What A Character! Dame Margaret Rutherford

Posted on December 16, 2016September 3, 2017 Posted in BlogathonTagged Agatha Christie, Margaret Rutherford, Miss Marble, Once Upon A Screen, Outspoken And Freckled, Paula's Cinema Club, What A Character Blogathon26 Comments

Character actors do not usually star as the lead in a movie; however, their supporting performance is still vital to the success of a film. Their roles varies with unique personalities that are often found to be eccentric, quirky, villainous, or just plain interesting. Whatever the role, you can be sure that an excellent character actor will enhance the plot of the story and the film as a whole. As a matter of fact, many of them have a tenancy to steal the scene.

In my last post, I examined a few acting techniques by character actor, Agnes Moorehead. I felt her techniques helped her to create powerful performances. Obviously, she is one of my favorite actresses; but, there are others. Some of my more current favorites would have to include Robert Duvall, Kathy Bates, Stanley Tucci, Gena Rowlands, and Paul Giamatti and the list goes on. Character actors are that rare breed that you can usually depend on to give an outstanding performance even if the movie or show is a stinker. At the top of my list for favorite character actors would have to be Dame Margaret Rutherford (May 11, 1896 – May 22, 1972).

The first movie I saw this colorful actress in was Murder, She Said (1961). She played Agatha Christie’s super sleuth, Miss Marple. At the time she made this movie, she was 70 years old. This movie was the first of four films by director George Pollack based on Agatha Christie’s sweet, elderly amateur detective with Rutherford as the bold and eccentric Miss Marple .

The film was based on a 1957 novel by Christie, 4:50 From Paddington. In the books, Miss Marple is a serious, soft-spoken, and a well-mannered spinster of independent means. In appearance, she is of small stature. Rutherford isn’t anything like Christie’s image of her beloved character. As a matter of fact, Christie hated all four movies.

Book that movie Murder, She Said is based on

Margaret Rutherford meeting with Agatha Christie

An interesting note, Christie’s first pick to play her beloved Miss Marple was actress Joan Hickson. Hickson actually had a small part in this movie as a maid. Years earlier, Christie seen her in a stage play of another of her novels, Appointment With Death. She sent her a note: I hope one day you will play my dear Miss Marple. And of course, she will, superbly, in the BBC adaption of all the original Miss Marple novels in the 90s.

Unlike Miss Marple of the books, who is genteel and prim in every way, Rutherford’s Miss Marple has the energy of a steam roller and almost the size of one too, with a witty, sharp tongue. I much prefer Rutherford’s interpretation of the character; and, it would appear Agatha Christie admired her as an actress too, despite the fact she loathe the films.

margaret-rutherford-murder-ahoy-1964-d5rxnj

In 1962, Christie dedicated her novel, The Mirror Crack’d On Both Sides, to Rutherford “in admiration.” That speaks volumes for Rutherford’s ingenious portrayal of the indomitable Miss Marple, especially in view of the fact how much the author acknowledged she hated the movies. Miss Hicks final performance as Miss Marple was the based on this particular book in 1992.

The_Mirror_Crack'd_From_Side_to_Side_First_Edition_Cover_1962

To appreciate Rutherford’s portrayal of Miss Marple, you need only view the first ten minutes of this movie. Of course it goes without saying, you will want to finish it too. Murder, She Said begins with Miss Marple moving quickly through Paddington train station. As she walks, upbeat 60s music plays in the background. While watching her, I was thought of Paddington the Bear. I think it was because of her hat and the fact she was at Paddington station. I learned that Rutherford worn her own personal clothes in the movie. I wonder if this helped her to get into “the skin” of her character.

As she walks through the station, she has a porter following her with her bags. She stops at a newspaper stand and quickly buys a paperback novel. Once on board the train and in her compartment, she settles in her seat and puts on her reading glasses. She opens her recently purchase paperback book ominously titled, Death Has Windows.

In the next scene, we see her relaxed hands barely holding on to her recently purchased book, her head resting back, and her eyes shut. Suddenly, a loud passing train abruptly awakens her. Nearing the destination station, the trains are slowing down as they pass each other. As she looks out her window, she watches the people in the slower moving train. She sees a man attempting to eat his sandwich which he quickly puts down when he sees her watching him. Then, she sees a little girl looking out the window in the next compartment. When the little girl sees her, she sticks out her tongue. Our not so prim Miss Marple sticks her tongue out too. That’s when I fell in love with the Rutherford’s Miss Marple. I doubt the book Miss Marple would ever react so child like and ornery.

After that humorous scene, we now see a different compartment with the blinds down. As Miss Marple is still looking out her window, the blinds suddenly fly up, revealing the back of a man with gloved hands wrapped around a woman’s throat. She is fighting for her life; but, cannot break his hold around her neck. Miss Marple frantically watches as he chokes the life out the beautiful blonde woman. Miss Marple reports the murder to the train conductor who enters her compartment to checks her ticket. The ticket conductor is hesitate to report a murder. He sees an Miss Marple as an old maid, waking up after reading a murder mystery, titled Death has Windows, and dreams she saw a murder. He suggests this to her; but, she insists she knows what she saw; and he had better report it.

Next, we see Miss Marple in her own comfortable home. We observe a tidy house except for several newspapers scattered about. Inspector Craddock pays her visit concerning the report. She offers him to set down where he proceeds to sit on her knitting needles. He painfully, explains that they could not find a woman at the train station or hospitals that matched her description. Miss Marple reminded him that she was dead. He replied a through search was made along the whole track line and no body was found. She realizes that the inspector does not believe her. She informs him that she may be a spinster; but, she is not a dotty old maid.

She puts on her cape coat and picks up a stack of books. She marches to her bike and feverishly rides to the library to speak to her librarian friend, Mr. Stringer. Mr Stringer ( Stringer Davis) is not in the books. Rutherford demanded that her real husband play the added part of Miss Marple’s special companion. I love that Rutherford gave Miss Marple this buddy friendship. It made her more earthy and urbane. Their friendship is a joy to watch as she explains to him what they must do. They are adorable and almost child like in their planning.

The plan is to search the grounds around the tracks for the body or for clues to where the body was thrown. Although, Mr Stringer is against the idea considering they are trespassing and it is very dangerous, he does as Miss Marple directs, like all good friends do. After Mr Stringer is nearly hit by a train, Miss Marple finds a clue. Lodged between the stones, she discovers a piece of torn fur from the collar of the coat of the victim. She deduced that the body must have been dragged over the wall.

She decides that she wants to see the estate behind the wall. My Stringer tries to hoist her over the wall. He clumsily helps her to the top but not over it. As she looks from the top to the other side, she sees a man with gun and dog. She decides to change the plan. She finds the address to the estate and becomes an employed as a maid for a referral agency. She requests to work at the estate where she soon learns they have quite a turnover for help. This is another variation from the books. Book Miss Marple never worked a day in her life. Rutherford’s Miss Marple has had many jobs. Once she reports to the house, she finds the Lord and master of the estate does not much approve of her. Again, this is a comedy. Miss Marple is very quick with the subtle insults and sarcasm as she finally solves the crime. Which makes this a delightful movie. Even this trailer for the movie is done in an endearing way to include the audience in the great adventure to solve the crime.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=murder+she+said+you+tube&view=detail&mid=AE7AE1D683DD0C9D9B86AE7AE1D683DD0C9D9B86&

Rutherford is an Oscar winning actress, Golden Globe winner, and has been honored by the Queen of England with the OBE(Order of the British Empire) in 1961 and the DBE (Dame Commander ) in 1967. She has appeared in over 40 movies. Many considered her a National Treasure. I love watching her performances no matter how small or in what varied role she chose to play. To me and to many others, she is a great actress and a according to all those who knew her, a great human being too. A more personal discussion requires a separate blog to do her any justice because her life is amazing.

This is the 5th Annual What a character Blogathon! It is hosted by: Paula’s Cinema Club; Once Upon A Screen; and Outspoken and Freckled. I am very happy to contribute a post about one of my favorite character actors: Margaret Rutherford.

