#Arthur Hopcraft

[claudia1829things]

"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Review

"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Review

In less than I year, I have developed this fascination with the works of Charles Dickens. How did this come about? I do not know. I have seen previous Dickens movie and television adaptations in the past. But ever since last year, I have been viewing these adaptations with a vengeance. And one of them turned out to be "BLEAK HOUSE", the 1985 adaptation of Dickens' 1852-53 novel.

Adapted by Arthur Hopcraft, this eight-episode miniseries conveyed the affects of Jarndyce v Jardyce, a long-running legal probate case involving the existence of more than one will. The heirs and their descendants have been waiting decades for the court to determine the legal will, for the sake of a large inheritance. Among those affected by the Jarndyce v Jardyce case are:

*John Jarndyce - a wealthy English landowner, who happens to be the proprietor of the estate, Bleak House. Jarndyce had inherited it from his uncle Tom Jarndyce, who had went mad waiting for a verdict on the case before committing suicide. *Richard Carstones - Tom Jarndyce's grandson and John Jarndyce's cousin, who also became one of the latter's legal wards, and a potential beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case. *Ada Clare - Tom Jarndyce's granddaughter and Mr. Jarndyce's cousin, who also became one of his legal wards, and a potential beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case. She and Richard, also cousins, became romantically involved. *Esther Summerson - one of the novel's main characters and orphan, who became Mr. Jarndyce's ward following the death of her previous guardian, Miss Barbury, who had also been her biological aunt. She joined the Bleak House household as Ada's companion and Mr. Jarndyce's housekeeper after he became the guardian of Richard and Ada. *Honoria, Lady Dedlock - the wife of baronet Sir Leicester Dedlock and a beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case. She is also the younger sister of Miss Barbury and Esther's illegitimate mother. *Captain John Hawdon aka Nemo - a former British Army officer, who became an impoverished law writer and drug addict. He is also Lady Dedlock's former lover and Esther's illegitimate father. His penmanship on one of the Jarndyce v Jardyce affidavit attracts Lady Dedlock's attention. *Mr. Bill Tulkinghorn - Sir Leicester's ruthless lawyer, who noticed Lady Dedlock's reaction to the affidavit. This leads him to investigate her past and possible connection to Hawdon aka "Nemo". *Miss Flite - An elderly woman living in London, whose family had been destroyed by a long-running Chancery case similar to Jarndyce v Jarndyce. This has led her to develop an obsessive fascination with Chancery cases, especially the main one featured in this story. She quickly befriended Esther, Richard, Ada and Mr. Jarndyce.

As one can see, these characters represented plot arcs that connect to the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case. As one of the beneficiaries of the Jarndyce case, Richard becomes obsessed with the verdict. He seemed more interested in depending upon the Jarndyce verdict to provide him with an income rather than pursue a profession. This obsession eventually led to a clash between and Mr. Jarndyce, who has tried to warn him not to get involved with the case. Another clash formed between Lady Dedlock and Mr. Tulkinghorn, due to his determination to find proof of her past with Nemo and the conception of their child. A clash that proved to create even more damaging for a good number of people, than the one between Mr. Jarndyce and Richard. In the midst of all this stood Esther, who served as an emotional blanket for several characters - especially the inhabitants at Bleak House, a potential romantic figure for three men (ironic for a woman who was not supposed to be a great beauty), and the center of the Lady Dedlock-Nemo scandal.

For years, 1985's "BLEAK HOUSE" had been viewed as the superior adaptation of Dickens' novel. The first novel aired back in 1959. But a third television adaptation that aired in 2005 had managed to overshadow this second adaptation's reputation. But this is not about comparing the three adaptations. I am focusing only the 1985 miniseries. If I might be blunt, I believe screenwriter Arthur Hopcraft and director Ross Devenish created one of the better Charles Dickens I have personally seen. Granted, one might use the source material - the 1952-53 novel - as the reason behind the miniseries' top quality. But I have seen my share of poor adaptations of excellent source material . . . and excellent adaptations of poor or mediocre novels and plays. And I would find this excuse too simply to swallow. Hopcraft and Devenish could have easily created a poor or mediocre adaptation of the novel. Fortunately, I believe they had managed to avoid the latter.

