Saturday, 9 June 2012

The Handmaid’s Tale: A Strangely Broken Tale … 

Hmmm …

You know, I’ve seen a good few films in my time, I really have.

But I’m ALSO thinking that the flick I’ve seen tonight … ?

Is …

Not necessarily bad.

But not necessarily one that I’ll be getting dribbingly excited about.

Hmmm …

Let’s see if we can’t explain, shall we … ?


1990’s The Handmaid’s Tale is set in a not too distantly future USA: where serious environmental damage — and ongoing pollution —  rendered many women sterile.

Focusing on Kate — the Handmaid of the tale, and played by Natasha Richardson — assigned to The Commander (Robert Duvall) and his wife, Serena Joy (Faye Dunaway), as a sexual slave.

And follows her story as she gradually becomes involved with both an underground rebel group, with the cult like organization of the Handmaid group that trained her …

And with the family’s chauffeur, Nick.


Hmmm …

Now, I’ve GOT to admit, I would love to tell you this was a film that was a pleasure to watch.

Unfortunately, I don’t think I can.

You see, having checked out the Wikipedia entry for the film, I find that The Handmaid’s Tale had something of a mixed production: with both the original director dropping the project, after many arguments with the studio.   The original screen writer — Harold Pinter, of all people — withdrawing after completing a draft and a half — I’m guessing, there — and the replacement writer — Margaret Atwood, writer of the novel that the film is based on — being called in as a replacement.

It shows.

The whole effect is that The Handmaid’s Tale is something of an well meaning, but irreparable mess.

Which is a shame, I think.

The Handmaid’s Tale, for all it’s fine cast, and interesting ideas … ?

Could WELL have been a lot better than it actually is.
The Handmaid’s Tale

No comments: