I've watched this remarkable production many times and each time I'm more and more convinced that the story line of Lizzie and Eugene is far more riveting than that of Bella and John. Perhaps this is due to the acting of Paul McGann and Keeley Hawes and to the intensity they bring to their roles.
Any thoughts?
I thought so too. Their story was more intense and full of challenges vs Bella and John.
I was reading the producer interview on the PBS page for this series:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/archive/programs/mutualfriend/interview.html
She says: "For instance, Eugene does not behave like we want a hero to behave. He would have seduced Lizzie if he could have. If Headstone hadn't clonked him on the head, he would have met Lizzie the next day and seduced her. And she would have gotten pregnant and ended up in the workhouse dead. Dickens makes no bones about that. He refuses to apologize for Eugene's seductive ambiguity. I think that is what is so wonderful about him as an author, he doesn't knock the edges off anybody."
I agree that when Eugene was almost killed, that is what woke him up to finally marry Lizzie. I know that he was hesitating in marrying her, yet he did not want to leave her alone. I think I missed the part that he was going to meet her the next day (after they had met in the fields in the evening), but I would like to think he was not going to get her pregnant and leave her.
I assume he hesitated because of society rules and the fact he did not have money and she did not either. I guess he changes his views later, because when he was in the boat with Mortimer and John, he says that he does not care about society and what they think of him and Lizzie.
Thank you for the interesting interview quote! Eugene appears to be wrestling with his passion, his societal background, and his unproductive professional life. Lizzie, illiterate and poor as she is, is the solution to all of his problems; but, as the producer so accurately points out, it is Headstone's murder attempt that resolves Eugene's inner turmoil. The recovering Eugene is aware of Headstone's part in his (Eugene's) "redemption," and he tells Mortimer so.
share[deleted]
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder - because I very much preferred the storyline of Bella and John and even preferred Lizzie's psychotic stalker Headstone to Rayburn. I also liked Rayburn's sidekick, I forget his name just now. I thought they should have gotten someone handsomer to play Rayburn. But I think Paul McGann was very popular in England at the time they made this show. Anyway - I think Dickens would be pleased, all in all it is an unforgetable series which I still watch over and over, years later! With all the kooky characters, it is just so enjoyable!
shareI liked Mortimer also. He tried to knock some sense into Eugene as well. Eugene would have looked better without the bushy mustache I think, but I assume that is his character description.
If I could choose a suitor *dreams* I would also prefer John and want to be Bella. Headstone was definitely willing to commit to Lizzie (he did a good acting job). i would have run away if I were her too lol.
I enjoyed it too and I can see myself watching it again. I just watched it a few days ago and I am still thinking about it.
I remember watching the original production in installments and thinking that the Lizzie/Eugene dynamic was the most compelling part of the story. Headstone brought in some drama and danger to further burnish that section.
The Bella/John section was a bit boring but the Boffins were a hoot and kept me interested.
I'm not sure if the Lizzie/Eugene section was better written than the Bella/John section but it was certainly better acted. Maybe not "better" but I felt I got much more depth of character from Lizzie and Eugene than Bella and John.
I seem to remember a New York Times review saying something similar but then again my memory isn't as reliable as it used to be.
I don´t agree actually. I think Eugene and Lizzys story is more catchy for todays eyes, since the have the class aspect and Eugene is kind of a reformed rake.
Personally I was more touched by the Bella and John story. I thought their getting closer was done so wonderfully gradually. Esspecially Anna Friel was brilliant in her portrayal of the gradual change from mercenary to honest and caring. And I also liked how Mackintosh brought the quiet, but passionate John Harmon on the screen. I found them both very appealing in a subtle way.
I did like Lizzys and Eugenes story as well. Keeley Hawes is fantastic as the beautiful but poor and socially unacceptable loveinterest for Eugene. Paul McGann did a good job too. And while I totally believed his bored and stoic behavior, I found his rakish intentions a bit too subtle. On the other hand this made Lizzy falling for him more believable.
I guess I am saying I liked both stories and all four actors very much. But my favourite part has always been Johns and Bellas story and their entanglement with the wonderful Boffins.
I definetely preferred the bella/john story a lot more to the lizzy/eugene story. It's the bella/john bits i keep on rewatching all the time!!!
I found eugene quite difficult to like, he was funny at times, but was so pessimistic about life and so mean to his "inferiors" that i never really warmed to him, so wasn't as bothered about whether he ended up with lizzy or not! I liked the character lizzy though and wanted her to end up happy and to be honest i hoped she'd end up with headstone at first, before he turned psycho of course!!!