With eight episodes, Hopcraft and Devenish did an excellent job in conveying Dickens' exploration into the chaos of the legal landscape in 19th century Britain, especially cases involving the Chancery courts. One might consider the longevity of Jarndyce v Jarndyce rather exaggerated. However, I speak from personal experience that an extended length of time in such a case is more than possible. But what I thought the effect of Jarndyce v Jarndyce and similar cases in Dickens' story seemed very interesting. In Richard Carstone's case, I suspect his own hubris and upbringing had allowed the case to have such a toxic effect upon him. He had been raised as a gentleman. Which meant he was not expected to work for a living. But since he did not possess a fortune or an estate - like Mr. Jarndyce - Richard never lost hope that the court would rule the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case in his favor, allowing him to inherit a great deal of money. Although it took another case to send Miss Flyte mentally around the bend, I found it interesting that her obsession with Chancery cases led her to attach her interest to the Jarndyce case beneficiaries.

The Jarndyce case also produce a group of leeches in the forms of attorneys like Mr. Tulkinghorn and his obsession with assuming control over the Dedlocks and Mr. Vholes, who had sucked a great deal of money from Richard in exchange for his legal services. The series also featured the vicious moneylender Mr. Smallweed, who helped Mr. Tulkinghorn in the latter's campaign against Lady Dedlock; and Mr. Jarndyce's "friend", Harold Skimpole, who had not only encouraged Richard to pursue a greater interest in the Jarndyce case, but also had accepted a "commission" from Vholes to recruit the young man as a client. Would I regard William Guppy as a leech? Sometimes. I had noticed that one particular story arc was missing - namely the story arc regarding the philanthropist Mrs. Jellyby, her daughter and Esther's friend, Caddy and the Turveydrop family. This did not bother me, for I have never been a fan of that particular arc.

However, I also noticed that "BLEAK HOUSE" featured a few moments in which important plot points had been revealed through dialogue or shown after the fact. Audiences never saw Skimpole convince Richard to hire Mr. Vholes. Instead, Mr. Jarndyce had revealed this incident after it happened. The whole scenario regarding Dr. Allan Woodcock being a survivor of a shipwreck was handled as a past event revealed by the good doctor himself. Hopcraft's script never stretched it out in the same manner as Dickens' novel or the 2005 miniseries. Audiences never saw George Rouncewell's release from jail, for which he had been incarcerated for murder. Instead, Episode Seven began with George in jail and later, near the end, found him serving as Sir Leicester's valet without any information on how that came about.

"BLEAK HOUSE" featured a few other writing and direction decisions by Hopcraft and Devenish that I found . . . well, questionable. Why did the pair solely focused on Lady Dedlock in the series' penultimate episode and Richard and the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case in the final one? Would it have been so difficult for them to switch back and forth between the two arcs in those final episodes? I found Inspector Bucket's resolution to the story's murder mystery rather rushed. I would have liked to see Bucket eliminate suspects before solving the case. In Bucket's final scene with the killer, Hopcraft left out that moment from the novel when the latter had the last scathing word on British society, leaving the police detective speechless. This erasure dimmed the impact of Dickens' message and made the killer even more of a caricature. I had some issues with how Devenish directed certain performances. How can I put this? I found them a bit theatrical.

I have one last issue - namely Kenneth MacMillan's cinematography. I realize that in "BLEAK HOUSE", fog represented institutional oppression and human confusion and misery in society. Unfortunately, I feel that MacMillan may have been heavy-handed in utilizing this symbol in the series. It is bad enough that photography featured a fuzzy element that seemed popular in many period productions in the 1970s. But thanks to MacMillan's use of fog in the story, there were many moment in which I could barely see a damn thing. And I found that irritating.

Aside from a few quibbles, I had no real issues with the performances featured in "BLEAK HOUSE". One of those quibbles proved to be the performances for some of the secondary cast members. How can I say this? The exaggerated and wooden performances for some of the cast members brought back memories of some of the minor actors' bad performances in 1982 miniseries, "THE BLUE AND THE GRAY". I must admit that I did not care for Pamela Merrick's portrayal of Lady Dedlock's French maid, Madame Hortense. Her performance bordered and then surpassed the lines of caricature - as some British actors/actresses tend to do. Charlie Drake's portrayal of the moneylender Smallweed tend to waver between a pretty solid performance and pure caricature. Although there were moments when I found her portrayal of the eccentric Miss Flyte a bit hammy, I must admit that Sylvia Coleridge gave a well-done performance. Chris Pitt's performance as Jo, the crossing sweeper boy struck me as very poignant. Yet, at the same time, he seemed so passive that at times, I found it difficult to believe he had survived on the streets on his own, for so long. Jonathan Moore, whom I had remembered from the 1988 television movie, "JACK THE RIPPER"; did an excellent job of conveying the ambitious and self-interested nature of law clerk William Guppy. However, his portrayal of Guppy seemed to lack the character's comedic nature. Denholm Elliot gave a very interesting performance as Esther, Richard and Ada's guardian, John Jarndyce. On one level, I found his portrayal of the kind-hearted Mr. Jarndyce as first-rate. Excellent. But there were moments, including the character's famous quote following Jo's death, when Elliott's Mr. Jarndyce seemed to resemble one of those "angry young men" characters from a John Osbourne play. I found those moments very odd.

