:00:09. > :00:19.Tonight on the review show, the world but not as we all know it.
:00:19. > :00:22.
:00:22. > :00:26.Spiritual, venal, surreal and Terrence Malick's personal,
:00:26. > :00:34.emotional Palme d'Or winning, The Tree Of Life, will it capture a new
:00:34. > :00:39.audience. Some day we will fall down and weep. Sam Mendes and Kevin
:00:39. > :00:48.spacey together again n a modern setting of Richard III, is there
:00:48. > :00:52.sympathy for this devil? Hats, pipes and trains, is the
:00:52. > :00:56.Magritte exhibition at Liverpool suitably surreal. Love, loss and
:00:56. > :01:05.libido in the devastation of war in the adaptation of Sarah Waters's
:01:05. > :01:15.novel, The Night Watch. I think it is easy to be brave in war time.
:01:15. > :01:18.
:01:18. > :01:24.Plus, folk rock taub dor - Troubadour performing.
:01:24. > :01:28.Joining me to chew over the cultural week are Sarah Churchwell,
:01:28. > :01:32.writer and broadcaster, Paul Morley, comedian and writer, Natalie Haynes,
:01:32. > :01:36.and last but not least, film historian, Matthew Sweet. And as
:01:36. > :01:42.ever, we look forward to hearing from your tweets too.
:01:42. > :01:45.In a movie career spanning four decades, reclusive author, Terrence
:01:46. > :01:50.Malick, has directed five films, beginning with the ground-breaking
:01:50. > :01:57.Badlands in 1973, we propelled Martin Sheen and Sissy Spacek to
:01:57. > :02:01.stardom. His latest people, The Tree Of Life was releeld to the
:02:01. > :02:06.Cannes Film Festival to standing ovations and a few boos, and walked
:02:06. > :02:13.off with the Palme d'Or prize. Has it been worth the wait for this
:02:13. > :02:18.highly anticipated movie. Some day we will fall down and weep. We
:02:18. > :02:25.won't understand at all. We will understand all things. Starring
:02:25. > :02:31.Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain and Sean Penn, The Tree Of Life looks
:02:31. > :02:37.into human existence, through the film lens of a 1950s family,
:02:37. > :02:41.focusing on Jack, the eldest of three brothers.
:02:41. > :02:48.Amidst the golden glow of endless summer, we follow Jack's journaly
:02:48. > :02:56.through childhood innocence, witnessed in a series of stylised
:02:56. > :02:59.shots, his angelic bond with his loving mother, but a more complex
:02:59. > :03:08.relationship with his disciplinarian father. What are you
:03:08. > :03:12.doing son. The adult Jack is played by Sean
:03:12. > :03:18.Penn, a disillusioned man, cast adrift amongst the steel and glass
:03:18. > :03:23.of the modern world, looking back on the lessons of his childhood.
:03:23. > :03:29.Father, mother, always you wrestle inside me. Although framed by the
:03:29. > :03:33.death of one of Jack's younger brothers, the film has an
:03:34. > :03:39.impressionistic, non-linear narrative that operates on an ind
:03:39. > :03:46.mit and panoramic scale, exploring metaphysical questions of life and
:03:46. > :03:50.death. With dramatic scenes on the origin of the planet and the huge
:03:50. > :03:55.Cosmos. Malick also employs his characteristic signatures of
:03:55. > :04:03.imagery, sweeping music score and internal monolougue. Unless you
:04:03. > :04:08.love, your life will flash by. such immense themes, big questions
:04:08. > :04:12.and painter's canvas, has he created a film that will appeal
:04:12. > :04:18.broader than his loyal and patient fan base. Lots of patience, because
:04:18. > :04:21.it was ready in 2008, it is six years since his last film, one
:04:21. > :04:24.senses Malick has been thinking about this since he was a little
:04:24. > :04:29.boy. I have a lot of time for Terrence Malick, you need to,
:04:29. > :04:33.because the films are so long and the gaps between them are so huge.
:04:33. > :04:39.All the other films are masterpiece, I wauted for this one to overwhelm
:04:39. > :04:45.- I waited for this one to overwhelm me, it didn't happen.
:04:45. > :04:51.Despite the beautiful images there are vulgar things in it, the CGI
:04:51. > :04:55.dinosaurs down the river. Is it creationism? It is a religious film
:04:55. > :04:59.too, this is where some of the vulgarity comes from. We get this
:04:59. > :05:06.image of the afterlife that looks like something from the Halifax
:05:06. > :05:09.advert. Sean Penn wandering around on the beach with families being
:05:09. > :05:14.reunited. Or something from the cover of a Christian self-help book.
