By Matthew Savelloni
“CRY HAVOC! AND LET SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR!”
Harry Feversham is the son of a famous General. However, he shares more of his deceased mother’s introspection and sensitivity than his father’s blood-red passion for war. Deprived of his mother’s sheltering presence, a rift deepens between Harry and the General. He is more concerned with caring and providing for his best girl: an Irish lass named Ethne Eustace. Imbued with what today we would probably label an identity crisis, Harry’s anxiety boils down to an extreme fear of being a coward. That’s not to say he is one; he has, in fact, never been tested. However, his expectation at failing his mates on the field of battle, and his growing distress at letting down Ethne, prompts him to resign his commission in the Army just before he is to set sail for the front lines. His shocking decision prompts the General to disown his son and his three mates to give him white feathers as a sign of what they regard as Harry’s cowardice. To top off his misery, Harry is then presented with a four feather by Ethne who sees his resignation as a betrayal not just to God and country but to the type of man she was hoping to marry. Disgraced, adrift and abandoned, Harry vows to redeem his name, regain his honor and eventually win back the heart of Ethne. Thus begins A.E.W. Mason’s timeless masterpiece THE FOUR FEATHERS.
 |
Mason’s work is a tough one to crack initially. The narrative concerns itself with character solely. Most of the action is relegated to dialogue passed from one personality to the next. The reader rarely witnesses anything firsthand. Our experiences are reduced to impressions analyzed through our knowledge of the players. Every movement in the piece is covered repeatedly by at least two overtures. This can make reading Mason slow going. But once you become accustomed to his method, his real intentions start to bleed through. Mason is examining the effects of war, rule and global dominance. Being on top as a nation costs dearly. Maybe not as substantially as it costs those ruled but nevertheless, the colonization exhibited by Britain in the late 1800’s exacted a heavy toll on its own society. One gets the impression that young men were expected to a man to serve in the Army and fight overseas to protect and expand the homeland’s interests. Women were intended to run the home, to wait for their loved ones to return and serve their needs while they recharged their batteries for a future campaign. Mason avoids critiquing this expectation of servitude directly and accepts it as a background to paint a story of frustrated love, the desperate hope for redemption and disgraced tradition.
Harry’s odyssey carries him into the Sudan disguised as a Greek musician. He involves himself rather obliquely in the activities of his mates and sets about through subterfuge trying to redeem his honor. Ethne meanwhile starts up with Jack Durrance, Harry’s previous best friend who has been blinded by some mysterious ailment during his last campaign. The plot, despite its intricacy, is not the focal point. Mason concentrates on the various suffering endured by each character. Harry’s friends and love interest are haunted by degrees of guilt over their harsh judgment of him, representing the stresses and rigorous effects of the thriving British Empire. THE FOUR FEATHERS’ “happy ending” is delivered only through the honor and sacrifice of a single character. That level of melancholy still resonates painfully in today’s readers.
THE MOVIE – AS PERFORMED BY AND FOR THE WB NETWORK CROWD
 |
THE FOUR FEATHERS has been filmed five times previously: 1915, 1921, 1929, 1939 and 1977. The two most familiar are the 1939 Zoltan Korda version and the 1977 TV movie starring Beau Bridges (yes, he plays an Englishman) and Jane Seymour. Large dramatic licenses are issued whenever Mason’s novel is brought to the silver screen for one simple reason: it’s boring. And that’s not necessarily a criticism in the literary world. One of the worst effects of the post-modern, irony-laden, MTV culture is the lack of appreciation for slow-moving drama. A direct adaptation of Mason’s opus would not include any cinematic adventure or ill fated love-lost and love-regained. And while deliberate movements work in a novel where one’s imagination can fill in the cracks and contemplate deeper implications of a story, on the screen, it’s a lullaby. Movie adaptations always accentuate two aspects of novels whenever possible: sex and violence. Korda’s 1939 version chooses the war at Omdurman to kick off its climax while Mason excludes it entirely from the novel. The TV movie with Beau and Jane pumps up the lovey-dovey stuff while Mason’s characters talk incessantly about their emotions without definitively acting upon them.