You can read more posts about other wonderful characters actors using the following links:

It’s here! 5th annual WHAT A CHARACTER! BLOGATHON: Day 1

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/23966024/posts/20279

Before The Witch, The Fabulous Agnes Moorehead

Posted on December 6, 2016May 2, 2017 Posted in BlogathonTagged Agnes Moorhead, Bewitched, Character Actress, Jane Eyre, Mrs Parkington, Radio18 Comments

What a delightful subject to be writing about! Agnes Moorehead: A polished and flawless character actress. To celebrate her birthday, December 6th, Crystal, In the Good old Days of Classic Hollywood, came up with the idea for a special Blogathon to celebrate Moorehead’s life and work. So, I would like to thank her for the invitation to contribute and to invite all readers to read more about Moorehead’s work using the link below:

https://crystalkalyana.wordpress.com/2016/09/05/announcing-the-agnes-moorehead-blogathon/

Most of us remember her as Endora, the witch and mother of Samantha Stephens (Elizabeth Montgomery) in the popular 60s TV show, Bewitched (1968 – 1972). Endora was controlling, over the top, bitchy, en vogue, meddling, protective and always the funny “Mama Witch” who could not stand the idea that her daughter was married to a mere mortal. Endora was the real deal when it came to being the ultimate bitch to her son-in-law, Darrin Stephens (played by Dick York and later Dick Sargent). Endora enjoyed to make Darrin’s life miserable in inconvenience ways like changing him into various animals or tempting him to do something naughty to prove to Samantha he was not worthy of her. Of course, Endora’s schemes never worked; but we loved her nonetheless.

When Samantha or Endora would make their magic, they would always make up an incantation that rhymed and used their body to send the spell. Samantha always twitched her nose to create her magic; and, Endora always used the twist of her wrists and hands to perform her enchantments. When I was a kid this would fascinate me. Those small body movements convinced me their magic worked. I have learned that many great actors use physical mannerisms to become the characters they portray. By utilizing the smallest body gestures to convey something about that character’s thoughts or emotions, they appear to become the person they are portraying.

Voice is another tool actors use to help their audience enter into their character’s world. Moorhead was a genius when using these two tools. No matter what Endora was up too, we hung onto her every word. Endora spoke with perfect diction in an unrecognizable accent. Moorehead’s accent had the same effect on me as did Audrey Hepburn’s accent. It sounded a bit British but not really. I know now neither of them were British.

Agnes Moorehead was born in Clinton Massachusetts, near Boston, in 1900, to a mother who was a trained opera singer and a father who was a Presbyterian minister. Both parents, by nature and practice, taught her the incredible value of a powerful, melodic voice. She most assuredly practiced her voice in the Church choir and doing imitations of more colorful parishioners at the family dinner table.

One of the first things I admired about Moorhead was how she completely submerges herself into the roles she plays. She studies each character by learning each characteristic nuance they might display. This most certainly involves but not limited to facial expressions and body movements like hand gestures or the tilt of the head. Once you observe her performances, you truly understand what the term consummate actor really means. It is no wonder her acting career spans over 50 years. Her performances vary in all sorts of entertainment mediums: movies, theater, voice overs, and Radio.

Radio is a great art form. It could be described as the technological poetry of modern man. As a matter of fact, it is Agnes Moorehead’s voice that first brought her to fame. If you think about the early days of radio as an art form rather than just a means of communication, you will come to appreciate those early radio shows which were usually performed live, on the air.

On radio, a story is conveyed through the emotions of the voice and maybe some added background sounds. If you compare the effectiveness of ancient storytellers to radio storytellers, you will find a huge discrepancy. Like radio, ancient storytellers depended not only on a good story, but also the effectiveness of the emotions conveyed in the voice. Unlike radio, storytellers also depended on their physical gestures and movements to impress a story on their audience. Despite this similarity, there is one huge disadvantage for Radio: no one sees the storyteller. The audience relies only on their hearing and listening skills and the talents of a wonderfully gifted voice.

Moorhead had a voice made for Radio. Her most memorable character was the terrified wife on Sorry Wrong Number. She performed it 8 times from 1942 to 1960. Radio led her to another great voice in radio Orson Wells. She became one of the original actors of his Mercury Theatre. However, it is her performance in Sorry Wrong Number that is most memorable to radio audiences. While listening for her cries of help as woman who is finally murdered, it is unforgettable.

So, Moorehead is a woman of many talents. Her voice and mannerisms are used effectively in her art. To understand this better, I decided to look at two very different movie characters in two very different movies that she made within a year of each other. The evil Mrs Reed is the British character in Jane Eyre (1943) and the lovely Baroness Aspasia Conti is the French character in Mrs Parkington (1944).

In Jane Eyre, Moorehead plays Mrs Reed. This movie runs for one hour and 36 minutes, Moorehead may have had a total of 5 minutes screen time. However brief she is on-screen, she is unforgettable as the evil Mrs Reed. This character is a widow with two children. Her husband’s dying wish is that she promise to take care of his orphaned niece, Jane Eyre (Margaret O’Brien). Although Mrs Reed attempts to take care of the high-spirited and very intelligent child, her care involves verbal abuse, neglect, and some old-fashioned torture. She allows her children to bully and abuse Jane also.

Finally, Mrs Reed has had enough of the uncontrollable Jane when she begins getting the best of her son in a fight. She calls for Mr. Brocklehurst who man is the director and treasurer of Lowood School for orphaned girls. Moorehead as Mrs Reed coldly explains to Mr. Brocklehurst that she has done her best with the child and Jane repays her with lies. The whole time during this exchange, Moorehead is calmly petting her lap-dog while her son sits quietly next to her. The boy quietly admires his mother as she speaks as continues to pet the dog. We understand through Moorehead’s characterization that Mrs Reed is a very malicious woman. The message is sent loud and clear: If you let her train and control you like a dog, you too can be petted. High spirited and honest Jane refuses to be a lap dog.

Moorehead’s accent and voice is British with that aristocratic tone throughout her brief conversation. Her accent sounds so natural that you would never know that she was not a British aristocrat. When Jane leaves to go to Lowood School, she turns back to yell at Mrs Reed who is watches her leave from a window. Basically, Jane tells back at her that if she was a liar, she would say she loves Mrs Reed and that she would miss her. But, she is not a liar; and, she hates Mrs Reed and hopes never to see her face again. Jane ends by saying that Mrs Reed was cruel and cold-hearted; and, she refuses to come back to visit her, never to return.

Years later, a grown up Jane does go back to a much older and sick Mrs Reed. Her son and Jane’s abuser, gambled away the family fortune, and mostly stayed with a bad crowd in a drunken stupor. He eventually commits suicide. Mrs Reed has a stroke upon hearing of her son’s death and cannot recover. A completely different Mrs Reed emerges. She begs Jane not to leave her. Jane forgives her and promises to never leave. Moorhead lies dying in bed as we last see her in this movie. She is weak and unclear of her surroundings. Yet,even in this very emotional reunion, Moorehead conveys in her characterization of Mrs Reed a concern for only herself. No remorse or apologies can be found from the cold and possibly evil Mrs Reed for poor, sweet Jane.

In contrast, in the movie Mrs Parkington, Moorhead was not the first choice to play lovable Baroness Conti. Moorhead feared being typecast as a dark, unlikable character; so, she fought hard for this part. She convinced the director to look at her audition. He saw it and agreed that she would be perfect for the part. Just to emphasize how good she was as the Baroness, she received a Golden Globe and an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Mrs Parkington stars another one of my favorite actresses, Geer Garson, who plays the titled character: Susie Parkington. Her husband Major Augustus Parkington is played by likeable actor Walter Pigeon. An actor who also has a great voice. He has a resonating baritone voice. At the beginning of the movie he first sees Susie looking out a second story window. He winks and she winks back. He is impressed with the lovely, decisively bold Susie. He falls fast for this impoverished hard-working young lady. He finds her lovely, inquisitive, smart and charming. Susie works as a maid in her mother’s boarding house. When the Major asks to rent a room, he is told there are none available. So, smart, inquisitive Susie graciously gives up her room for him to rent. She is a smart cookie who recognizes an opportunity when it knocks. We soon discover the life of the town depends on a silver mine owed by the powerful and charismatic, Augustus Parkington. Susie really is a smart cookie.

This movie reminds me of several movies that follows. It is basically a Cinderella story that shows what happens after she marries the Prince (Ever After, 1990). It begins with Mrs Parkington 86th Birthday dinner. During the event, she reminisces about her life with the decreased”Major.” This is very similar to the television movie-series, Woman of Substance (1984). At the “Christmas dinner party” we meet the Parkington’s spoiled children and grandchildren who prove to be unworthy of their inheritance and power. There is one exception, who is a shining star, granddaughter, Jane.