:05:14. > :05:17.Do you really have to have something that's cut and dried.
:05:17. > :05:21.Terrence Malick's films aren't cut and dried, there is room for lots
:05:21. > :05:26.of interpretation in this, you don't have to have a big storyline?
:05:26. > :05:32.There is room for lots of interpretation, read the reviews.
:05:32. > :05:40.Some people think he's an architect and engineer, Sean Penn, some think
:05:40. > :05:44.he's the darker and light child. Whose bedroom is he in when he goes
:05:44. > :05:48.through the underwear drawer, you have to pay attention. That is no
:05:48. > :05:52.bad thing? That is the thing for me, it looks beautiful, it is a sign of
:05:52. > :05:55.my vulgarity, this is what I like, a story, a really good story, and
:05:55. > :05:58.the kind of punch of the story is taken away, we see at the very
:05:58. > :06:08.beginning, not just the little boy dying, but that information comes
:06:08. > :06:17.via a telegram, you go OK, so he's away from home when he dies. You
:06:17. > :06:22.have this incredibly Spence-filled family dynamic. It are too hard
:06:22. > :06:27.work? We are going to say this film is a difficult thing to watch and
:06:27. > :06:31.throw out a good bit of thinking. I would rather watch this than
:06:31. > :06:36.Transformers, when I came out of the film tonight and people going
:06:36. > :06:40.in for the other showing. The film ended in stunned silence, it is
:06:40. > :06:44.either good or bad, but it is something. I wanted to say to
:06:44. > :06:49.people outside, I didn't know if I wanted to say don't go in or go in.
:06:49. > :06:55.I couldn't make my mind up. Whether it would be something very exciting
:06:55. > :07:00.or not. That is maybe dialogue Terrence Malick might think of at
:07:00. > :07:06.10.00 in the morning! It is like a series of high-level home movies,
:07:06. > :07:10.some happen to be at the beginning of time and the big bang. I'm not
:07:10. > :07:15.sure if we are being fair, it is a movie that does. That it is two
:07:15. > :07:20.different movies stitched together, one of the movies is fanttationia,
:07:20. > :07:25.it is the - Fantasia, it is the origins of man through the
:07:25. > :07:29.dinosaurs, joined with the story of a coming of age, a very familiar
:07:29. > :07:33.intimate small story about coming of age with a young man. With an
:07:33. > :07:43.extraordinary performance by the boy who plays Jack. By all the
:07:43. > :07:43.
:07:43. > :07:49.children. And Brad Pitt giving a very fine performance. It was to be
:07:49. > :07:52.Heath Ledger, and Brad Pitt to produce: the beauty of it, we can't
:07:52. > :07:57.gloss over, that it is spectacularly beautiful. The music
:07:57. > :08:02.is spectacular but also very over the top. I think another of his
:08:02. > :08:06.missteps is the music. For something that is meant to be
:08:06. > :08:10.something like Kubrick, his timing with the use of music is slipshod,
:08:10. > :08:14.I don't think he does it well. is a very, very fragile film. It is
:08:14. > :08:20.a film that is really affected by the context in which you watch it.
:08:20. > :08:23.At the press screening there was an air of difference silence, people
:08:23. > :08:30.were afraid to swallow their crisps too loudly to disrush those around
:08:30. > :08:35.him. I saw it in a public - disrupt those around him. I saw it in a
:08:35. > :08:40.public screening in Paris and people were laughing at it. Hunter
:08:40. > :08:43.as the older boy, the children hadn't acted before, Terrence
:08:43. > :08:49.Malick dealt with them in a very interesting way, he told them very
:08:49. > :08:53.little about what will happen. These are young kids. What they
:08:53. > :08:58.delivered was something quite mesmeric. He has coaxed something
:08:58. > :09:02.very wonderful out of them. whole idea that the basis of this
:09:02. > :09:07.film has something important at the centre. The internal monolougue of
:09:07. > :09:11.the wife saying is it about grace and nature. She's about grace and
:09:11. > :09:16.the husband about nature. problem with the film, ultimately,
:09:16. > :09:21.I felt as if I had assigned to an undergraduate to ask them to
:09:21. > :09:26.interpret a coming of age story set in Texas. They would have said in
:09:26. > :09:31.order to do this I must go back to the big bang, go through images of
:09:31. > :09:36.women and look at religion, I would say, you can, but you don't have to,
:09:36. > :09:43.it doesn't add too much. We have all done it, I'm reminded of
:09:43. > :09:47.Charley cough man's adaptation, you go dr Kaufman's adaptation, and you
:09:47. > :09:51.go further back and further back and further back. To God.