However, there were performances that did not leave me scratching my head. Colin Jeavons and Anne Reid gave very competent performances as the grasping solicitor Mr. Vholes and George Rouncewell's close friend Mrs. Bagnet, respectively. Ironically, Jeavons had portrayed Richard Carstone in the 1959 adaptation of "Bleak House" and Reid had portrayed Mrs. Rouncewell in the 2005 television adaptation. Both Suzanne Burden and Lucy Hornak gave solid performances as Esther Summerson and Ada Clare. And yet, both actresses managed to rise to the occasion with some brilliant moments. Burden's moment came, following Esther's realization that she had survived the smallpox. As for Hornak, she gave an excellent performance during Ada's soliloquy about her love's growing obsession with the Jarndyce case. Brian Deacon gave a passionate performance as Dr. Allan Woodcourt, the penniless doctor in love with Esther. Ian Hogg gave a very solid, yet commanding performance as Inspector Bucket. I really enjoyed Sam Kelly's warm portrayal of the law-stationer, Mr. Snagsby. Bernard Hepton gave one of the most colorful performances of his career as the alcoholic rag and bone shopkeeper, Krook. Dave King gave a very solid performance as the loyal, yet intimidating and conservative former Army sergeant George Rouncewell. I found George Sewell's performance as Sergeant Rouncewell's older brother, the wealthy Mr. Rouncewell not only entertaining, but very memorable. I thought Robin Bailey did an excellent job portrayed the haughty and proud Sir Leicester Dedlock.

But there were four performances that really impressed me. One came from Philip Franks, who did an excellent job of conveying Richard Carstone's emotional journey from John Jarndyce's warm and friendly young man, to the more embittered one, obsessed with the Jarndyce case. T.P. McKenna gave a delicious performance as Mr. Jarndyce's self-involved friend, Harold Skimpole, who proved to be quite the emotional (and financial) vampire. I thought Peter Vaughan was superb as the Dedlocks' sinister lawyer, Mr. Tulkinghorn. I was amazed by how Vaughn managed to combine the character's dedication to protecting his client Sir Leicester and his penchant for assuming control over others. If I had voted for the best performance featured in "BLEAK HOUSE", I would choose Diana Rigg's portrayal of the tragic Honoria, Lady Dedlock. I believe the actress gave a brilliant performance as the mysterious, yet complicated baronet's wife, whose cool demeanor hid a great deal of emotions and a personal secret. I am shocked and amazed that neither she, Vaughn, McKenna or Franks had ever received any accolades for their performances.

In fact, I am surprised that "BLEAK HOUSE" had only received BAFTA nominations (and won three) . . . and they were in the technical/arts category, aside for the Best Drama Series/Serial. No Primetime Emmy nominations, whatsoever. Was this eight-part miniseries the best adaptation of Charles Dickens' 1852-53 novel? I cannot answer that question. Granted, it had its flaws. But what television or movie production did not? But I cannot deny that "BLEAK HOUSE" was a first-rate miniseries that deserved more accolades than it had received, thanks to Arthur Hopcraft's screenplay, Ross Devenish's direction and an excellent cast led by Suzanne Burden, Denholm Elliott and Diana Rigg.

[goldfishgrahamcracker]

Franklin's lost expedition crew

I was looking at posts about AMC's The Terror and I kept getting confused by the use of first names, so I wanted to see how many of the characters had the same names. Arranging the crew in alphabetical order, I got:

1 x Abraham (Seeley)

4 x Alexander (Berry, McDonald, Paterson, Wilson)

5 x Charles (Best, Coombs, Des Voeux, Johnson, Osmer)

1 x Cornelius (Hickey)

2 x Daniel (Arthur, Bryant)

3 x David (Leys, Macdonald, Young) + Bonus: Bryant in the show but most historical sources I found list him as Daniel

1 x Edmund (Hoar)

3 x Edward (Couch, Genge, Little)

2 x Edwin (Helpman, Lawrence)

3 x Francis (Crozier, Dunn, Pocock)

1 x Frederick (Hornby) + Bonus: Des Voeux, whom I have seen referred to as Frederick rather than Charles on occasion

6 x George (Cann, Chambers, Hodgson, Kinnaird, Thompson, Williams)

1 x Gillies (MacBean)

1 x Graham (Gore)