It is during Mrs Parkington’s trip to the past, that we meet Moorehead’s character, Baroness Anpasita Conti. Again, she uses every aspect of her body and voice to provide the movie viewer with a completely believable person. The Baroness is a French aristocrat who is the Major’s main squeeze. She is also his confident and friend. We first see the Baroness while she is still in bed. The Major abruptly wakes her when he rushes in to shock her with the announcement that he just married. He confesses that he is a scoundrel; but, he loves the girl. He asked his friend the Baroness to help his new bride adjust to a different social class that he feels his new bride would be totally at lost.

The Baroness does some of her own confession. She asked the Major to open the Windows and pull back the drapes. She wants him to take a long hard look at the real woman, without the shadows and “war paint.” She is letting him know that this is the real her without the masks, cosmetics and pretense. The Major is a little surprised to learn that she is much older than he realize. She is his friend and will help his bride. This is definitely a twist. Why would we believe that his long time mistress would want to help his new bride? That is an arduous task for any actress, let alone one who has brilliantly convinced audiences that she is the impediment of evil. Moorhead plays such villainous characters it is understandable why the director hesitated to cast her for this part. Only a very talented actress like Moorehead could convince the audience, that the Baroness is honestly this loyal to her friend the Major.

With her French accent and her open expressions, she uses her hands and eyes to convey complete sincerity. When she exposes her physical flawlessly of lost youth, she is saying: the gloves are off, where do we begin? The consummate actress has us totally convinced she is a caring, loving friend of the Major’s in any way he needs her. It is also in a way, to make each of us wish the Baroness was our friend too.

It is no surprise that Moorehead received an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting actress for her performance in Mrs Parkington. When one compares the evil Mrs Reed with the tender Baroness Conti, you can see two completely different people. These two women are nothing alike. They do not even look-alike even though they are played by the same actress. If you study the pictures of the two characters, you can see the unfriendly, expressionless face of Mrs Reed in contrast to the relaxed and open face of the Baroness. If you listen to each, not only are their accents different, English verses French, but in their pitch and pause within each sentence. Which craft is this? Certainly, not witchcraft.

If Agnes Moorehead were alive today, she would have.

N: celebrated her 116th birthday. Unfortunately, she passed away at the age of 74 from uterine cancer. She always believed her cancer came from exposure to radiation poisoning from a movie site in the Nevada desert. She was one of the other 54 cancer victims, which included movie legend, John Wayne, who worked on that movie, The Conquered (1958). Apparently, a weeks before the shoot began, atomic testing done there.

Agnes Moorehead was a truly gifted artist who could work miracles on film, radio, and in person. She mesmerize us with the sheer force of her personality, imagination and skills. Her dedication to her arts gave us unforgettable characters. Her attention to detail as she studied the people she met and the characters she played gave us unforgettable characters. Those close to her described her grace and sense of humor. She certainly had a brilliant career. In closing, she proved she was so much more than even Endora’s magic could conjure up.

https://crystalkalyana.wordpress.com/2016/09/05/announcing-the-agnes-moorehead-blogathon/

From Fiction to Flim: Outlander’s Costume Designer Terri Dresbach

Posted on October 28, 2016February 15, 2018 Posted in Appearnce, accuracy, description, makeup, casting, costume, and more, BlogathonTagged Caitrinona Balfe, Diana Gabaldon, Terry Dresbach20 Comments

Vivan Leigh as Scarlette O’Hara

How could anyone forget the scene in Gone With The Wind when Scarlett O’Hara (Vivian Leigh) creates a beautiful emerald-green dress made from hanging drapes? Despite the war, Scarlett frantically searched and found fabric to sew herself a fashionable dress. This inspiration was the by-product of “Necessity.” According to awards winning costume designer, Terry Dresbach, while working within the time constraints of a weekly TV show and building a workshop from scratch, she claims this is why people lost their heads in 18th century France… people were sick to death of doing all this stuff and not getting paid for it. She understands the pressure of her work and for those of her teams. From designing her own fabrics to embroidery machines, there is a lot of work to making thousands of costumes. Yet, all of this time consuming work is not the exciting part or even the heart of what she does. Her costume designs are not just a piece of clothing but “the embodiment of a character.” Dresbach defines the difference between a fashion designer and a costume designer as this: costume designers are storytellers. They create people from the ground up. So, where does that leave the author’s book? Dresbach says the book is the blueprint but not the bible.

As a fan of Outlander, I have seen her beautiful creations for two wonderful seasons; however, I would not have been motivated enough to learn about Dresbach and her team’s painstaking work if it had not been for Christina Wehner and Andrea Lindgren’s invitation to contribute in their sponsored Blogfest: Characters in Costume: Fiction and Film. I would like to thank her for this invitation and for the opportunity to contribute to this intriguing and enjoyable topic. I encourage everyone to read an array of blogs written for and contributed to this blogfest. This is the link ….

https://christinawehner.wordpress.com/2016/09/07/announcing-the-characters-in-costume-blogfest-fiction-and-film/

Outlander is a television series that can be described as a romantic adventure, sometimes fantasy, that spans over two centuries. It is also produced with historical accuracy. It is based on a series of bestselling novels written by author Diana Gabaldon. Although Gabaldon is a brilliant storyteller, she also has the mind of a scientist. When is comes to anything that surrounds her story, like any great novelist, she does her research.

Many of Gabaldon’s characters and events are taken from historical record. By implementing history in the story, readers wholeheartedly absorb the elements of time travel, magic, and even at times, the supernatural.

Dresbach has an intimidating challenge before her. The show begins with a British Army Nurse, Claire Randall (Caitriona Balfe) in a British hospital, during combat, in war-torn France (1945). Then, a year later in the Scottish Highlands, we find Claire and her husband Frank Randall (Tobias Menzies) on a second honeymoon before he starts his new job as a history professor at Oxford. Next, we find Claire traveling back in time in 1743, three years before the second Jacobite Rising (1746). It is here she meets and falls in love with outlaw and tragic hero, Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan). Finally, the season ends with the couple sailing for Paris France to start a new life. All of this in just the first season.

To design and make thousands of costumes that are historically accurate and covers several eras of time in different locations like England, Scotland, France, and Boston within a relatively short amount of time can make Santa’s workshop look easy in comparison. There are books and a numerous magazine articles (onlinks that I used as a source) on Dresbach’s workshop and the making of Outlander.

When comparing a fictional character’s dress to their film counterpart, Dresbach’s interpretation is very close but definitely different. To better understand the connection between history and fiction and her artistic work and interpretation, it is necessary to look at a few examples of her designs. Dresbach uses subtle visual cues in her storytelling. For instance, the everyday task of getting dressed, or in the symbolism and functionally of a uniform and even knowing the mindset of a character by their choice of garment.

To give you an example of how historically accurate Dresbach’s costumes are, here is a “deleted” scene, really an edited scene, from the Season I. Here you find newlyweds waking up in their first home. Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan) is dressing himself in his Highlander kilt as Claire(Caitriona Balfe) tries to encourage him back to bed. The Kilt is the national symbol of Scotland. When a man wears a kilt, he is referred to as a “Man and a Half.” A full kilt is two yards wide and six to eight yards long. This garment isn’t just considered functional and life saving, it also represents a man’s sense of honor. This is one of the reasons the British outlawed the wearing of kilts or tartans from 1746 to 1782. Seriously, when have you seen a man put on such a cherished garment? In the movies or on television? None? So, Sam Heughan dresses himself in this very complex garment. Watch as Heughan carefully and with pride fold each pleat (sett: one inch exposed pleat) in this very complicated process of putting on a belted full kilt.

Another example of Dresbach clear attention to historical and character costume design can be seen in the first morning dressing of the beloved, time traveller from the 20th century, Claire in 18th century noble women’s dress. Gabaldon describes this in Book I, Outlander, chapter 5, page 65:

Mistress FitzGibbons …laid out a pile of garments on the bed. There was a long yellowish linen chemise, with a thin edging of lace, a petticoat of fine cotton, two overshirts in shades of brown, and a pale lemon-yellow bodice. Brown-striped stockings of wool and a pair of yellow slippers completed the ensemble. … Turning out the pocket like a gunnysack, she produced a handful of ribbons and bits of jewelry.