:09:51. > :09:56.I felt that he was very much, I couldn't work out if he was
:09:56. > :10:01.completely out of his depth and can only con cinema critics, we are
:10:01. > :10:11.easy to do that to, because we are always looking, I'm thinking of you
:10:11. > :10:16.
:10:16. > :10:21.as a film historian. Does this make him the auteur's autuere. He's so
:10:21. > :10:24.venerated it is difficult to criticise him. He's very
:10:24. > :10:29.pretentious, it is philosophically pretentious, but asthetically
:10:29. > :10:33.gorgeous, that is why people still love him. He doesn't always hold up
:10:33. > :10:40.to the veneration he's given. don't know what you take from Paul
:10:40. > :10:43.Morley's go or don't go, if you want to go The Tree Of Life is in
:10:43. > :10:48.cinemas now. Kevin Space is at home on the screen, but his main focus
:10:48. > :10:55.of the last 12 years has been the Old Vic theatre in London. His day
:10:55. > :11:01.job there is of artistic director, but he has contorted himself into
:11:01. > :11:08.the Shakespearian villain of villains, Richard III, in Sam
:11:08. > :11:12.Mendes's latest production. Richard III has been a frequent presence on
:11:12. > :11:19.the stage, played by Laurence Olivier and Ian McKellen to name a
:11:19. > :11:22.few, it is the blueprint for a coup d'etat. One thing that still
:11:22. > :11:26.commands the imagination is Laurence Olivier's portrayal of the
:11:26. > :11:31.bad boy on screen and the stage of the Old Vic itself. Olivier's
:11:31. > :11:36.theatre has welcomed back the play, this time under the direction of
:11:36. > :11:41.Sam Mendes, and the Old Vic's artistic directsor, Kevin Space,
:11:41. > :11:46.taking the lead role. The last time they worked together was on the
:11:46. > :11:53.1999 Oscar Garlanded film, American Beauty. They have both previous
:11:53. > :12:00.experience of the play. Mendes directed a production in 1992, and
:12:00. > :12:07.Space played Buckingham opposite Al Pachino's Richard on screen. This
:12:07. > :12:12.comes to the end of a three-year victory, with Sam Mendes bringing
:12:12. > :12:19.much screen talent to the play. Space joins a leg caliper, a claw-
:12:20. > :12:25.like glove for a hand, and a military uniform with echos of
:12:25. > :12:31.dictators. Richard meets the force of royal and regular GAL, Gemma
:12:31. > :12:41.Jones's Annabel Scholey and Niall Quinn give as good as they get.
:12:41. > :12:49.
:12:49. > :12:54.Does Space steal the show? Did he steal the show? He did for
:12:54. > :13:00.me, he's a cerebral actor and he liked it. It works very well with
:13:00. > :13:04.the role it's the arch manipulator, that is the point. I spoke to a few
:13:04. > :13:12.people who said he didn't emotionally inhabit the role.
:13:12. > :13:16.Richard III, it is a post fraudian idea to think we need to know his
:13:16. > :13:22.emotional ambition, we see in the news this week that material
:13:22. > :13:26.motivation is enough to make people do bad things and he wants the
:13:26. > :13:32.Crown. He plays all the layers of Richard's man nip laigs and comedy
:13:32. > :13:42.and shifting and his anger - man nip laigs and comedy and shifting
:13:42. > :13:44.
:13:44. > :13:49.and his anger. When he's offered the crown three times we see close
:13:49. > :13:53.ups on the screen. What about the cinematography, that is great?
:13:53. > :13:58.is an interview, it seems to be a live relay, this isn't some kind of
:13:58. > :14:02.dangerous work they are doing with recording material. I wondered
:14:02. > :14:09.about, Spacey, this is inevitable in a production, but he dwarfs
:14:09. > :14:12.everybody, apart from the women. I wonder, I hate to blame the
:14:12. > :14:17.Americans, because they have to take the blame for everything, but
:14:17. > :14:23.there is something about an American actor saying the word
:14:23. > :14:29."Tamworth", or "Leicester", that I can't quite take seriously! On a
:14:29. > :14:35.serious point of Tim dwarfing the other actors - him dwarfing the ear
:14:35. > :14:40.actors, in the very long - the other actors, in the very long
:14:41. > :14:47.first half the other actors don't seem to figure. It is Spacey's show,
:14:47. > :14:54.it all falls away behind him, he's constantly on, he's thinking, the
:14:54. > :14:58.extraordinary energy he emits. It is the cinematic Richard III.
