd the ending is a bit confusing. what did u make of it?
@@nitpicker12 Look luv, I should be teaching at Harvard and if there was any justice in this world I would be. Now about Kidman. Wrong for the role. Too transparent, too superficial. I think James perceived American women (Isabel Archer and Daisy Miller) in the way Nabokov portrays Dolores (Lolita). HARD CORE with a soft core patina. I HATED the film. James is so abstruse. His characters are real killers but the steel hand in the velvet glove. THe antagonisms rage as in Hitchcock films. But they rage beneath the surface. On the surface all is calm, all is bright. I`d love to get my paws on a James novel, even to do it for TV or Netflix. James did a short story I love Hitchcock should have had it adapted for the TV series. Takes place in Paris at one of the bistros that was so wonderful in the old days. Still a few around today. A man passes this place day after day and each time he passes he is enthralled by the looks of the cashier. Finally, eventually he plucks up the courage to have meal there, to meet the cashier. He goes in, orders a meal, finishes and then goes to pay. He is reluctant, holds back because of the amour. Finally he confronts the object of his amour. He looks. He looks again. He is stupefied. Why? She is a wax dummy!!!!!
@@sandrashevey8252 wow I'm more impressed by your knowledge. You know a lot about this topic. I epersonally loved the film. It's dark dramatic and Kidman wss beautiful jn it. I loved Barbara Hershey as madame serena merle. what's your take on the ending. Nice comment you made ablut James' word. the dummy thing is surprising