In this description from the book, Gabaldon does not mention the bum roll or the putting on of layers. Not to worry Dresbach doesn’t miss a tick. You can witness for yourself how Dresbach dresses Claire in the the Leoch castle. Here is the scene from the Season I. Claire is being dressed for the first time in 18th century clothing. This is how the writers and directors decided to interpret that section of the book; and how Dresbach dressed her. In the book, Claire is given yellow slippers. That is not a color you would want to wear in a drafty, dirty castle. I like how the writers added Mrs FitzGibbons’s interpretation of Claire’s scanty discarded modern undergarments: If this scene doesn’t convince anyone of how a costume designer is every bit as important to a character and story, nothing ever will. Again, this scene was edited and not completely deleted in the show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwEAiWV9PR0

To further explain the historical detail that Dresbach uses in her work, here are two photos of baddie Captain Black Jack Randall (Tobias Menzies beautifully played dual roles, 20th century husband, Frank Randall and 18th century, evil Black Jack Randall). The first photo is as a Captain Jack Randall in Season I and the other is of him later in Season II, as a demoted officer. Look carefully at the two uniforms. They are different…brass buttons and all. Without being told, we know that he has been demoted. Would most fans of the show notice? Probably not, but again Desbach is creating character and storytelling through her designs.

Such attention to detail, helps builds suspense. A perfect example of this can be seen on the Jamie and Claire’s wedding night. Poor virgin Jamie, has to untie some 60 loops on Claire’s bodice/corset before he can even see what is in store for him, for that night and for life. While Jamie painstakingly unties, you have time to see and understand the desire and clumsiness of a first timer. It is the most honest and sexiest honeymoon scene, I have ever seen on film. I cannot imagine such a scene being possible without Dresbach’s costume designs. How long does it take Jamie to untie each of those loops? A while, which to him probably felt like forever. Costume design is as important to the story and character as are the actors, writers, director, and crew.

I would like to add one more personal opinion about the concept that Outlander as a “bodice ripping” Fembolt fest. First of all, most men could not rip open a bodice with their bare hands; unless, it was untied first or cut. I mean a historical bodice not a Fredericks of Hollywood or Victoria Secret bustier. If a man even tried to rip the bodice, it would take a very long time. There is whale bone or animal bone sewed along the sides to keep you in and for it not to lose its shape. Plus, it is an expensive piece of clothing to replace. Now, a person could cut it away the bodice like Black Jack did to Claire before he attempted to rape her; but, violently forcing a person to have sex is not sexy. It is criminal. Romance writers need to double-check their book covers to make sure they are not sending the wrong message out there about the difference between rape and romance. In Gabaldon’s books there is rape and one spanking. Also in the books, there is nothing sexy about it just like in reality. This is a societal problem; and, I repeat a criminal act. I felt I needed to add this.

Here are some visual aids about real corset or bodices:

The last example of Dresbach’s design I would like to point out is the Claire’s clothes in Versailles France during the reign of Louis XIV. As Dresbach explained this is a directive of executive producer, husband Ron D. Moore, 18th century should be as foreign to 20th century Claire as if she landed on another planet. In the first season, Claire’s clothes were borrowed. In the second season, she had them designed. When I first saw the designs, I did not understand why her dresses were so historically skewed. I wondered why Claire’s clothes were decidedly different than that of the fashion of the day. I wish they would have wrote in a scene at the dressmaker’s salon where you see and hear Claire’s input on how to design her clothes. Now, it makes perfect sense why there is a 20th century in her flaire in her 18th century dress.

When Dresbach refers to herself and other costume designers as storytellers, I understand her completely now. I see how she works with actors to give birth their characters. From dressing in the morning, to wearing kilts to uniforms of honor, and to designing their clothes in another century, it makes perfect sense.

Before learning about Terry Dresbach, the only costume designer that I could name was the late, great Edith Head. Now, I am in awe of Dresbach. To me she is the ultimate costumer designer. Even her name is the perfect name for a dress designer. Terry can “tear” into that cloth or that project. Dres? Really? That is too obvious. Bach? The German passion to create art or visual music for the eyes, the “dress.” Personally, I think Terry Dresbach is as close to a superhero you can get. Sorry, Ron Moore (producer, writer) but I could easily see Deadpool in Terry’s future. Terry Dresbach brings a character to life from the pages of fiction. Without her, their story cannot be fully told because the actors wear the skin of their garments within their soul.

Dresbach’s Web site address:

http://www.terrydresbach.com/posts-by-category/

OnLine Sources:

http://www.latimes.com/fashion/la-ig-adv-outlander-costumes-20160607-snap-story.html

http://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/a15048/terry-dresbach-outlander-season-2-costumes/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/terry-dresbach/

http://www.goldenglobes.com/articles/dressing-romance-outlander-%E2%80%93-genius-terry-dresbach

‘Outlander’ Costume Designer Terry Dresbach Talks Bringing History to Life

Terry Dresbach in her own words:

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=0_owiLQMmq4

The Heiress: What I learned at the Movies Blogathon

Posted on October 16, 2016April 20, 2017 Posted in Blogathon14 Comments

I would to thank Kristina (Speakeasy) and Ruth (Sliver Screenings) for hosting this blogathon: Things I Learned at the Movies. I really enjoyed writing on this topic

Things I Learned from the Movies: Day 1 Recap

To say movies can make an impression or can teach people life lessons is an understatement, especially for an adolescent. Many describe a youth’s ability to absorb knowledge to that of a sponge since they are always looking for information in order to understand the world around them. The prime problem is they used flawed judgement and logic. This frontal part of the brain does not completely develop until they are well through their teens. That is probably why the movie, The Heiress (1949) haunted me for most of my life while it taught me a few important lessons about the complexities of human relationships and a woman’s role in relation to her power.

In 1969, my perception of a woman’s role was heavily influenced as I read and viewed two wonderful classics at the tender age of 14. Like most of my peers, I avoided watching anything in black and white; unless, it was a featurette like Our Gang, The Three Stooges, Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello or Charlie Chaplin movie clips. In other words, I only watched the slap stick comedies. The Heiress was the first drama I watched on the sliver screen, at least from beginning to end. It was during the time that I daydreamed of what it would be like to be an adult. How easy life would be when I became independent and make my own decisions. What little did I know then.

If you have not seen the movie, The Heiress, I warn you; there are spoilers ahead. If you have not seen it, I urge any movie lover to watch it. This movie was nominated for eight Academy Awards. It won four: Best Actress in a Drama (second Oscar for Olivia de Havilland) Best Original score by Alan Copeland, Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design.

It was directed by William Wyler (Little Foxes, 1941 and The Best Years of Our Lives, 1946). Wyler is considered one of greatest directors even today. Besides Olivia de Hallivand’s Oscar winning performance, it also included the third film for newcomer and hottie, Montgomery Clift. He was cast as the fortune hunter. He is the charming and dashing, Morris Townsend. It was adapted to screen by married couple, Augustus and Ruth Goetz. Their play, then screen play, was adapted from a magazine article, later a book, by Henry James: Washington Square. James claimed it was based on a true story told to him by a friend. Enough said, if you haven’t seen, please do.

So, in the late 60s, I was home trying ok to read the “boring” Odyssey by Homer. It was a Freshman English assignment. Poor Penelope, weaving that tapestry by day and taking it apart at night. While these horrible men, suitors who took over her home, are destroying her property during their drunken partying. They demanded, by ancient Greek law, for her to choose a new husband. Once she is married, her new husband would possess and own all her property and titles and even her, herself. Women were considered the property of their fathers or husbands. I was so happy to be living in modern times in the southern state of Florida. Women even had the right to vote, though it was not encouraged. Yet, even in the 60s a woman still needed the signature of her father or husband to open a checking account.

Lesson One: Nothing is written in stone that cannot be changed; no matter how long it’s been done or how splendidly advanced the item or thinking.

Penelope was compelled to promised to choose one of the invading house guests as a husband. She had only one small request: She would be allowed to complete a tapestry before she had to choose. She successfully bought time to think and find a solution. To increase her time and advantage, every night, she would secretly unravel the work she did during the day. She was Odysseus’ widow. A widow with no proof her husband, King of Ithaca, was dead. A widow who still loved her husband very much but has not seen him for twenty years due to the Trojan War. To a teenager in angst, this is the ultimate romance. So, for any Outlander fans who happened upon this blog, I want you to know that I really “get” Jamie and Claire who are still madly in love after twenty years and two centuries apart.

Lesson Two: Real heroes are regular people who do miraculous things during desperate times.