:14:58. > :15:03.his cinema career, it is the twisted leg to remind us of the
:15:03. > :15:10.Union Suspects,s had the head in the box we reminds us of Seven.
:15:10. > :15:17.There is a small homage to all the films he has been in. It is
:15:17. > :15:21.brilliantly clever. I have said it before, Shakespeare is a very good
:15:21. > :15:25.HBO box-office writer. That constant sense of drama. Spacey has
:15:25. > :15:29.elevated it above any problems of Tudor propaganda or the cripple
:15:29. > :15:34.being made out to be evil. It is sheer performance, it is not even
:15:34. > :15:37.history just sheer performance. a sense it was a shame in the first
:15:37. > :15:41.half, I thought, that the relationship with Buckingham
:15:41. > :15:47.couldn't be intense enough to actually bring that alive as
:15:47. > :15:52.someone else that was acting alongside him? Spacey seemed to act
:15:53. > :15:58.as if Buckingham was OK. He still seemed to be reacting. In a sense
:15:58. > :16:04.it works, it is a strange way to look at their relationship, you
:16:04. > :16:08.don't get the pain of it. You do get the idea as Buckingham as a
:16:08. > :16:11.spin doctor, it works well, particularly for putting the idea
:16:11. > :16:15.of the play across to the audience. It is a populist version of the
:16:15. > :16:18.play. Some purists won't like that, it is playing to a crowd, it is
:16:18. > :16:22.presuming you don't understand what is happening. I think it works
:16:22. > :16:26.really well, it is putting across theatrically what the underlining
:16:26. > :16:30.meanings of the story are. What happens is you have the very long
:16:30. > :16:37.first half, you are slightly concerned that it is going to be
:16:37. > :16:42.Spacey, Spacey and Spacey, then the glorious change of gear with Haydn
:16:42. > :16:46.Gwynne and Annabel Scholey, it is extraordinary how these women can
:16:46. > :16:50.completely command the stage and challenge him in every way. Haydn
:16:50. > :16:55.Gwynne especially, the scene where he's Bartering for her daughter's
:16:55. > :17:01.hand, he's reminding him he has killed everyone else she's related
:17:01. > :17:08.to apart from this daughter. I was sitting there properly jaw-dropped,
:17:08. > :17:14.you realise there is someone else on stage who can go toe-to-toe and
:17:14. > :17:18.jaw-to-jaw. She relished it, and it drew attention to the other guys
:17:18. > :17:21.not. This first two hours were testing, to choose to break the
:17:21. > :17:26.show at that point was really quite brilliant. That moment that he's
:17:26. > :17:31.crowned. To come back from the same scene with a different perspective
:17:31. > :17:35.altered. There was a good reason for having wimpy men, it works well
:17:35. > :17:38.with him as a modern dictator, and once again the news this week, we
:17:38. > :17:43.are sitting thinking, big terrifying significant at the core
:17:43. > :17:50.and satellite wimpy people around him. Women with wild hair, I'm
:17:50. > :17:53.feeling this is kind of working for me. Life on Richard III could be
:17:53. > :17:57.the dramatisation of News of the World. You can't get away from it.
:17:57. > :18:02.There is a serious point here, I have never seen a production of
:18:02. > :18:06.Richard III where I thought the women mattered in the way they do
:18:06. > :18:10.in this production. Things with Queen Margaret, you think actually
:18:10. > :18:14.she's important here. They overplayed it by the end. They like
:18:14. > :18:17.decision that is are also very Machiavellian in themselves, I
:18:17. > :18:22.thought that was really good. brings out the strength of the way
:18:22. > :18:26.these characters are writen, and they are the - written, they are
:18:27. > :18:30.tend to be the dopey and wimpy ones, that is a question of direction and
:18:30. > :18:33.performance. You realise as it is written these people can be
:18:33. > :18:37.incredibly powerful. A quick word on The Bridge Project, that is
:18:37. > :18:41.three years, a success? I don't know, I think they have all, they
:18:41. > :18:45.have all dropped where somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic, these
:18:45. > :18:53.productions. Something happens when actors from these two different
:18:53. > :18:57.cultures get together. It slows everything down. Jeff goldbloom and
:18:57. > :19:00.Sissy Spacek? Some of them have been terribly show. What happens
:19:00. > :19:05.when critics of different things get together. It is much more
:19:05. > :19:08.successful, clearly. It continues until September, with handful of
:19:08. > :19:11.tickets available. Pipes, bowler hats, trains, are some of the every
:19:11. > :19:18.day objects that Rene Magritte painted over and over again. In
:19:18. > :19:21.infusing them with new meaning, or maybe not, intentionally, or maybe
:19:21. > :19:26.not. The Pleasure Principle is the first major British retrospective
:19:26. > :19:30.of the work of the Belgian surrealist in 20 years. Including
:19:30. > :19:40.the familiar iconic paintings and little seen photographs, commercial
:19:40. > :19:52.
