The Beguiled

Dir: Sofia Coppola

2017

****

I never thought a director such as Sofia Coppola would consider remaking a Clint Eastwood movie, although if I had to guess I suppose I would pick The Beguiled. Her 2017 film is of course an adaption of Thomas P. Cullinan’s novel A Painted Devil, which Don Siegel adapted in 1971 to great critical success. The Beguiled tells the story of a wounded Union Army solder (played by Colin Farrell) who is discovered in the Virginian woods by a young girl. Although he was the ‘enemy’ the girl takes pity on him and remembers her religious upbringing and lessons of compassion, and helps him back to the Seminary school for Young Ladies from where she lives. The Civil War was in its penultimate year and all but the school’s headmistress, a teacher and handful of students remain. Cut off in the remote outback, the schools headmistress Martha Farnsworth (played by Nicole Kidman) replies on teacher Edwina Morrow (played by Kirsten Dunst) to help her care for the five girls left in their care. They take in the solder with the intention of giving him over to Confederate officers once the large wound on his leg has healed. Their initial fear and resentment for the solder is replaced with curiosity, compassion and eventually lust and attraction. The solder is polite and helps where he can, knowing that he is in the safest place he could be. However, the women begin to compete for the solders affection, which is at odds to their long-lived sense of comradery and commitment to each other. The results are climactic, with the story building to a disturbing conclusion. Siegel’s version of the story was more in keeping with the original than Coppola’s but I would argue that Coppola’s version better captures the beguiled nature of the story’s characters. Siegel said of the story that at its core it deals with the themes of sex, violence and vengeance and was based around the basic desire of women to castrate men. He cast Clint Eastwood in the main role because, as Eastwood put it “"Dustin Hoffman and Al Pacino play losers very well. But my audience like to be in there vicariously with a winner. That isn't always popular with critics. My characters have sensitivity and vulnerabilities, but they're still winners. I don't pretend to understand losers. When I read a script about a loser, I think of people in life who are losers, and they seem to want it that way. It's a compulsive philosophy with them. Winners tell themselves I'm as bright as the next person. I can do it. Nothing can stop me.” I think both men are completely wrong. I don’t see the wounded solder as being a winner or a loser, just a normal man, caught up in a war that isn’t his own, who cheats death and sees an opportunity. It’s really not a film about winners. I do like the 1971 version but I loved Sofia Coppola’s version. I expected this to be filmed as an epic with big lush visuals of the beautiful Virginian plantations but Coppola’s decision to film on 1.66 aspect ratio does make the film feel suitably claustrophobic, given that the school is large but only houses eight people who are essentially living close to one another. One of the major changes in this version is the exclusion of the school’s slave Hallie, the only slave who hasn’t fled. In the original she too bonds with the solder but Coppola – who was heavily criticised for ‘whitewashing’ – decided that the story’s situation was different to the subject of slavery and the Civil War. She added that slavery is a subject that should be covered properly or not at all, saying it was best "not to brush over such an important topic in a light way," and that "Young girls watch my films and this was not the depiction of an African American character I would want to show them.” I don’t think she is re-writing history, sugar-coating the story and certainly not ‘whitewashing’ the characters and I agree that if one can’t do justice to a subject then they shouldn’t include it. It is correct to question the ethics of a film but I don’t think any harm has been done here. If you want to question ethics in cinema then go back to Clint Eastwood’s films, you’ll have a field day. The visuals are stunning, the pace is spot-on and the eerie conclusion is perfect. It is also clear that Coppola is a director who can get the best from her actors. Farrell even said that this has so far been his favorite shoot, crediting Coppola in making him feel as comfortable as possible, which helped him with his own development of character. Dunst and Elle Fanning have worked with Coppola before and I think her and Dunst’s collaborative career is one of the best (and overlooked) of recent years. Nicole Kidman seems to be the actor ever director wants to work with, she is dependable and I’m sure brilliant to make a film with but, as much as I think she did a good job, I still don’t really see any magic. I can think of many other actors who could have done as good and who would have brought a little more magic to the role that could have had far more teeth then Kidman let show. I think it was a performance, a more powerful score and a few striking scenes away from being a pure masterpiece.