Since this Blogathon is about what we learned through the movies, I have to explain why I even watched a black and white movie at fourteen. Although Penelope’s challenges intrigued me at the time, I still would rather do anything then keep reading that archaic story. With decision-making skill on target, I turned on the television

There she was: a plain Jane with no self-confidence but possibly intelligence and a seemingly broken spirit. Yes, I identified with Catherine Sloper (Olivia de Havilland) immediately. In just a few minutes, I understood her and her predicament with a domineering parent. Unlike me, she was an only child. She carried the guilt of her mother dying due to her birth. Catherine’s father, Doctor Austin Sloper (Ralph Richardson), will not let her forget that his beautiful and talented wife is no more because of this girl. I certainly understood guilt, whether real or imagined, of a disappointed parent. Doctor Sloper complains to his sister and Catherine’s aunts how disappointed he is with his daughter. He has spent a fortune on schools of music, dance, and social graces; and, none of them improved Catherine in his eyes. She will never measure up to her beautiful and lovely mother. Yes, as a teenager, I really felt her pain, her guilt and even her uncomfortable shyness around everyone, especially her only parent.

Lesson Three: Never let your children feel unloved or not valued for who they are really are, flawed and human.

Catherine’s aunt, Lavinia (Miriam Hopkins) is a widow who the Doctor invited to live with them as a chaperone and guide for Catherine. He hoped she could help Catherine with her awkward and at times her nonexistence conversation with others outside of the home. From the Doctor and Lavinia’s discussion, we learn that Catherine usually hides in a corner to avoid people and embarrassment during social events. As a matter of fact, when the Doctor asks his daughter about an Engagement Ball for his niece, she explains that she cannot go since she is working on her embroidery. Wait a minute, this sounds like a Penelope excuse. From ancient Greece to New York in the late 1800s, women’s roles have not changed much if we are still using the sewing excuse to get out of doing what a male in authority wants her to do. Oh yeah, I get Catherine.

At the ball, Catherine is forced upon an eligible bachelor who has no interest in her at all. He begrudgingly dances the steps and afterwards, hurriedly places Catherine on a garden bench. He asks if she would like a drink with no intention of bringing it back to her. He has successfully escaped. Sadly, Catherine realizes she has been disposed of again. After Aunt Lavinia sits with her to console her hurt feelings, an extremely handsome Morris Townsend introduces himself and asks Catherine for a dance. Frighten Catherine appears to nearly jumps out of her own skin. She has a hard time looking in his eyes. She apologizes and tells a lie that she is booked until the fifth dance. At this point, her aunt seizes the opportunity to leave them alone. Morris sits next to her and informs her that his dance card is full too. He shows her his blank dance card. Then, Catherine laughs and shows Morris her blank dance card.

Lesson Four: If you want to put people at ease, be willing to laugh at yourself.

Morris sweet talks Catherine into a dance. While they are awkwardly dancing, he stops and politely asks for an arrangement: I will not kick you while we dance, if you will not kick me. Catherine laughs again. They begin the dance again. This time he instructs her to look at him as he counts the beats. Before, you know it, Catherine is no longer self-conscious; and, you can see her actually enjoying herself. To the point, where she even dances a bit without a partner. The couple go back to the bench, where Catherine nervously fans herself. Thinking she might need a drink to cool down, Morris asks if she would like a drink. She adamantly refuses. You can actually see the fear in her eyes at the though of Morris’ abandonment. Not understanding her strong objection to the refreshment, he asks if she is a member of the Temperance Movement. She replies that she thinks she is. Morris laughs, not believing her, and says he is not. He leaves to get them both a drink.

While Morris is away, aunt Lavinia returns with an overly enthusiastic dancer that she graciously dumps on poor Catherine. While Catherine is trying to keep up with the dancing fool, Morris returns with the drinks. He is very disappointed that Catherine had not waited for him. Aunt Lavinia sees this disappointment and tries to soothe his hurt ego . During this exchange, the Doctor finds Lavinia talking to Morris and informs her they should go. Morris pleas with the Doctor to stay. You can almost see the disdain on his face for this young upstart, a stranger, trying to tell him what to do. It is obvious to the Doctor Morris, without proper introductions, is a fortune hunter, especially since he is interested in Catherine. Once Catherine returns, she apologizes for being detained withthe dance trap. Morris laughs and says he is glad she did not intend to dance with him; or, he may have been forced to call him out to fight with sabers. Again, Catherine laughs. Morris then asks what her what her father’s office hours were. Innocently, Catherine asks if he is ill. Again, Morris laughs. No he says, to a shocked Catherine, I want to call on you.

Aunt Lavinia is enchanted with the handsome Morris too; and, she encourages him to pay a call on them when doctor daddy is not home. I think to myself, great idea. This will keep the Doctor from spoiling their developing relationship. Everyone knows Catherine has zero chance of not falling in love with the charismatic, kind, and doting Morris. Poor girl is starved for positive male attention. Of course, Morris is a perfect Prince Charming. You know she is in over her head when he brings sheet music to the house to play on the piano. Morris plays and sings, in French…the language of love, a 18th century French love song, Plaisir D’Amor. If you are unfamiliar with this song, the melody of the song reminds me of a love song covered by Elvis: I Can’t Help Falling in Love. Morris asks Catherine if she knew what the words meant. She does not. Morris plays the melody again but speaks the words in English:

The joys of love lasts but a short time while…the pain of love lasts all your life.

Of course, once the father is made aware of his daughter’s deceitful relationship, aided and encouraged by her chaperone, aunt Lavinia, he decides to put an end to their courtship. For years, I often wondered why he reacted this way. He obviously viewed Catherine as a burden. He believed his money would be the only thing that would attract any suitors. So, why, did he take such an offend to Morris? I had to wait until I was older to understand that there may have been many reasons. One reasons might have been that he considered Catherine as his property, to marry off to a man of his choosing and not hers. Let’s face it, Morris did not ask her father if he could court her. He was smart enough to know that Doctor Sloper had an instant dislike for him. Hence, the sneaking around to see her when the Doctor was at work.

Another reason could have been that he saw that Morris was as beautiful as his late wife. Some part of him wanted to punish his daughter for keeping him from his beloved. She didn’t deserve the handsome Morris. At least, that’s one of my the thought that satisfied my confusion of his particular hostile reaction to Morris. In the play, the character of Morris was definitely a rake. No one doubted he did not love Catherine. In the movie, the character was purposefully played ambiguously. The audience thought he might be greedy and wanted the money; but, he could have fallen in love with Catherine too. The reason was too not present newbie Montgomery Clift, future heart-throb, as a villain. What it really did was allow the audience to believe as Catherine that he was capable of love; and therefore, he might love her.

Lesson Five: People who claim to love us are still capable of doing cruel things to us too.

Well if you want to know or come up with your own thoughts to what happens in this wonderful story, you have to watch the movie. I never spoil the best part or parts of anything. I wish I could sometimes…espicially with the turn of events in this particular movie. Just like Homer in his tales of story weaving, more contemporary stories weave theirs too with as many twists and turns to make all of us think and hopefully understand our own life through the Arts.

Lesson Six: Stories of women throughout time have a common thread, sometimes literally, it is a story of struggle, to embrace their power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLXzow5YP7U#action=share

Monty Python: The Meaning of Life

Posted on October 3, 2016February 9, 2017 Posted in Blogathon18 Comments

Continue reading “Monty Python: The Meaning of Life” →

From North and South to Dallas: Lesley Anne Down

Posted on September 20, 2016September 21, 2016 Posted in Blogathon, Uncategorized16 Comments

https://weegiemidget.wordpress.com/

As part of the Dallas Blogathon, bloggers were asked to pick an actor from the long-running TV show Dallas (1978-1991). It was requested that we write a blog about a regular or a guest star on the show but in a different role, other than Dallas. It was suggested to me to pick Lesley Anne Down; since, I am a fan of Patrick Swayze; and,they both stared in the mini -series North And South. It is a great suggestion; but, I never seen North and South. So I decided to write about Lesley Ann Warren in Victor/Victoria. I love that movie.

Of course, that was a huge mistake. I felt a little better later when I read that Lesley Anne Down joked with a reporter that she is constantly getting mail for Lesley Ann Warren. After reading her candid comment about people mixing up the two actresses, I felt a connection; and, I instantly knew that I really liked her as a person. Even though I knew next to nothing about her. So, I bought the DVD North and South and prepared for a bingefest. It is 1392 minutes long without commercials. That is 23.2 hours of movie watching. Basically, it took me 3 days to binge watch this mini-series. Was it worth it? Absolutely!

The beautiful, British Down co-starred in Dallas in 1990. In my humble opinion, she is as beautiful as Ava Gardner (who died that same year of pneumonia) or Elizabeth Taylor. In Dallas, season 11, she played Stephanie Rogers. In her role as an expert public relations agent, she is intent on capturing the heart and mind of Cliff Barnes, J.R. Ewing’s nemesis on the show. During this time, she signed a contract for a 10-week shoot. She created quite a stir with the salary she negotiated for her role in the show. An unheard of amount of $250,000. Who is this actress who was able to secure such a lucrative amount of money? Remember this was before the big money of Oprah Winfrey or Ray Romano or even the equality pay demanded by Hollywood actresses today. I think part of the answer lies in her stunning performance as Madelyn Fabray- LaMott in the Emmy award-winning North and South (1985-1986).

