MovieChat Forums > A Handful of Dust (1988) Discussion > Gosh I really hated Brenda Last , what ...

Gosh I really hated Brenda Last , what a horrible human being

posted 19 years ago by FlorenceLawrence
10 replies | jump to latest

Gosh I really hated Brenda Last, what a horrible human being, excellent acting too bring her too life in all her spoilt heartlessness.

You could feel her expecting sympathy all the time, poor love, kind and handsome husband lovely house in the country, gorgeous son, gosh she needed slapping.

All the principles and traditions of the time seemed so strange, certainly not a film to escape in and enjoy, but definitely worth watching

what was everyone's take on the beginning though ?

Was like a joint dream, very bizzare

[–] urania_fic 19 years ago

She's awful, isn't she? I couldn't stand her when I read the book-such a selfish, self-involved cow! Kristin Scott-Thomas does a very good job of playing her, though.

I think the beginning is part of a fever dream that Tony is having at the end. I've not reached the end of the DVD yet, but in the book Tony eventually ends up in the jungle completely delirious so that must be where it's from. It's all so surreal.

[–] slokes 18 years ago

The end is indeed a flash-forward sequence, which you can tell from the equipment we see arrayed (later reappearing as Tony starts his South American sojourn) and his dip in the river. The image of Brenda is from Evelyn Waugh's novel, a fevered dream of Tony's where he imagines Brenda and the others from her circle popping around his camp to make amends for the "hard cheese" they dished out to him.

Brenda is indeed a character. No chance of seeing this one aired on Lifetime!

[–] Philiphewlett 18 years ago

Yes, Lady Brenda is horrible, but she only acts particularly cruelly when coerced by others, mostly men. These are either her brother, John Beaver, or her mother. She seems to be the conduit for the various acts of cruelty dished out to Tony Last, but she is rarely the originator of the acts... apart form shagging John Beaver in the first place that is. Slag.

[–] Andrew_S_Hatton 16 years ago

What we do not learn from the film is what prompted her to marry Tony and his mansion in the first place?

Maybe she had a shallow childhood, where her "duty" to marry status was made clear to her.

No doubt a younger more testosterone driven Tony had been more attractive and like so many she believed they would have a hedonistic high life of London Socials rather than country sermons and fox hunting.

So I did have considerable sympathy for her.

I was surprised that they only had one child because I thought it was customary where the continuing family is so critical that at least one spare should be borne as well as the heir?

[–] circus14 15 years ago

Actually I felt quite sorry for her, I haven't read the book but judging from the film yes she is spoilt, thoughtless and shallow but if you think about it all and all the horrible thing that she does is gettig completely infatuated with a very shallow, unfeeling, socialite and letting her whole conduct being directed by it.

She is one of those last speciments of upper class females where she is raised to have her whole life directed around a man. She was not encouraged to take up a career and her maternal duties are mostly fulfilled by nannies. Indeed her whole occupation is to be lovely. That is a pretty empty existence to begin with and in most cases it would result to someone becoming shallow.

No, I think that if there is a villain in the case it would be Judi Dench. She encourages her son to pursue a relationship that will ruin someone's family -and maybe life- because she wants him to 'have more fun' what a cold blooded witch! Then when all harm is done she takes her son out of the mess to California. Of course Beaver could do the gentlemanly thing either way but one does not expect that with such a mother he ever learned the value of doing the right thing.

Stephen Fry's character was also despicable. I wanted to hit him in the restaurant scene.

---I don't know enough to be incompetent.---

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cine-maum 14 years ago

Yes, she was a real pip

Surely, my husband wouldnt leave me without provisions

All I did was leave him to repeatedly sleep with another man
and try to take his estate away from him.

Sorry Toots, Bummer4U

Kirsten Scott Thomas was superb playing her tho.

[–] Squeeth2 13 years ago

The husband and the boyfriend were a bit vapid so it'd be a surprise if she wasn't. Metaphorically the boy was the marriage so when he died (a la Barry Lyndon) he represented her soul.

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

[–] randommovies2002 10 years ago

That's how I saw it, too.

[–] Katiedot 13 years ago

Yes, she's a hopeless person, isn't she. Raised to be cherished by all around her, it never even occurs to her that what she could be doing is hurtful.

George Clooney forum, news & gossip updated daily: http://www.clooneysopenhouse.com/