:19:52. > :19:56.What we were trying to do in Liverpool is to stage a number of
:19:56. > :20:01.important exhibitions which look at particular aspects of important
:20:01. > :20:04.figures in 20th century art, Magritte now, and trying to put a
:20:04. > :20:09.different angle on well known figures. Magritte is one of the
:20:09. > :20:14.most popular artists there is. He's a poster boy of Surrealism. What we
:20:14. > :20:19.tried to do is look behind that facade of normality that he
:20:19. > :20:25.presented and see how powerful his work still is. Magritte is a
:20:25. > :20:33.perennially popular artist, but with this appeal comes the risk of
:20:33. > :20:37.overfamiliarity. In a bid to dispel our preconceptions of the work,
:20:37. > :20:41.Tate Liverpool has put the show under different headings.
:20:41. > :20:45.In this show you have all of the iconic works, you have the pipes
:20:45. > :20:49.and the apple, you have the clouds, you have the train coming out of
:20:49. > :20:53.the mantlepiece, you have the man in the bowler hats, all the icons
:20:53. > :20:57.are here. But at the same time you will see the unknown Magritte, the
:20:57. > :21:00.painter Magritte, the breaks in his work, where he suddenly paints
:21:00. > :21:09.completely sloppy and expressive, that is what makes his work
:21:09. > :21:13.interesting. The exhibition also showcases the
:21:13. > :21:22.commercial work of his advertising days, and surrealist home movies
:21:22. > :21:27.with his wife and muse, Georgette. Magritte, maybe more than any other
:21:27. > :21:32.of the surrealist, has created images that are instantly
:21:32. > :21:37.recoginsable, but they are complex. The dommin I don't know of day and
:21:37. > :21:41.night, - dommin I don't know of the day and night, perfectly executed,
:21:41. > :21:49.simple but also intriguing, disturbing, puzzling, that is a
:21:49. > :21:59.power of his. The excuse is perfect, simple and effective though the
:21:59. > :22:05.
:22:05. > :22:09.Paul, did you get a sense from this exhibition that although you knew
:22:09. > :22:13.about Magritte you only had passing acquaintance before? He is one of
:22:13. > :22:17.my favourite artists, I did think I knew enough. There were surprising
:22:17. > :22:23.turns. I got the feeling the exhibition was trying to recover
:22:23. > :22:29.his reputation a bit, he's obviously overexposed, a lot of the
:22:29. > :22:33.cliches in kitsch world could be sourced back to Magritte, he has a
:22:33. > :22:42.lesser reputation. I got the impression they were trying to
:22:42. > :22:46.position him more to DeJomp, I thought if he's more a Bob Dylan! I
:22:46. > :22:49.got this sense that it is the thing about being overfamiliar with these
:22:49. > :22:54.exhibitions is will the exhibition itself transform the reputation of
:22:54. > :22:58.Magritte or will the individual works. Or the shop? The shop is
:22:58. > :23:04.handily placed at the end of of the familiar paintings. What I found
:23:04. > :23:09.that was thrilling, frs not so much the exhibition or how it was
:23:09. > :23:14.curated, and there was a lot of great work, and it made me see how
:23:14. > :23:24.he thought, I got into the idea of the paintings not the exhibition.
:23:24. > :23:29.
:23:29. > :23:32.In an exhibition it will deral and desting Surrealism, it - it will
:23:32. > :23:36.devalue Surrealism. It didn't do that.