The story between bella and john was much more interesting for me as it left u hanging on wandering if they'll get together or not! I think the plot between them is actually a lot more complex (as eugene/lizzy is only made complex really by headstone) After all they were supposed to get married anyway, but they didn't to begin, with yet still ended up falling in love! I love the way she gradually comes to realise she loves him and all his patience pays off. I find their characters a lot easier to like, especially when you think of the sacrifices they make for each other. The whole her "not likin" him at first reminds me a little of the Mr Darcy / Miss Bennet love story a bit too!! John certainly has some great moments of smouldering looks!! LOL!!!
I thought the Bella/John storyline was FAR more engaging than the Eugene/Lizzie match up. I enjoyed Eugene & Lizzie's story well enough, but Bella & John's was much, much better.
First off, I preferred Bella (spirited & funny)over Lizzie (sweet & saintly but rather BLAND) and also preferred John to Eugene.
But I think the best advantage of the Bella/John storyline is how you get to see the relationship develop whereas with Lizzie & Eugene you see it *inferred* that he's developing some feelings for her and she on her side is growing fond of him,but they actually don't have all that much onscreen interaction. That's why when they reunite and--BAM-- they're hot for each other,it seems sort of odd & sudden.
Very well said. You make some great points and I agree with all of them! Thanks.
shareYes. I thought every scene Eugene Wrayburn was in brilliant..Paul McGann's top billing is certainly not without merit...i found Bella and John's storyline rather pedestrian and contrived..i was unmoved.
Last films:
Stupeur et tremblements 8/10
Pride and Prejudice(1995) 10/10
I thought both stories were beautiful. I loved the tenderness of John/Bella. I would have like there to have been a lot more mystery, but that was fine. The Eugene/Lizzie story was equally beautiful. I really liked Lizzie's character. Seeing how the film starts with her rowing that boat on the river. You just knew she was gonna have a hard time in life. Her story made me so sad. I always knew that Eugene would not be able to resist her but the mystery was whether or not he could make her his wife.
share[deleted]
I believe that many of you, in your rush to enjoy the big, true-love payout ($$) with the wealthy Wrayburn, have overlooked the complex things Dickens is asking you to consider. Every single Dickens book concerns itself with poverty and injustice.
I'm not one to fall for all this victorian "true love" b.s., so I found the Eugene storyline to be rightly questionable. Eugene is a despicable, idle, unethical fop who confides to Mortimer that he has noones interests or concerns at heart, least of all Lizzie's. Get it? His BEST FRIEND becomes concerned that Wrayburn will ruin Lizzie and leave her in the lurch. Why? Is it that Eugene has knocked up beautiful, impoverished women before, as people of his class liked to do? ...or, do you imagine that Lizzie will be Eugene's first sexual experience in life? (eye rolling)
When Headstone confronts Eugene about Lizzie, Headstone is RIGHT!
Only after the scuffle, does Headstone become disturbed, because he knows exactly what the stakes are (Refer to Fantine in Hugo's Les Miserables). Headstone both a) desires Lizzie, and b) wants to save her from social ruin, with Eugene. When combined with his personal shortcomings (insecurity, self-consciousness, lack of means) the result is his failed proposal, full of inappropriate outbursts and conflicted emotions; the greatest scene in the series. (No idea where some of you came up with that "Headstone wants Lizzie as an object" cr_p)
The cruelty inherent in 19th century English society will take Headstone's character flaws and crush him. It will take Wrayburn's and merely deliver him. That is Dickens point. Dickens allows Eugene to triumph ...to show how unfair the world is (and to deliver a pleasant ending), which makes for more complex Dickens than usual, but it's a pretty nasty trick; even with Wrayburn's eleventh hour redemption.
Dickens asks you to feel and process complex feelings/thoughts about Headstone; a much more difficult thing to do, than to thoughtlessly cheer for two pairs of earnest lovers (Hooray... another camera spinning around embracing lovers - yawn). Every pair of lovers with a couple of obstacles in romantic literature is prettty much identical to all the others. But viewers prefer those mawkish moments.
There is no hero in this piece, but there is a failed hero; someone who tried to right the immoral things surrounding him, but ends up powerless and consumed. Of maybe ten Dickens stories I'm familiar with, Headstone is his best "villain," because Dickens understands him, and shows us persuasively how someone with the best intentions can be crushed into someone lost and evil. David Morrissey is excellent at conveying Headstone's many conflicts. The plight of 4 boring, virtuous lovers is interesting only on the first viewing. The arc of Mr Headstone is why you'd watch it more than once. His anguish is heartbreaking.
Also note; As the big book of Victorian conventions requires, all the men are required to become wilting, feminized sweetie-pies before they can win a woman over in this movie. Headstone is the only eligible man to show any vigor whatsoever.