MovieChat Forums > My Family and Other Animals (2005) Discussion > Question about Durrell's mother as portr...

Question about Durrell's mother as portrayed in the movie

posted 14 years ago by Ernest_Hero
6 replies | jump to latest

Do you think that she was depicted as a much harsher character in the movie (compared to the way she was described in the book)?
Interestingly, Imelda Staunton played the role of Dolores Umbridge in "Harry Potter".

Any ideas why Gerald Durrell's teacher was regarded as an undesirable suitor for Margo? I don't think that it was a matter of class consciousness, as the family didn't seem to have any objections regarding Margo dating the Turkish guy (and it's unlikely that the Turkish dude was an aristocrat).

I really enjoyed the movie, btw, though there were some prominent omissions (like Leslie's lawsuit).

[–] jezza115 13 years ago

I didn't find her harsh.

I think they were glad to see the back of the turkish guy, so they never had the chance to disapprove. Peter was poor and without prospects maybe that was why.

Leslies' lawsuit ? I don't remember a lawsuit in the book. Can hardly be prominent.

[–] Ernest_Hero 13 years ago

Thanks for replying!

Yes, she wasn't overly harsh, but perhaps the way I imagined it her (based on the books) was slightly different.
As for the Turkish guy, Margo appeared to be very much into him, though you are right that they were never actually engaged. However, I don't think that there was any indication that the Turkish dude was affluent or more educated than Peter.

A Greek man demands financial compensation from Leslie (Leslie is the first member of the Durrell family with whom the villager has a conversation) due to Roger allegedly killing his turkeys. Leslie refuses to believe him and goes ballistic, starting to curse him in Greek, which causes the villager to file a lawsuit. The Corfu judge decides to let it slide, determining that Roger had not been the culprit (siding with Leslie's version of the events and ignoring the uttering of profanities) thanks to Spiro's intervention (Spiro is rather well-connected). Could have been another funny scene in the film, but I don't blame them for omitting it.

[–] jezza115 13 years ago

Isn't that in another book? It sounds familiar but is not in my copy of MFAOA. Coudl it be "Birds, Beast & Relatives" ?

[–] Ernest_Hero 13 years ago

Exactly, that's the work I had in mind!

Not sure why, but I just assumed that the film had intended to encompass the plots of all the major Durrell books.

[–] IanDSmith 12 years ago

The characterization of Mother is much closer to the book's in the 1987 mini series. Hannah Gordon's take on her eccentricity is rather more relaxed than Imelda Staunton's interpretation, but at 4 hours they did have rather more time to explore everyone's characters better.

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

In the book she is portrayed as charmingly vague, absorbed in cooking and gardening. hannah Gordon captured her very well in the 1987 version, Gerald Durrell thought she was perfect. Imelda Staunton is somewhat more abrasive, and doesn't convey that charm. The business with Peter is a bit of a mystery. They have made him very obnoxious in the film, he doesn't really come across like that in the book,where he seems okay. I don't know why he was considered so unsuitable.