:23:36. > :23:44.I kind of felt like Magritte is one of those people who got turned into
:23:44. > :23:49.too many posters. The great moment in the Thomas Crown Affair, where
:23:49. > :23:55.everyone pretends to be somebody from Magritte. I was excite today
:23:55. > :23:59.see it away from the tea towels and all that, you can see it at the end,
:23:59. > :24:02.you have the perfect moment of repcation, here are ten or eight
:24:02. > :24:08.different versions of men in bowler hat, and here you can take your
:24:08. > :24:13.own! I found it really intriguing, there were lots of paintings I knew,
:24:14. > :24:21.and far more that I didn't know, especially the comic book of this
:24:21. > :24:29.figure, the Phantomas, he's a cat burglar and criminal, there he is
:24:29. > :24:37.suddenly turned into a Magritte. The Basque, the erotica there was
:24:37. > :24:41.so much, the bad period, the Renoiresque stuff, there was a
:24:41. > :24:46.complete fabulousness of Magritte in all his periods. I'm not sure if
:24:46. > :24:53.I felt the fabulousness or much pleasure, frankly. I remember when
:24:53. > :24:58.they did George Melly on Through The Keyhole, and Lloyd Grossman
:24:58. > :25:07.went around snooping and it was full of surrealist art, I thought
:25:07. > :25:11.there was nothing good enough to put in George Melly's bathroom.
:25:11. > :25:15.think he's amazing. That was the stuff I wasn't nearly as familiar
:25:15. > :25:19.with as I thought I was. It was one of those exhibitions where I
:25:19. > :25:22.realised I didn't know Magritte at all. I thought I was passingly
:25:22. > :25:26.acquainted with him. Particularly he has all these paintings where
:25:26. > :25:30.he's playing with language and he has all these ideas about
:25:30. > :25:33.literalism, and then representing what the idea might be in its
:25:33. > :25:37.relationship to language. Some worked better than others, but the
:25:37. > :25:40.way in which he was thinking conceptually about what he was
:25:40. > :25:43.trying to do and questions about ideas and representation. I think
:25:44. > :25:49.he does the kinds of things that Terrence Malick thinks he does and
:25:49. > :25:56.doesn't do. There was some things of equisite beauty, hi no idea that
:25:56. > :26:01.the Domain of Skaf life had been done, 16 times. When you see them
:26:01. > :26:08.all there. Thu suddenly lit up like Turner, you could see the technique
:26:08. > :26:13.that was there, that I had also underappreciated, he made it really
:26:13. > :26:19.beautiful. In a way he withdrew behind the bowler hat and created
:26:19. > :26:24.this image of himself. But for that anonymity, he was constantly
:26:24. > :26:29.present, he was sending himself to the future in a way that outdoes
:26:29. > :26:36.Andy Warhol and Hirst, he was replicating his own reputation.
:26:36. > :26:40.of the paintings, which until two years ago nobody knew had a mirror
:26:40. > :26:45.image partner, it was only just found two years ago? Amazing, and
:26:45. > :26:51.the question of whether he did it because there are two customers.
:26:51. > :26:55.That is the exact type of anecdote I want to find out at an exhibition.
:26:55. > :27:00.My problem with the exhibition is I wished because it actually covers
:27:00. > :27:03.the long career of a man who lived a long time. I actually think they
:27:03. > :27:07.overegged the pudding, they could have gone for the more straight
:27:07. > :27:13.forward chronological, so we could see the way his ideas developed.
:27:13. > :27:17.Here is a painter, I'm grumpy about this, it is a painter playing with
:27:17. > :27:20.the idea of banality, that is a dangerous game to play. They seem
:27:20. > :27:23.to be representations of a moment when something was dead pan and
:27:23. > :27:29.something was cool. I wonder whether the dead bit isn't the bit
:27:29. > :27:33.that seems most apparent, to my eye. These all seem very flat and
:27:33. > :27:40.unexcited. I know they play with the idea of flatness, and
:27:40. > :27:43.unexcitingness. But still for me. There is a lot of value in terms of
:27:43. > :27:47.the idea of the mystery of appearance. There was all those
:27:47. > :27:52.things that seemed like cliches before I went and suddenly came
:27:52. > :27:57.alive again. What excited me was the commercial art, actually. The
:27:57. > :28:02.vitality of that, the vitality of his film posters, and his orange
:28:02. > :28:07.juice adverts seemed to be more. was not about designing wallpaper,
:28:07. > :28:16.the whole exhibition was like a wallpaper sample board, full of
:28:16. > :28:21.unbelievable images. The back room with porn too. No time for that!
:28:21. > :28:27.The Pleasure Principle continues at Tate Liverpool until October.
