In This Section
|
« Masterpiece Theatre
October 15, 2006: Casanova, Part 2
How different this second part is from the first. The first was a comedy with a dash of true love; this one has a good deal of humor, but ends with dark, volcanic bitterness and a couple of scenes of such sinister decadence that I am left totally shaken on the inside. And there wasn’t a nun in sight!
The flashback starts with a balcony scene in which a group of gore-loving aristocrats watch a bloody, entrail-heavy execution with twisted, greedy grins on their faces. In the movie, Casanova protects his son from the sight, but if I recall correctly, in the book he actually has sex from a balcony overlooking the execution. This highlights one aspect of the Casanova story that this particular adaptation willfully disregards: his self-obsessed, perverse carnality. In the book he also has an affair with his illegitimate daughter; in the movie he is morally revolted by the prospect. A few other things are made up as well: in the movie the characters of Rocco and of Edith the kitchen maid, for example, each play an important role in the humanization of a man who might otherwise appear cruel and coldhearted. The film character of Rocco shows us a side of Casanova that is a loyal, warm and grateful friend, capable of nonsexual relationships and of grief and mourning. The character of Edith shows Casanova’s mean side but also his needy, little-boy sad side, and all the old-Casanova scenes with her reminded me of the scenes between Geoffrey Rush and Kate Winslet in the movie Quills – actress Rose Byrne, who plays Edith, even looks like a brunette Winslet. Still, both Rocco and Edith were not in the original books, and I wonder what purpose they serve here in the movie and why the screenwriters chose to include them, except to make the character of Casanova more palatable to modern audiences.
All that said, there are plenty of things I did like. There was a lot of terrific humor at play, like pretty much every scene between Giac senior and Giac junior (the stare-off scene between father and son in the carriage, the “Giac, say you’re proud” scenes). And Casanova’s various quips about where the region of Seingault is (“It’s not so much a place as a state of mind”; “Its boundaries tend to wax and wane”) were delightful. I loved that Casanova invented the lottery and built himself a chateau in which there was a room “just for wrapping presents,” and then of course gambled it all away. The party scenes were all remarkably well-done – beautiful bright pastels in the court of Louis XV and punk/goth red and black in Bellino’s Naples villa. The famous duel and Casanova’s wonderful capacity for emotional insight made me tear up a bit – and to like Grimani in spite of myself. I also liked that they touched a bit on the political, artistic and philosophical thoughts that Casanova included in his memoirs. In the book he also discusses the French Revolution and its possible causes – such as the carnivorous upper class and the newly expanding middle class in which the poor had more opportunity to rise in rank. This last factor is particularly ironic since that’s precisely how Casanova got as far as he did.
So overall, a funny and moving retelling of the remarkably versatile and wildly intelligent man called Casanova. The Henriette true-love trope lent a lot of warmth to a story that otherwise can descend into dull travelogue, empty trysting and overlong discussions of Greek poetic devices. In this version, Casanova is sweet, loving, self-mocking and oft-misunderstood. Giac, we’re proud! Now everybody go buy a lottery ticket to prove it.
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2006 2:19 PM
|
|
I'm not sure what to make of this mini-series. I mean it's the best Casanova adaption out there. Certainly the most colorful. I'm glad they made some changes to the story, the real Casanova was a pig. No way would you be rooting for a guy who had an affair with his daughter, and knew she was his daughter to boot. You gotta root for the fictionalized version. Of course who knows how much is really true about Casanova, he might of exaggerated a bit there.
|
|
Oct 16, 2006 3:10 PM
|
|
Michelle, I think that you are right that the writers added Rocco and Edith to make Signior Casanova more tolerable because he really was a cad in so many ways. I was struck by the decision to make the older Casanova bitter because when reading the abridged autobiography I got the impression that he was unrepentant to the end for his bad-boy behaviour and reveled in his reminiscences, particularly as it ended with the description of an affair that he had with a daughter of a former lover. Also interesting is that the older Casanova seemed atheistic when challenging Edith on her belief in God but in the book there is no doubt that Giacamo believed in God. Just as there was no doubt that Giac did not feel the need to abide by ANY of the teachings of the Church! Like you I found a couple of the scenes disturbing, particularly as that behavior really occurred. I must admit that I would have liked to have seen the story of the love affair with the nun MM included in this production. This was a well-done production and David Tennant was outstanding as the charming Giac. I look forward to seeing more of his performances, e.g. the 10th Doctor in Doctor Who.
|
|
Oct 16, 2006 6:21 PM
|
|
|