I have no doubt that the 2002 version coming our way on September 20th will add rampaging battle scenes and heightened sensuality. The film stars Heath Ledger as Harry, Wes Bentley as Durrance and Kate Hudson as Ethne. Supporting role players include Djimon Hounsou, Michael Sheen, Kris Marshall and Rupert Penry-Jones. The novel is adapted by Michael Shiffer (THE PEACEMAKER, CRIMSON TIDE) and Hossein Amini (THE WINGS OF THE DOVE, JUDE). Shekhar Kapur (ELIZABETH) directs. Kapur’s ELIZABETH was overrated but still an edgy costume drama and how many times have we seen one of those? Linking up disparate screenwriters responsible for CRIMSON TIDE and THE WINGS OF THE DOVE makes sense. Shiffer was obviously hired for his ability to convey warfare and conflict onscreen while Amini has exhibited strength in writing convincing period pieces and tales of repressed love and quiet honor. THE FOUR FEATHERS also boasts Oscar winners shooting the film (Robert Richardson, 1991 for JFK) and scoring the music (James Horner, 1998, TITANIC). Thus far, the studios and producers are trusting their instincts and wisely matching talent to material.
Until you get to the cast. And then it seems as if the powers-that-be chicken out and revert grossly to demographic concerns.
I will make no bones about my bewilderment over Heath Ledger’s popularity. Other than making teenage girls go atwitter, his best role so far has been his ten minutes in MONSTER’S BALL. Not one time during the excruciatingly bad THE PATRIOT, the hideous A KNIGHT’S TALE, or the amusing Australian crime noir TWO HANDS, has Ledger seemed anything other than a bland pretty boy with not much going on behind the eyes. Wes Bentley issued a stunning proclamation of his potential in AMERICAN BEAUTY then disappeared into movie oblivion with THE WHITE RIVER KID, THE CLAIM, and SOUL SURVIVORS. Kate Hudson descends from Hollywood royalty, enjoying a “Thanks, Mom” career from Goldie Hawn. Must be real hard to break into the “Biz” like that. Nevertheless, she has shown promise, most notably in ALMOST FAMOUS, an almost great movie. Still, an Irish leading lady in a period war drama is a big stretch from a hippie-dippy groupie.
CRY, LIKE, WHATEVER AND LET SLIP HOLLYWOOD’S SUITS
The fact that a potentially award-attracting production of A.E.W. Mason’s THE FOUR FEATHERS is opening in mid-September is not a good sign. The forecast is a stormy one indeed with two fronts meeting head-on. One is a very adult, internationally-flavored group of filmmakers slamming up against California hipsters who in pre-production probably thought A.E.W. Mason was the company that delivered office supplies. I wonder if they signed each other’s yearbooks when the movie was done filming. I can see the inclination to go young and chic in the casting. This is a multimillion-dollar epic with a six-month shoot; they need as wide an appeal as possible. You don’t entrust that level of investment to Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes and Julia Ormond but in a perfect world, such a cast would draw informed moviegoers, a species heading up the cultural endangered species list.
Yet despite the fact that Ledger, Hudson and Bentley do not bring a matching track record to the pedigree behind the camera, if there is magic to be mined from their talent, I have faith Kapur will bring it prominently to the surface. He did, after all, introduce us to the dazzling Cate Blanchett. His presence, along with Shiffer’s, Amini’s, Richardson’s and Horner’s, promise at least A-list production values and a dedication to the setting, mood, (limited) plot and spirit of the novel. You’re only as strong as your weakest link. If Bentley can return to his AMERICAN BEAUTY form and Ledger and Hudson can grace us with powerful performances we’ve never seen from either of them previously, then we will all benefit from a strong tale of courage regained and honor redeemed.
“A very thin line separates wits from cowardice, stupidity from bravery.” –Anonymous
SHOOT-BACK HERE! |
ARCHIVES