:28:27. > :28:33.Award-winning author, Sarah Waters is renowned for historical novels,
:28:33. > :28:38.known as lesbian historical romps. The books have proved popular with
:28:38. > :28:43.TV audiences, The Night Watch has been adapted for BBC. In a
:28:43. > :28:47.departure from her usual Irene that it is September after the Second
:28:47. > :28:53.World War. We spoke to Sarah Waters and about why her new work lends
:28:53. > :29:00.itself to television. It is like her putting on a display
:29:00. > :29:03.just for us. Bravo. . I'm pretty much an old fashioned
:29:03. > :29:08.storyteller. I like plots, characterisation, dialogue. I'm
:29:08. > :29:12.part of a generation of people who grew up watching an awful lot of
:29:12. > :29:16.tele, films. I know when I'm writing a scene, usually I
:29:16. > :29:22.visualise it and write down what I'm seeing in my head. Following
:29:22. > :29:26.the lives and losses of four Londoner, The Night Watch explores
:29:26. > :29:31.the convolume luted emotional relationships and seemingly abitary
:29:31. > :29:40.connection that is interlink the main characters. My starting point
:29:40. > :29:44.for the novel was writing about relationships that had failed. The
:29:44. > :29:48.Victorian novels had young women at the start of their lives. For this
:29:48. > :29:52.I wanted to write about women my own age who had done that and
:29:52. > :29:58.moving on to something else. And dealing with the problems of
:29:58. > :30:08.relationships. Anna Maxwell Martin is Kay, an androgynous loner,
:30:08. > :30:14.scarred by emotional loss and scarred by his experience as an
:30:14. > :30:21.ambulance driverburg the blitz. were - during the blitz. You were
:30:21. > :30:25.the bravest person I know. It is easy to be brave in the war.
:30:25. > :30:29.Duncan, played by Harry Treadaway hides a dark secret, and battles
:30:29. > :30:34.with his own sexual desires. What so there is no shame in the army
:30:34. > :30:38.making you into a murderer, as long as for king and country it is OK to
:30:38. > :30:41.have blood on your hand. You want to talk about shame, you wait until
:30:41. > :30:46.you are out of here and you can't walk down the street without people
:30:46. > :30:52.pointing at you. The drama follows the unusual narrative structure of
:30:52. > :30:56.the novel, beginning during the period of reconstruction in 1947,
:30:56. > :31:01.and jumping back in time to 1944 and 1941 and the chaos of horrors
:31:01. > :31:07.of the blitz. As each character's past actions are revealed, their
:31:07. > :31:11.present and futures are explained. When I was writing The Night Watch,
:31:11. > :31:16.I thought nobody will want to adapt this. Everyone is a bit glum in it,
:31:16. > :31:22.for one thing, it has this rather difficult structure where it moves
:31:22. > :31:28.backwards. It was a technical challenge, but I enjoy that. I do
:31:28. > :31:32.like figuring out how best to tell a story. So has its film succeeded
:31:32. > :31:36.in capturing the war and post-war time atmosphere and the emotion of
:31:36. > :31:40.fraught and fractured lives. They say romance is dead.
:31:40. > :31:45.Natalie, you have come to this fresh, without reading the book.
:31:45. > :31:49.Saved myself some time too, well done. Do you get the atmosphere of
:31:49. > :31:54.the fear and recklessness and excitement and bravery attached to
:31:54. > :31:59.the war? Yes, all of those things are there. Also it is beautifully
:31:59. > :32:02.shot. You can feel the fabrics that everyone is wearing t made me feel
:32:02. > :32:09.strangely closer to the war than the future for the first time in a
:32:09. > :32:12.really long time. And I think it is really carried by its performers,
:32:12. > :32:16.Anna Maxwell Martin is just about as good a TV actor that is working
:32:16. > :32:20.at the moment. She's extraordinary. Once she's on the screen, she eats
:32:20. > :32:25.it, it doesn't matter how good the people around her are, she's all
:32:25. > :32:31.I'm focusing on. I never say this, I have been doing this programme
:32:31. > :32:37.for five years, do you know, it could have gone on longer, what
:32:37. > :32:40.about two episodes. They short changed the story? I think they
:32:40. > :32:45.have squadered one of the hottest literary properties that there has
:32:45. > :32:51.been in a decade or so. Why wasn't this three episodes when we could
:32:51. > :32:55.have really delved into the world. Given that we are right now airing
:32:55. > :33:00.Duncan Pearce a very silly novel, given this incredible reverential
:33:01. > :33:06.treatment. And you think here is a very good novel that deserves that
:33:06. > :33:09.five hours of attention. That was my problem, it whistles through it.