7 x Henry/Harry (Collins, Goodsir, Le Vesconte, Lloyd, Peglar, Sait, Wilkes)

10 x James (Brown, Daly, Elliot, Fairholme, Fitzjames, Hart, Reid, Ridgen, Thompson, Walker) + Bonus: Ross, who was not part of the expedition but appears in the show

23 x John (Bailey, Bates, Bridgens, Brown, Cowie, Diggle, Downing, Franklin, Gregory, Hammond, Handford, Hartnell, Irving, Kenley, Lane, Morfin, Murray, Peddie, Strickland, Sullivan, Torrington, Weekes, Wilson)

2 x Joseph (Andrews, Healey)

1 x Josephus (Geater)

1 x Luke (Smith)

1 x Magnus (Manson)

1 x Philip (Reddington)

1 x Reuben (Male)

2 x Richard (Aylmore, Wall)

8 x Robert (Carr, Ferrier, Golding, Hopcraft, Johns, Sargent, Sinclair, Thomas)

3 x Samuel (Brown, Crispe, Honey)

1 x Solomon (Tozer)

16 x Thomas (Armitage, Blanky, Burt, Darlington, Evans, Farr, Hartnell, Honey, Johnson, Jopson, McConvey, Plater, Tadman, Terry, Watson, Work)

22 x William (Aitken, Bell, Braine, Clossan, Fowler, Gibson, Goddard, Heather, Hedges, Jerry, Johnson, Mark, Orren, Pilkington, Read, Rhodes, Shanks, Sims, Sinclair, Smith, Strong, Wentzall)

[mariacallous]

Forty years ago, the BBC broadcast its adaptation of the John Le Carré novel Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy for the first time. Starring Sir Alec Guinness as George Smiley, the master spy hunting down a Soviet mole in the British intelligence services, it provoked controversy. Largely over whether it made any sense or not.

While Nancy Banks-Smith, in her review for the Guardian, called Tinker Tailor “the very best caviar”, Clive James in the Observer was of a different mind. “The first instalment,” he wrote, “fully lived up to the standard set by the original novel. Though not quite as incomprehensible, it was equally turgid.”

You get the feeling, from the way James begrudgingly warmed to the drama as it ran its course (“Anything can improve,” he wrote, “even Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, of which the latest episode was a good deal less wearisome than the previous three”), that some of the invective was for effect. But he was not alone in finding the material challenging. Working out whether you had a clue what was going on in Tinker Tailor became something of a national pastime. Larry Grayson even joked about it in the Generation Game.

In 2019, it is not just the bluffs and double bluffs (and treble and quadruple bluffs) that viewers might find baffling. It is the world in which the drama is set, the way its inhabitants behave and what – if anything – they believe in. Tinker Tailor very much remains TV caviar. But it is also, from today’s vantage point, a remarkable insight into a different time, one that itself offered a window on to another, dying world.

Tinker Tailor’s director, John Irvin, now 79, is one of the few people still alive who was involved in the production. His understanding of what the story required, he says, was filtered through values born of empire. “What we wanted to reveal dramatically was the complexity of the secret state,” he says. “The contradictions, the betrayals of loyalty. The aspect that I latched on to, I think, the one I felt personally, was the idea of service. Christian service and service to country. How that sense of Christian service could be corrupted into the most mendacious and reckless behaviour was something I was preoccupied with throughout the telling of the story.”

While we are still living in a Britain ruled by public school elites, this aristocratic concept of service would appear long gone. In 2019, it is a struggle to find anyone articulating a case for “doing good”, even disingenuously. Tinker Tailor may be a story about betrayal, the hunt for a mole at the heart of MI6, but it occurs in a world defined by rules and procedures. In the modern era, with all its disruption and executive action, that seems odd. A final jarring dissonance between Smiley’s world and ours is the aesthetic of it all, the drab locations and sallow flesh. It depicts a country wearing its decline on its sleeve. Our contemporary age would never admit to as much (and indeed it did not in the 2011 film version, where everything was carefully stylised and in the colour scheme of a 70s sitcom).

Watching Tinker Tailor today, you feel teleported: you get the thrill of watching something that is complex, that you can’t quite make sense of but desperately wish to. (In 1979, the debate over Tinker Tailor’s complexity continued into the Guardian’s letters pages, with the counterpoint to the Larry Grayson position being articulated by a Dr Graham Nicholls, who made the case that “People love being mystified”.)