Ms Down was born in London, England on March 17,1954. She started modeling at the tender age of ten. Although Down retired two years ago at the age of 60, most American audiences can still remember her charismatic portrayal as Madelyn Fabray LaMott in North and South. This mini-series is based on three books of historical fiction by author John Jakes. His trilogy follows the friendship of two West Point cadets and their families before, during, and after the American Civil War. This is a war that is described as a war that forced brother against brother and nearly destroys both in the process.

The Maines are from South Carolina and the Hazards are from Northern Pennsylvania. Patrick Swayze plays Orry Maines and James Read plays George Hazard. Before Orry Maines meets George (his Bestie), he meets Madelyn soon after he said his goodbyes to his family. While traveling on the road to the pretigous West Point, to train as an officer in the United States Army, he comes across a coach lying on its side in water.

Madelyn’s coach wheel had broken and turned itself over in a section of a flooded road. Orry rides up and sees the beautiful southern belle in distress and promptly jumps from his horse to assist. When she explains to him she is on her way to meet her father who is visiting the owner of the LaMott plantation, Orry offers to take her on his horse (side-saddle, of course). Apparently, the LaMott plantation is neighbors to the Maines’ plantation. Little does Madelyn know that her French Daddy is shopping for a rich husband for her. While at the same time evil and mean plantation owner Daniel LaMott (played perfectly by actor David Caradine) is shopping for a southern bell- trophy wife. By the time Orry and Madelyn arrive at the LaMott planation, Orry knows she is the woman he wants to be with for the rest of his life. However after they arrive, Orry must tell her that he will not see her again for two years due to his training at West Point. The newly discovered star-crossed lovers promise to wait for one another.

They keep their promises and write daily; but, neither one will receive that first letter. Daddy Fabray intercepts each letter coming in and each letter going out. He wants his daughter to marry the filthy rich and powerful LaMott. Madelyn eventually is persuaded that Orry must have found someone else or decided she was not the girl for him after all. Meanwhile, LaMott is working hard at wooing her by spoiling her with his loving attentions and gifts.

I mean really, what’s a girl going to do? It has been over two years and no word from Orry. Madelyn finally gives in to her father’s and LaMott’s encouragements. She agrees to marry LaMott. Can you believe it? On their wedding day, Orry comes home. He still loves her; and as soon as he speaks to her and looks into her beautiful eyes, she admits, she still loves him too; but, she cannot love him back. She is a married lady, now. As if it would be easy to forget you love handsome and kind-hearted Orry over mean-spirited not so cute LaMott? I mean, really! What’s a girl suppose to do?

North and South — NORTH AND SOUTH, Patrick Swayze, Lesley-Anne Down, 1985,

Ms Down plays the long-suffering and abused wife so well that even the most virtuous audience wants her and Orry to “hook up” and have their secret adulterous affair. Down completely submerges herself in the role of Madelyn to such a degree that you believe every unbelievable facet of her pure and good personality. One of the elements of her portrayal of Madelyn that makes her character believable, is her sharply crafted southern accent. It is this accent that definitely aids her in achieving such a stunning performance. Unless you are an excellent southern actor like Billy Bob Thornton or a superb actor like Tom Hardy in “Lawless,” most actors articulate poor southern accents. For Patrick Swayze, this was not so much of a challenge because he is a southerner from Texas. Most people can sound somewhat southerner; but, very few can speak with an accent that sounds aristocratic and culturally enriched. Ms Down accomplished both the mannerisms and the authentic accent while avoiding the stereotype that most southern audiences have had to endure while watching movies or Television. With an array of talented qualities in Down’s performance, it is no wonder why she was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actress in a television drama in 1986.

In an interview, Down gave excellent advice about going into acting. She said: you have to want it really bad so that nothing else matters. Most people don’t make it because there is a lot of things that happen to you on your way. She explained she hated school and stop going at the age of 12 years old. She started as a model which eventually led to acting. She said the casting couch was not a Hollywood myth. She claims that she hated her years as a teenager. They were stressed and intense. Fortunately for us and her, she did make it.

On a personal note, she has two sons from two marriages. She met her final and present husband on the set of North and South. Don E. Flauntleroy was the cinematographer for the mini-series. Patrick Swayze, in his autobiography which he finished shortly before he died in 2009, describe Down as a generous and funny lady who he greatly admired. He said she would invite cast and crew to the expensive hotel she was staying at during the shoot. They were invited to fine dinning and would hang out there later on most nights. That is very generous indeed. It was rumoured she was going through a divorce from her second husband at the time. Some suggested he actually paid for all that generosity. My response is, so? If she spent the money on making people happy who is to question her ability and desire to do so?

As always in my blogs, I like to pass on lessons or wisdom that I discover from my subjects or topics. I find that Ms Down is not so different from most of us who have struggled to reach our goals. She has had to overcome great obstacles in order to obtain her successful acting career. She is as complex and as complicated as any character she has chosen to play. It has been suggested that great acting comes from the actor’s soul. They in turn share that honesty and truth with their audience. Ms Down has shared many passionate performances with her audiences over the years. From the sweet, noble Madelyn to the cunning, ambitious Stephanie Rogers, Ms Down has shared a part of her soul with all of us. From North and South to Dallas, this accomplished actress has given to her Art and her audience with her honest role portrayals.

Why is Jamie Fraser the King of Men? The Reel Infatuation Blogathon

Posted on June 19, 2016June 24, 2017 Posted in Blogathon, Books To Film, Outlander, Sam HeughanTagged Caitronia Balfe, Claire Fraser, Diana Gabaldon, Jamie Fraser, Ron Moore, Sam Heughan, Silver Screenings, Tobias Menzies32 Comments

What literary character do I have a crush? That’s an easy question to answer. It is Highlander-warrior, James Fraser. To be exact, Outlander’s James Alexander Malcolm Mackenzie Fraser (JAMMF). I can confidently say that I am not alone in this sentiment. There are millions of fans of the Outlander books by author Diana Gabaldon and its adaptation for a television series on the cable network, Starz.

Before the first episode aired, Starz promoted the show with several film “shorts.” These are approximately ten-minute sneak peeks and “behind the scenes” look at the upcoming new show. Ron Moore (producer, writer) reveled that he thought the most difficult role to cast would be Jamie Fraser. Why? Moore claims that Jamie Fraser is “Bigger than life…he is the King of Men.” This was the first time I heard Jamie Fraser described in this way. Ironically, this role was not hardest to cast; but, it was the easiest to cast. That is, after Sam Heughan’s Skype interview, and the viewing of his audition tape. The search for Jamie was over. It was over almost as soon as it began.

Not only is Outlander (1991) the first book of the series, it is Gabaldon’s first novel too. Presently, there are a total of eight books in this historical multi-genre series. Fans are thrilled by the promise of a planned total of ten books before the series is completed As a matter of fact, Book #9, Go Tell The Bees That I am Gone, is a work in progress. No release date in 2017 has been announced. However, Gabaldon graciously posts excerpts of this book, for her fans, as she continues to work on it. To view them on her site, just click on the link below:

http://www.dianagabaldon.com/books/outlander-series/book-nine-outlander-series/

So Who Is This Fictional Character: Jamie Fraser?

JAMMF is an 18th century Highlander. He possesses numerous traits and talents. Here is a list of a few: He is brave, loyal, extremely intelligent, funny, resourceful, educated, mysterious, nobel, an outlaw, honest, has a high tolerance to pain, Scot-stubborn, and completely loveable. There are weaknesses too; for instance, he is tone-deaf (cannot hear the variations of the notes in music or pleasantly sing a tune), he cannot travel over large bodies water without becoming deathly seasick, and he cannot blink with only one eye. His physical attributes are varied: he has dark red hair, dark blue eyes, wide smile, stands 6’4″, has a charismatic personality, has a very hot internal body temperature, his back is severely scarred from 200 lashes given as punishment, and is drop dead gorgeous. His magnetism is so strong that most women, and a few men as well, would love to assist him in the removal of his kilt.

