So As You Can See, We Get A Lot Of Natural Light.

Sarah Polley, a Canadian actress of some international note, is noted for her intelligence and incredible ability to physically portray emotion without the need for words, but the film of hers that arguably made her known more to audiences around the world is one in which she did not, in fact, appear. Away From Her, her 2006 directorial debut, saw her Oscar nominated for Adapted Screenplay, with her star Julie Christie picking up a nom for Best Actress.

Fiona (Christie) and her husband Grant (Gordon Pinsent) are two sixty-somethings living in a cottage in Canadia as Fiona begins to suffer symptoms of Alzheimer's disease - quite young. At first it is just a few little things, but the film quickly shows her rapid deterioration. Quite intelligent, Fiona accepts her fate, and almost forces Grant into sending her into a care home. The home's policy of not allowing contact with the outside world for thirty days after admission means that by the time Grant gets to visit his wife of 44 years, she can no longer remember who he is, and indeed appears to have started an emotional (if not necessarily physical) relationship with another patient, Aubrey. Aubrey is eventually moved out of the home to remain under the care of his wife Marian (Olympia Dukakis), causing Fiona much trauma and seemingly increasing her descent into the ultimate oblivion she shall find herself in.


Meanwhile, parallel to this is the beginning of an unlikely friendship between Grant and Marian. Grant tracks Marian down to ask her to allow Aubrey to visit Fiona, to provide her with some comfort and joy and perhaps to slow her progression, and the two begin to see that the disease afflicting their spouses gives them much in common - including fears, desires and responsibilities.


Christie's performance is amazing. Her character has many differences to that of Iris Murdoch in that other incredible Alzheimer's performance of the decade, Judi Dench in Iris, in that she does seem to retain a higher level of awareness and dignity - quite possibly we simply do not follow her as deeply into the ravine of forgetfulness that we do with Iris. But her wit and humour provide us with respite in a situation that could otherwise become almost unbearable. And there is a lot of beautiful humanity in the film. Grant loves his wife (and Marian her husband, in a different way) very much, visits her every day despite the fact that she doesn't know who he is. Yet when he sees that her only real happiness in this new world she is inhabiting is given to her by Aubrey, he effectively sacrifices what he feels are his needs and rights as her husband of over four decades to give her the happiness he cannot. And his relationship with Marian is built upon a shared respect of each of their duties to their actual spouses, while they try and retain something in their own lives to keep them moving.


It's a wonderful and understated film. It says just enough to keep you on the edge of heartache, and then draws you back in with a laugh. I find mental disorders such as this the most heartbreaking, so I'm a sucker for films like this and solid performances like Christie's and Dench's. Polley does an amazing job drawing the elements together and continually moving you as you watch, drawing you into their lives and troubles. And considering she was only 27 when the film released it becomes even more extraordinary - her incredible maturity to be able to understand how a marriage almost twice as long as she has lived can work, and work so well, is tremendously applaudable. I guess it takes an actor to work their way into a space where they can represent a cast of characters with an average age thirty years greater than her.


Here's to hoping Polley pulls out something equally as good, and soon, for her sophomore effort. And to Christie getting more work asap - who said there wasn't work for over 40 actresses out there? Well, they're right, there isn't, but when it's this freaking good, it should be more common. 4.5 stars.

For The Record

I quite like our dearest Queen Betty the Second. I think her existence is... nice. Truly. I like the tradition and the formality and the fact that, in reality, there is no true point to her. I like that. Like Victoria Beckham, but with more longevity and probably a bit more poise. (Though don't get me started on Victoria Beckham - mostly I'm in love with her because she just shouldn't exist. And the fact that she does is hysterical.)

But this is not the point. The point is that I've added The Queen to my ticked off list of films that I have watched in the early stages of this marathon.

Stephen Frears' 2006 film gave the Helen Mirren an Oscar for her titular role, and was, in its own quiet and very British way, a little controversial in its examination of the week following the death of the people's princess, Lady Di. Mirren's Betty II and family (James Cromwell as Prince Philip, Alex Jennings as Prince Charles, Sylvia Sims as the Queen Mother) decided to treat the untimely and enormously publicised death as a private matter until her popularity plummeted and, at the behest of Michael Sheen's Tony Blair (newly elected as PM of the ol' UK), decided to return to Buck Pal to make a statement and appear with her people.

I think the real appeal of this film was the fact that it delved into the protocol of the Crown here in England. Dealing with the death of a former royal was 'unprecedented.' The royal family (I'm sure that's meant to be capitalised, but it looked funny so I changed it) didn't see it as appropriate because she was no longer a royal, despite the fact that she was the mother of the third (and, I assume, fourth) in line to the throne. The Queen wouldn't even let Prince Chuck take the royal plane to Paris when Di was in hospital because it wasn't a matter of state. (Please note that all of this is based on what happened in the film - I'm not sure what was fudged.)

However, dear Betty was, technically, correct, I imagine, in saying and behaving the way she did. In terms of protocol. What she had failed to realise is that Di was at the forefront of massive celebrity culture around the world. Coins were minted in the honour of her wedding back in '81. She was followed relentlessly by paparazzi. And she died tragically, suddenly and unexpectedly at the height of another scandal.

This is what the film portrays. A monarch who at that point had been on the throne for 45 years, and hadn't managed to keep up with the way the public were now behaving. Protocol be damned! Put up the standard at Buck Pal and then lower it to half-mast, goddamit, because that's what we want! And then the tabloids keep going and going, running it until the public is at near breaking point.

Mirren does dear Betty very well. Not much of what you imagine (or hope) must be inside the real person escapes in any large fashion, but glimpses are allowed through her incredibly stoic exterior to give an almost humanising portrayal of one of the biggest closed-books I know of. Sheen was an amazing support (almost lead... almost) with his Blair portrayal, coming up against party politics, his young relationship with the Queen as her appointee to lead the country, and against his own wife's differing opinions.

I did, however, find myself at the end of the film without a great deal to say about it. It was a nice film, anchored by a couple of great performances and an interesting story that I remember vividly, but it just didn't seem to... do anything. Which was fine. But I think it was ultimately a piece designed around the exploration of a character who can't really be explored that deeply without making things up - obviously, that wouldn't have gone down well.

Frears has made some better films, I think. His previous, Mrs Henderson Presents (with her TRUE highness, Judi Dench) I adored much more than The Queen. It was a nice film, similar to the Queen's existence, but I'm not ranking it much higher than that. 3 stars.