You also get to watch something that is slow and often silent, and all the more powerful for that. “Arthur [Hopcraft] in his dialogue left a lot of space for silence,” says Irvin of the celebrated Guardian journalist who went on to a brief but glittering career as a screenwriter. “It wasn’t like working with Pinter, where it was deliberate, but it gave a chance to see what’s going on behind the mask. A spy story is a succession of masks. It’s poker – the silence is when you are trying to read the other’s mind. If people talk a lot, they’re not going to be very good spies. The trick was in timing the silence so that you don’t overdo it and it becomes tedious, but leaving it long enough that it became tantalising.”

Those moments worked as Irvin hoped, and form the centre of Tinker, Tailor. They are like the extended interrogations in Line of Duty, except the tension is more drawn out and there are more gaps the viewer is encouraged to fill. Those interrogations would not have been remotely as effective, however, had they not featured one of the greatest acting performances ever delivered on the small screen.

Sir Alec Guinness, it was suggested at the time, was able to play Smiley because he was rolling in Star Wars money. His reluctance to take the part of Obi-Wan Kenobi had led him to ask for 2% of the film’s box office takings. That turned out to be a smart move and allowed Guinness some latitude in selecting his next roles. According to Irvin, however, that did not mean he leapt at the prospect of Tinker, Tailor. “He needed three lunches with me and certainly a lunch with David [Cornwell, AKA John Le Carré] and the head of MI6 to be convinced that he would commit.”

Eventually he did commit, and Guinness set about fully engaging with a character he described to the Guardian at the time as being “a vulnerable man who … is capable of taking unexpectedly swift and rather harsh action”.

For Irvin, working with Guinness was “a deep, creative partnership”, but it had its strengths and weaknesses. Guinness’s pull meant that the supporting cast – from Ian Richardson to Beryl Reid – were easy to acquire. Requiring more time and patience, however, was Guinness himself.

“Like a lot of great artists, there were moments of great insecurity,” Irvin says. “He rang me at four o’clock in the morning on a Sunday before a shoot, saying that he hadn’t really found George Smiley and that it would be much better if we just recast. He also said that he couldn’t put on any more weight, he didn’t feel right.

“I don’t know whether it was a provocation or not, but this made me quite angry. I said: ‘It’s not about the size of George Smiley’s tummy; it’s about the size of his massive brain, for heaven’s sake.’ We were about to shoot in two hours, so I said: ‘Let’s go back to sleep, we’ve got to get some rest.’ A little later I arrive at Primrose Hill and he’s standing entirely alone in an overcoat and bowler hat, ready to shoot the scene. Any hint of that insecurity had entirely gone.”

Guinness’s insecurity existed alongside the confidence to insist the UK’s chief spy dine with him before he accepted the job. And the same stark contrast is at work in Smiley, too. A paunchy, aged cuckold who looks too frail even to leave his chair, he is capable of plumbing the depths of the human psyche and confronting them.

The contradiction within Smiley served as a reminder that human beings are complicated things, and this complexity is the heart of what makes Tinker Tailor one of the best dramas of the TV age. A lot has changed in the years since it was made, but not that.

[swtorpadawan]

[theoscarsproject]

Agatha (1979). December 1926, Agatha Christie's husband asks for a divorce. She leaves her car and goes missing 11 days. She books into a hotel as Mrs. Neele. Fiction: A US reporter looks for her and investigates.

On paper, this is a movie I should love, but unfortunately it never really gets off the ground. It looks good, and has some beautiful cinematography, but it's boring, and Dustin Hoffman and Vanessa Redgrave deserved better. 4/10.

[mariocki]

The Nearly Man: Reshuffle: June 1975 (1.4, Granada, 1975)

"Any minute now, the sounds of Harold shuffling his pack will be heard. A series of thuds and moans as the various bodies collide, like the blunt instruments they are. All change! To the corridors of impotence!"

[jacksfilmdiary]

Rebecca

1997

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119991/

[bimbokingorodreth]

what’re your top five marine moments? I’m sure they get up to many a shenanigan

1. Obviously the cool marines parkour with Tozer and Daly.

2. In ep 7. when they all immediately come over when Pilk is calling for help with Morfin

3. Hedges smiling at Tozer in ep 4 before leaving for watch

4. MANY good Hedges moments. Such as:

Pat

Vibe

And hyped Hedges. The birthday scene was so good for terror marines in general.

5. Daly always disassociating wherever he is or whatever he’s doing.

There are many other classics such as Hedges’ arthur fists, Mushroom Costume and Healey and Hopcraft being chummy to name a few off the top of my head.

[stretfordender]

The point about football is football. - Arthur Hopcraft

[ivandimarcofotografo]

Observer archive - Alf Ramsey, 28 October 1962

Following Ramsey’s appointment as England football manager, John Arlott explained why it was the ideal appointment, Arthur Hopcraft reported on Everton vs Ramsey’s Ipswich Town, and Ray Green photographed the man and the match.