As magnificent as fictional Jamie Fraser sounds, Sam Heughan’s brilliant portrayal is nearly as remarkable. Jamie’s particular mannerisms are not missed in Heughan’s performances. It is so eerily perfect that many fans confuse Heughan, the actor, with Jamie, the book character. Despite this, most critics overlook his screen presence as nothing more than eye candy. Which is a shame because Heughan is definitely a skilled professional who does an astonishing job. One day in the near future, I hope he will be given the acting accolades he deserves.

So is Heughan’s portrayal of Jamie that remarkable that millions of women around the world are in love with Jamie/Sam?

In part, yes! But, to give proper credit where it is due, you have to look at Gabaldon’s literary genius in the creation of two fictional characters: Jamie and his time travelling wife, Claire. To understand this phenomenal effect on women, it is important to analyze the entirety of Jamie and Claire characters, the circumstances that brought them together; and the kind of relationship they eventually develop.

The story begins:

Claire Randall (played by the lovely and talented Caitriona Balfe) is a WWII combat nurse. She accidentally time travels from 1945 to 1743. How does this time travel come about?

Outlander-1x03-outlander-2014-tv-series-37471483-1800-1200

Claire is married to Frank Randall (Tobias Menzies) who was a MI6 operative (a British Spy/Special Forces) during WWII. After the War, Frank becomes a history professor at Oxford. But, before he starts his new civilian job, he takes Claire on a second honeymoon to be reacquainted as a couple, after the years of separation. They arrive on their second honeymoon in Scotland on Halloween (Samhain day: Ghosts of the dead are able to mingle with the living). Unfortunately, un-romantic Frank spends most of his time doing research on his own family’s history. There are times when Claire must persuade her husband to abandon his research for more intimate, physical couplings with her. In other words, he seems to be slightly resistant to take the opportunities to have sex with his wife. I wonder if he is hiding something?

Outlander-First-Look-outlander-2014-tv-series-37411145-1800-1200

Outlander-First-Look-outlander-2014-tv-series-37433247-1800-1200

On a rainy night, as Frank is returning (alone) to his and Claire’s room, he literally bumps into the ghost of 18th century of Jamie Fraser. Frank finds Jamie staring up at a second story window. Through the window, he can see Claire as she brushes her curly hair. Frank is totally shaken when the spirit passes so close as to pass through his shoulder. When he later discusses the incident to Claire, he reluctantly confesses that it might have been a ghost; but, on second thought, he suggests that Claire might have had a Scottish lover. Many fans love Frank as a character; and, I admire the actor, Tobias Menzies, who skillfully plays both roles as lovely Frank and his villainous ancestor, Black Jack Randall; but, I suspect there is something inherently wrong with Frank’s character.

zap-outlander-tv-series-cast-photos-20130905-003

While Frank searches through dusty old records with his friend, Reverend Wakefield (James Fleet), Claire tries to keep busy by searching for medicinal herbs. It is while she is having her tea leaves read by Mrs Graham (Tracey Wikinson) who is the housekeeper for Reverend Wakefield. During the reading of tea leaves that lay in the bottom of the Claire’s cup, she learns she will be married to two men at the same time, bigamy? Also during this tea reading, Claire is informed that her husband will not stray to other women’s beds (Boy, did she get that wrong). So much for tea readings!

Frank insists on doing some of his own voyeurism just before dawn. He is told by the Reverend Wakefield that on the Autumn solstice, the ladies dress in white with lanterns, dance and sing, welcoming the new season. He and Claire hide as they watch this mysterious and ancient ritual. Once it is over, they begin to investigate the Standing Stones where this all took place. Claire finds some very pretty blue flowers, maybe Forget-me-nots, growing very close to the face of one Stone. They leave quickly, when one of the girls return. Later, Frank announces he has more documents to research. Claire decides to go back to the Stones alone and gather samples of those blue flowers.

Once, she begins to gather them, she hears a humming noise coming from the Stones. She places her hands on the stone and feels the vibration. Then, she feels she is falling among chaos and screams. The noise and pain is so overwhelming she passes out. When she awakes, the terrain has changed. Her car is missing. She sees British soldiers running through the woods. Then, she is being shot at and chased by them. She runs into their captain, Black Jack Randall. At first she is confused and thinks it is Frank. But after he assaults her and nearly rapes her, she definitely knows: he may look like Frank, but that ain’t Frank.

She is saved by a stinky Highlander. He grabs her behind a tree trying to avoid passing soldiers. Claire tries to scream for help before he cold cocks her in the head with the cluff of his sword. She is taken to a cottage, full of stinky men who sees her dirty 20th century dress as an undergarment…indecent…whore? Here, she hears them discusses a young lady’s injuries. When their leader, Dougal, tries to figure out if she is a spy or what, he knows the British is near; and, they must leave as soon as possible. The young man’s shoulder is out of place. They may cripple him trying to set it. If they don’t set it, they have to leave him behind. At first, Claire tries to keep quite, but the healer/nurse in her will not allow them to break his bones. She yells at them to stop. And like the combat nurse, she is, she takes over and properly sets Jamie Fraser’s shoulder. Their first date…riding on horse, together in the rain for two days. That is when I knew that I was totally hooked on their story.

Have I lost you yet?

So, again I ask what is it that makes James Fraser so irresistible to happily married Claire? If you look at the some facts concerning Jamie Frazer you might wonder if she has lost her mind. You certainly would question giving him the honorable description of The King of Men.

Here is a brief list of some reasons why Jamie Fraser’s title should be questioned. First, he is a British outlaw, fought as a mercenary for the French army, a coo (cow) thief, a spanker of Claire’s bottom, penniless, stubborn, a flirtatious tease (he is a virgin), he is easily roused (constant horny mode), no plans for the future, lives off his relatives, gets seriously hurt a lot, is superstitious, and he gives his body over to Frank’s super great-granddad to rape and torture even though he will be hanged the next day. That is just in the first book.

Warning! 🚫 Possible Spoilers ahead 🔺 for those who have not read all 8 Books

In later books, he marries a woman (Laoghaire) who nearly has Claire burned at the stake for being a witch; he has sex with an 18-year-old engaged girl (she blackmailed him to bed her) that produces a son he cannot claim, he begrudgingly befriends a gay British officer who is in love with him who just so happens to be the commander of the prison he is being held in as a traitor; he murders a prison guard, but not out of self-defense; he leaves wife #2 but sends her money out of guilt, he lives in a brothel, he is a smuggler, he has numerous aliases; and, he composes and prints traitorous material.

He also tells lies that would shame a politician; he encourages his runaway nephew to stay with him while the boy’s parents (his sister and best friend’s child) are frantically looking for him; he keeps his second marriage a secret from Claire; and, he nearly beats an innocent man to death for mistakenly believing he raped his daughter.
Does this sound like the King of Men? Far from it!

So, why is it, with all these flaws and imperfections, do women find James Fraser so irresistible? Does he possess some magical spell that he casts over our hearts or maybe he possesses a spark of the divine in his words? Maybe in a way, he does all of this, for Claire. In my opinion, James Fraser’s secret isn’t that he is the King of Men. In fact, his flaws are very human and can be be found to some extent in Every Man.

Jamie loves Claire unconditionally. No matter if she endangers their lives, swears like a soldier, tests his patience over her devotion to Frank, or tells him outlandish stories about time travelling and the future; to the point he questions her sanity or believes she might be a witch. He is there, through it all, for her. He believes and trusts her. If actions speak louder than words, then Jamie has proved his love and devotion from the sheer number of times he risks his own life to save hers.

He nearly always puts her first. Not only does he risks his life for her, he is willing to live a horrible life alone without her, if it will keep her and their child safe. Again, he proves this when he painfully guides her to the Standing Stones in order for her to go back to her time and Frank, not once, but twice!

Even when death beckons him to leave this world, it is his love for Claire that makes him stay. Jamie is loyal, faithful, intelligent, loving, and caring to his family and friends. He is a hard worker, a good provider, open-minded, and inquisitive. However, what he is not is perfect!

Outlander 2014

FOR TV — DO NOT PURGE — Outlander 2014 Starz pictured: Claire Randall (Caitriona Balfe), Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan)

James Fraser gives hope to every women, and man, that true love does exists; but, it only happens with the “right” person. This can be exemplified by Jamie Fraser’s second marriage.

Obviously, he wasn’t made to love Loaghaire even though she “thought” he was the love of her life. To “land” Jamie, she even schemes to place Claire in harms way and out of her way. Loaghaire loved the idea of loving Jamie and being married to him. To Loaghaire that’s all that was needed. Jamie feelings would naturally match her own; or, so she thought. That’s the problem. She worked hard “to get him.” Once she got him, it did not take her long to feel the void within her marriage. Unlike Claire and Jamie, she did not feel at home, or safe when they embraced or made love.

According to Loaghaire, Jamie didn’t need her; instead, she knew deep down in her heart that he still ached for Claire. Loaghaire felt miserable in her marriage and avoided sex at all costs. Sadly, Jamie tried to please her but failed. Again, if both partners are not equally committed, emotionally, they will soon feel alone in a failed relationship.

Jamie and Claire Fraser’s relationship remind us that it is possible to be with a flawed someone who is a true friend. A person that we feel well loved by and always at home with.
For the millions of fans like myself, yes, we swoon, we even lust a bit after Jamie Fraser because he carries with him our desire and wish to be wholly loved. To be home, with our love, no matter where we are or where we go, as long as we share that mutual love, together.

This is a post for the 2017 Reel Infatuation Blogathon hosted by Ruth of Silver Screenings and Maedez from A Small Life. From June 23rd through the 25th, use the following link to find more postings on character crushes ❤️

https://reelinfatuation.wordpress.com/

I do not own any of the images or pictures on this post.

Upcoming 2018 Blogathons

Posted on April 23, 2016July 21, 2018 Posted in BlogathonLeave a comment

Here’s the tentative 2018 schedule of Blogathons and with their topics. This will be updated as more Blogathons become available😜

Banners: Tentative Posts for future Blogathons

April 2018

Film Topic: Barbarella (1968)

May 2018: Maybe next year??? 2019

I didn’t have time to work on the duos this year. I am hoping next year.

June 2018

The topic is Robert Redford in 1962 Twilight Zone Episode

August 2018: The Indomitable Lee Grant

Lee Grant is a fascinating topic for a Blogathon. Gill at Reelweegiemidget is hosting. Lee Grant is an Oscar winning actress who was blacklisted in the 50s and whose career has miraculously survived. She is a rare actress who has directed in several mediums on various projects. I am looking forward to writing about her.

My film topic is on a lovable “stinker” that was a failed reboot of a Charlie Chan movie: Charlie Chan And The Curse of The Dragon Queen (1981).

SEPTEMBER 2018

This Blogathon is on one of my favorite actors: Joseph Cotton. So, happy that Maddy and Chrystal decided to host it. I want to write a post on one of his movies that I have not seen before. It is from the 1950s: A Killer is Loose (1956). I am so looking forward to writing this one 😊

November 2018: The WWI Blogathon

November 10th and 11th

Maddy is hosting this Blogathon from MaddyLoves Her Classic Films. All wars are sad and at times, unavoidable like WWII with stopping Hitler, Mussolini and Japan from world domination. However,WWI was an avoidable war. It produced never-ending tragic tales of inhuman acts.

My film topic is Gallipoli (1981). It is an Australian film directed by Peter Weir that I believe is one of the best films ever made about war.

January 17 – 20 of 2018

Pay Christmas Forward Blogathon

This is a Gift from Christmas Past (2017) using the 12 Days of Christmas Theme.

My Topic: Starz Outlander Seasons 1-3

I love this series so much that the Blogathon hostess, Gill Jacob from Realweegiemidget, choose it for me…God Bless Her😊

If you are an Outlander Fan or just a curious reader, I hope you come back for this Christmas Past Theme of Outlander Based on The Twelve Days Of Christmas.

🚫Sorry this post did not publish until January 26th. Unfortunately, there was an family emergency that delayed my completion for the 17 – 20.🚫

Thank you readers for your patience🌻

January 29th to 31st

I still miss Robin Williams. Thankfully, he left us an abundance of his work to view over and over. I am so happy Gill and Crystal hosted the first ever Blogathon of him. At least, the first Blogathon that I have ever seen. Since, my blog is all about lessons learned through the arts, I decided to write about my impression of Williams and those who influenced him. I wish to focus on one of his minor roles (he was not even credited for it) in the movie Dead Again and his last film.

February9th -11th 2018

O Canada 🇨🇦 Blogathon

This blog post will be dedicated to one of my favorite Canadians: William Shatner. I am a bit nervous writing about him. Yes, I crushed on him as Captain James T. Kirk, enjoyed watching him as TJ Hooker, and laughed at him as Denny Crane on BostonLegal. I have watched his Star Trek movies; and, I have read some his books (crime series and personal autobiographical books). And for all of this, I also follow him on Twitter. Okay, I joined his fan club too. However, I do not profess to be an expert on the life of William Shatner. I have never gone to any Comic Con or bought any of his music.

I do have my impressions and opinions. It is true, most people love him, many admire him, and yet; a few people may even loathe him. What I can say? He is one of those people who can bring out the best or worst in people. I hope dear reader you will enjoy reading this post in February.

This one I had to put on a “back burner.” I couldn’t quite finish it…sometimes, there are events in ones life that requires every ounce of your being. So, Hopefully, in 2019, I can enter this post in the O Canada Blogathon.

February 12th – 14th

The Singing Sweethearts Blogathon

Tiffany from PEPS is hosting this Blogathon. Since, it is so close to the date of the Canadian Blogathon, I considered using the same topic. However, that wasn’t working out and for good reason.

So, I am going to watch Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy film and watch them swoon over each other through the gift of song.

February 23rd – 25th

This is Oscar month for the 2017 movies. Hosting The 31 Days Of Oscar Blogathon are three bloggers: Aurora of Once Upon A Scene, Kellee of Outspoken & Freckled (@Irishjayhawk66), and Paula of Paula’sCinema Club (@Paula_Guthat).

I have not decided what topic I should pick. Last year, I wrote about John Garfield and his Oscar snubs. These Year I may take a closer look at one of the nominees for Best Actress and Best Actor. Once I decide, I will update my topic.

March 9th -11th

The Time Travel Blogathon

For this Blogathon, I will be writing about the movie Timeline (2003). Time travel the scientific way. It stars hunky GerardButler and the late PaulWalker. It has other wonderful actors too. Frances O’Connor, Sir Billy Connelly, David Thewlis and Michael Sheen. It based on a novel by Michael Crichton and screenplay written by Jeff Maguire.

March12th – 14th

Michael Cain Blogathon

The subperbly, smooth, calm and chic Michael Crane. I admire the actor and the man very much. He is one of those few famous people who has learn from his mistakes which is perfect for my Lessons blog. I am excited about writing this post. I will look at a couple of his films and compare the range of the star to the actor. I hope you check out his films too. They are extremely entertaining.

🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫🚫

2017 Blogathon List

January 16th – 18th 2017

This is a nice start to the new year: A blogathon dedicated to the one and only lovely Carol Lombard. It is hosted by Phyllis Loves Classic Movies. My Movie pick is an unusual screwball comedy called Swing High, Swing Low (1937) With one of my favorite actors Fred MacMurray.

February 19th to 21st 2017

My next blog will visit the iconic comedian, Buster Keaton. This is a celebration of the 100th year of his movie shorts. It is hosted by Silent-ology. I do not know too much about his work. The first movie I remember seeing him in was, Funny Thing Happened on The Way To The Forum (1968). It made a huge impact on me. I have heard everyone sing his praises; so, I felt this would give me an opportunity to learn more about this Hollywood legend.

March 6th – 10th, 2017

There are two separate blogathons. One, Unsung Heroes, allows bloggers to praise the artistic work of others that may have been ignored by the Academy Awards. This is hosted by K.G. Rants. At the top of my list is John Garfield. I believe the Academy should honor his memory because of his contributions to film and the film industry at large. The other Blogathon is called The Original Rebel Blogathon by Phyllis Loves Classic Movies. Again, I chose John Garfield because he was the first to introduce the Method acting on film.

March 24th – 26th The month of March couldn’t end without the marvellous Bette Davis.

Movie, Movie, Blog, Blog asked bloggers to post about a movie where rain is an essential element to the scene. My Movie pick is Pride and Prejudice (2005). The rain in the proposal scene essentially expresses the emotions of the two main characters.

April 15th to 17th

I am going to examine a comedy drama, Born Yesterday (1950) with William Holden. He tutors “Dumb Blonde” Judy Holiday (she won an Oscar for this role).

April 24th, 2017

I am going to examine Jack Nicholson’s Goin’ South. He starred and Directed this Western comedy. It is pure Nicholson at high speed!

April 28th, 2017

In this blogathon, bloggers are are asked to write a post about their favorite film villain. This was a though one; but if I have to choose one, I have to go with Vincent Price.

lifesdailylessonsblog

Category: Blogathon