The Cool Man in Charge by John Arlott

The F.A., this time, has disarmed all reasonable criticism. Alf Ramsey was, from the outset, the ideal manager for the English team. He is not merely a tried and proven expert in football management, he is the right expert, and the right sort of person, for the post. Basically, it matters to him.

Continue reading... https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2018/oct/27/observer-archive-alf-ramsey-28-october-1962

[weloseeveryweek]

Hi, I'm sure there's probably loads of things written on the topic, I wanted to get your opinion - and recs, if you have them! (I'm writing a paper that sorta kinda touches on this topic, but I'm always here to find breaks from studying lol) Do you think George Best was the first real celebrity footballer? I heard him once being compared to the Beatles and I was wondering - did he change how people perceived players? What do you think about him and his legacy (both footballing and otherwise)? :D

Hey there!! Long post under the cut:

OKAY FIRST OFF you gotta tell me all about this paper I’m dying to knowww!!! 

Secondly! I think that the transition of footballers from everyday working men to stardom is slightly more drawn-out than the explosion of Georgie, but he was definitely one of the first (if not the first) to sort of use that? And open up shops and all that when previously you’d just sort of buy a pub after you retired. Gary Imlach writes that the removal of maximum wage was the step towards football celebrities because footballers were finally being paid more than their working class counterparts. (This is entirely based on England which I’m more familiar with - of course other leagues like Italy and Colombia - see Charlie Mitten’s story - paid loads and loads and it’s possible that footballers were already celebrities in those cultures but! I digress!) So in that sense, at least money-wise, you had the break between Ordinary People and Footballers in the 50s before George. 

But you’re right in that George was really the first, like, Huge Celebrity of British Football. Not necessarily celebrity in a famous sense, since I mean Pele was famous before George, but celebrity in the sense that we know them now, I think? Known both on and off the pitch, doing adverts and all that kind of thing. Media frenzies and fangirls etc. You can read chapters 5 and 6 of Duncan Hamilton’s Immortal for more information but it sounds like he really knew how to get his way around the media, doing things like opening boutiques and wearing sombreros. (Yes, you’re right! He was called ‘El Beatle’ and this was given to him after United beat Benfica 5-1 in Europe and he came back wearing that sombrero. Harry Gregg was all ‘good players don’t need a gimmick’ which shows you the other side of the celebrity/player dichotomy.)

I think a part of it also came from Beatlemania and how the whole landscape of media recognition and culture was changing, so to think about the explosion of football celebrities you have to think about the wider context as well. (George tried hard to fit into that - for example his boutique was aimed at ‘the Mod shop for the extrovert male’ and his story is very much tied up in that era.)

Even then I’m not sure if it changed how people perceived players - I mean, his name is the only real Big One that stands out from that period, and if you think about the others, like Sir Bobby, he was still living ye olde family lyfe. Perhaps it’s more accurate to say that George made the transition from player to celebrity possible? 

And even then George wasn’t a full on egomaniac - he was still quiet and kind and sometimes you get the impression that he wasn’t even all that keen on this bunch of shenanigans. Of course this is a very romantic view from a Manchester United fan but I like to think that he was really the most comfortable just playing for us. His legacy is - complicated, but it definitely paved the ground for future stars to burst onto the scene in both senses - think comparisons with Giggsy (football) and Becks (non-football). 

Hm. Maybe celebrity culture is something that can be traced alongside the history of television? For me the real explosion of celebrity culture in football happens when the Premier League begins and that’s all about tv rights etc. And then suddenly you have megastars doing all sorts. (But again as a United fan I basically ignore the 70s and 80s so you might want to ask…*grits teeth* Ian Rush or someone.) But I’m not sure what the scope of your paper is so maybe this isn’t as interesting!

Recs wise - on footballing in the 50s and 60s, I’ve just finished two books that were really helpful because I’d never really stepped into that era before. The Football Man by Arthur Hopcraft is a contemporary account and he did interview Best, which was really interesting. My Father and Other Working Class Football Heroes by Gary Imlach is slightly earlier than Best but gives you a great overview of the change in maximum wage, retain and transfer etc. Immortal by Duncan Hamilton is my go-to George book but Blessed, his own book, is definitely something you’d want to look at as well. I haven’t finished Standing on the Shoulders of Giants by Soren Frank but it’s a cultural history of United and I just flicked through and there’s this bit where he compares Jackson Pollock to Best, which sounds interesting! 

Acacacacademia… Sadly I have lost all my journal access upon graduation but this looks super interesting and up your alley. Honestly, Soccer and Society is great for social history of football and there’re probably tons of things in there. Look at this! And this! Pls….if you have access…. download for meee 

I also just googled and Sport, Media, Culture: Global and Local Dimensions sounds vaguely tangential and interesting, plus MUTV ran a documentary called El Beatle that might be nice if you want to have a watch. And the Independent had this.

Hope this helps or was at least interesting!

[tensileacuity]

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (1979) - John Irvin/Arthur Hopcraft/John le Carre

[ljones41]

"TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY" (1979) Review

"TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY" (1979) Review I would have never thought about watching the BBC's television adaptation of John le Carré's 1974 novel if I had not seen the 2011 movie version. Never. For some reason, I have never been that inclined to read his novels or watch any movie or television adaptations of his work. But after seeing Tomas Alfredson's movie, I had to see this version that starred Alec Guinness. 

Unlike the 2011 movie, this "TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY" was set around the time the miniseries aired, since the Cold War was still in full swing. You know the story. The head of SIS (MI-6 in real life), Control, sends agent Jim Prideaux to Czechoslovakia to meet a Czech general who claims to have information identifying a deep-cover Soviet spy planted in the highest echelons of "Circus" (the nickname for the SIS headquarters). "Operation Testify" proves to be a trap when Prideaux is shot and captured by the Soviets. Due to the mission's failure, both Control and his right-hand man, George Smiley, are forced to retire. But when Ricky Tarr, a British agent gone missing in Portugal, turns up in England with new evidence backing up Control's mole theory, Smiley is recalled to find the mole. He learns from Oliver Lacon, who oversees the country's intelligence services, that Control had four suspects occupying high positions in SIS - Percy Alleline (who assumed the position as the Circus' new head), Toby Esterhase, Bill Haydon and Roy Bland. Smiley, with the help of Peter Twiliam (who happens to be Tarr's immediate supervisor), instigates a secret investigation of Operation Testify to learn the name of the mole, nicknamed "Gerald". To compare a seven-part television miniseries with a motion picture with a running time just barely over two hours seems just a bit too ridiculous to me. Instead, I will merely talk about the former. And what can I say about "TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY"? It was a first-rate production that deserved all of the accolades it had received thirty-seven to thirty-eight years ago. Instead of the usual action-dominated spy stories that have spilled out of Hollywood and the British film industries since the first James Bond movies, "TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY" felt like an well-paced Cold War mystery that featured a good deal of excellent acting, dramatic moments and perhaps the occasional action scene or two on the side. Too many flashbacks can be deadly to a story or a production. But when said production is basically a mystery, flashbacks can be effectively used. Director John Irvin and screenwriter Arthur Hopcraft certainly used the miniseries' flashbacks with great dramatic effect - aside from one particular flashback. The most effective flashback - at least for me - proved to be the back story regarding of Ricky Tarr's affair with Irina, the wife of a Moscow Center intelligence official, in Portugal. This affair leads to Tarr's discovery of new evidence supporting Control's theory of a high-ranking Soviet mole in the Circus. Another flashback that I found very interesting proved to be Sam Collins' recollection of the night when news of Jim Prideaux's capture reached the Circus. The single flashback that failed to resonate with me proved to be Smiley's recollection of his brief meeting with his nemesis, KGB operative-turned-official Karla, during the 1950s. Although the scene featured an excellent performance from Alec Guinness as Smiley and a strong screen presence in the form of a smoldering Patrick Stewart as Karla, the brief scene nearly put me to sleep. I would have been satisfied with a verbal recollection from Smiley. And there were two sequences that I found either unnecessary or disappointing. I found the sequence featuring Prideaux's trip to Czechoslovakia rather disappointing. I realize that both Irvin and Hopcraft's script tried to convey this entire sequence as intriguing action scene. It did not work for me. Considering that most of the sequence was shot at night, I found it rather dull. And it came as a relief when the miniseries moved on to Smiley's recruitment into Operation Testify. Smiley's capture of "Gerald" in the last episode struck me as unsatisfying and anti-climatic. And while watching the miniseries, I realized that one needs a great deal of patience to watch that particular sequence.  And while I certainly had no problem with the miniseries’ length, but I did find Irvin's pacing rather slow at times. The performances featured in "TINKER, TAILOR, SOLIDER, SPY" struck me as outstanding. I have already commented on Patrick Stewart's brief, yet strong silent presence as Karla in one scene. Siân Phillips' portrayal of Smiley's unfaithful wife, Ann, proved to be equally brief. Although the character was discussed in numerous scenes, Phillips did not appear long enough for me to be impressed by her performance. Terence Rigby's portrayal of one of the "Gerald" suspects - Roy Bland - seemed like a waste of time to me. Although Rigby gave a first-rate performance in one scene in which his character is interviewed by Smiley, he spent most of the production as a background character. I found this rather odd, considering his role as one of the major suspects. I also enjoyed the performances of John Standing, Joss Ackland, Alexander Knox and Michael Aldridge, who proved to be effectively smug as the new head of the Circus, Percy Alleline. Ian Richardson was the last person I could imagine portraying the charming, yet acid-tongue womanizer, Bill Haydon. Yet, he really did a fabulous job in the role and it seemed a pity that he never portrayed similar characters, later in his career. I really enjoyed Ian Bannen's performance as disgraced agent, Jim Prideaux. But I must admit there were times when I found it a bit hammy . . . especially in those scenes in his new profession as a schoolmaster. Beryl Reid struck me as perfect in the role of former Circus intelligence analyst, Connie Sachs. She not only conveyed the character's intelligence, but also the latter's joie de vivre that had sadly dampened with time and a surprising job termination. Bernard Hepton's portrayal of mole suspect, Toby Esterhase, struck me as the most unusual role I have ever seen him portray. He was marvelous and slightly eccentric as the Hungarian immigrant who rose to the top echelon of the Circus by toadying to others. Hywel Bennett did a great job in his performance as field agent, Ricki Tarr, projecting both the character's emotions and trapped situation. Michael Jayston's portrayal of Smiley's protégé, Peter Guilliam, struck me as equally emotional. In fact, I found his performance so effective that there were times I found myself wondering if the character was suited for intelligence work. The top prize for best performance definitely belonged to Alec Guinness, for his portrayal of intelligence officer, George Smiley. With delicious subtlety, he did a superb job of conveying every aspect of Smiley's personality. To my knowledge, only five actors have portrayed Smiley either in the movies or on television. I believe that Guinness' portrayal is probably one of the two best interpretations I have come across. "TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY" is not perfect. I believe it has a few flaws that included an unnecessary flashback, an unnecessary action sequence and some very slow pacing. But its virtues - an excellent story, first-rate use of flashbacks and some superb characters portrayed by a cast led by the legendary Alec Guinness - outweighed the flaws considerably. In my opinion, the 1979 miniseries might be one of the best television productions from the 1970s and 80s.

[50yearsofhurt]

A Recharge

My ‘positive’ this week was reading, in the early hours of a cold and dark January morning, words that spoke of a memory of a warm summers day with someone loved. They were part of a poem called, ‘A Recharge’, by Joyce Johnson given to me by Sarah, as a fillip at the start of a long working day. The days grow longer yet ahead of many of us lie several weeks of journeys to and from work on cold dark mornings and evenings. Receiving a few words offered in thoughtfulness and love do indeed act as a recharge. Warmed by the poem, I received another boost on my drive to work that particular morning by the sight of the large golden-coloured moon sitting low on the horizon. I know this, ‘moon illusion’, is a trick of the eye coupled with scattering of blue light, but to me it seemed the moon had over indulged at Christmas and now too heavy, struggled to leave it’s warm and comfortable bed of clouds. Sometimes it’s the simplest of acts or a glimpse of natural phenomena that change the whole tenor of a day. And I cannot close without mention of Graham Taylor, a 'Football Man' as Arthur Hopcraft might have described him. I loved the anecdote of Taylor in his early Watford management days travelling to Newcastle and slipping into St James Park to scout players incognito from the terraces in the Gallowgate End. Chris Waddle, whom Taylor overlooked for call-up when England manager, talked about that disappointment but then went on to speak movingly of Taylor. A measure of the man that Graham Taylor was and maybe also of Waddle. A sad loss. Enjoy your weekend all

[wedigfilmposters]

Agatha (1979)

A fictional account of the real life, eleven day, never explained 1926 disappearance of famed murder mystery writer Agatha Christie is presented. On a cold winter day, her damaged car with ... See full summary »

Director:

 Michael Apted

Writers:

 Kathleen Tynan (screenplay), Arthur Hopcraft(screenplay).

Stars:

 Dustin Hoffman, Vanessa Redgrave, Timothy Dalton

[mariocki]

The Nearly Man: Options: September 1975 (1.7, Granada, 1975)

"Would you like to think about your leadership of the group lately? You may be able to deny that you've actually lied about your attitude, but how often have you blurred your true position? Ingratiated with the government because you thought you were on the verge of office? You misread things, miscalculated, when the group relied on your judgement!"

"Arguable."

"You were determined to play cat and mouse with the one minister you thought - wrongly, we now all know - you could knock over and replace! Personal ambition crippled your judgement!"