:33:09. > :33:13.I'm wondering if the chronological thing needs to work in a complete
:33:13. > :33:19.space, split over there it would be less. It is great in the book I
:33:19. > :33:23.love that thing, Terrence Malick has missed a bit of a thing. It has
:33:23. > :33:28.this sense of after the war, when we find them, everything is
:33:28. > :33:33.fragmented and broken up. People are broken? Then we go back to
:33:33. > :33:37.piece it together. It works wonderfully. To an extent it was
:33:37. > :33:43.sort of experimental in the book, but here it works so well. That may
:33:43. > :33:46.be why they needed to do it in one space. It is like a cousin to Scott
:33:46. > :33:53.and Bailey, the detective series set in the north, with the women at
:33:53. > :34:00.the front and men hin. It is so refreshing. One of the amazing
:34:00. > :34:04.things, the dialogue is terrific, it is not overblown, not
:34:04. > :34:08.sentimental it is heart wrenching? It is precisely researched, the
:34:08. > :34:13.work that went into the novel, the work went in to research war time
:34:13. > :34:19.prison life, all of that is transferred to the screen, very
:34:19. > :34:23.effective, the sub cultures between conscientious objectives and that.
:34:23. > :34:28.The film does this very well, it is a film populated by adults, that is
:34:28. > :34:32.a good thing, they had the guts to keep it adult. They haven't dumbed
:34:32. > :34:38.it down or patronised it, except the crucial bit of them deciding
:34:38. > :34:45.they needed to rewind for those of us who couldn't read 1947 and then
:34:45. > :34:51.1941. History tends to be sentimentalised
:34:51. > :34:55.and later in the war and after the war, apart from anything else it
:34:55. > :35:00.provide as great historical service. I hadn't realised that so many
:35:00. > :35:05.people actively didn't go to the bunkers, they wanted to see what
:35:05. > :35:11.was happening, it was almost like come and get me. Everyone was limb
:35:11. > :35:15.rated from their positions, they could anticipate things.
:35:15. > :35:20.finally get gay war time London instead of gay war time Berlin.
:35:20. > :35:26.a sense it wasn't a novel I think about gay love, it was a novel
:35:26. > :35:30.about a coming of age of women, and very much in the same way of the
:35:30. > :35:34.munitions with the First World War, in the Second World War they were
:35:34. > :35:39.taking charge of all sorts. Women's sexuality is at the heart of it,
:35:39. > :35:44.but it is not always about at the sire, it is certainly not all about
:35:44. > :35:48.lesbian sexuality, but there is questions about women's rights.
:35:48. > :35:53.hasn't invented this idea, this is a cue she's taking from the cinema
:35:53. > :36:00.of the period, when had you a generation of the stars, like
:36:00. > :36:04.Margaret Lock wood, all appearing in melodramas set on the home
:36:04. > :36:11.fronts revolving around stories not entirely unlike this one. What was
:36:11. > :36:15.very brave, not giving away this end, there is only one resolution
:36:15. > :36:20.regarded as a traditionals re l the unhappiness doesn't get magiced
:36:20. > :36:29.away. All of that is transferred very precisely from the book. It
:36:29. > :36:37.has a lovely Mel collie feeling to it. I wond - Mel Len collie feeling
:36:37. > :36:41.to it - melencholy feel to go it. The budget wasn't big enough to do
:36:42. > :36:48.the burning London. This isn't Hollywood. It is on next Tuesday
:36:48. > :36:55.night at 9.00. It is turning into a weekend of farewells, the News of
:36:55. > :37:05.the World, the space shuttle and Harry Potter, the final film.
:37:05. > :37:10.
:37:10. > :37:15.You know the stats about Harry Potter, 400 million books sold,
:37:15. > :37:19.translated into 67 language, including ancient Greek, including
:37:19. > :37:29.the most lucrative movie franchise of all time. The little wizard has
:37:29. > :37:29.
:37:29. > :37:36.come into millions of homes and people's careers.
:37:36. > :37:40.The spotlight tonight is Lizo, the BBC entertainment correspond
:37:40. > :37:42.department. Which of the Harry Potter books has told the most?
:37:42. > :37:47.Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 2. What two conditions
:37:47. > :37:53.were imposed on the making of the Royal Hospitals Trust films?
:37:53. > :37:59.wanted it an all-British cast made in the UK, number two commercial
:37:59. > :38:09.partners involved in merchandising, putting money into good causes.
:38:09. > :38:15.was JK Rolling's first choice to direct the movie? Terry Gillingham.
:38:15. > :38:24.Why did Steven Spielberg turn it down? He wanted it an animated
:38:24. > :38:28.movie and starring Haley Joel Osmond. Why has it been successful?
:38:28. > :38:32.People say because it explores folklore and drawing it together.
:38:32. > :38:39.Correct, it is said one in four American adults have seen a Harry
:38:39. > :38:43.Potter film, why? There are so many different reasons for that, firstly,
:38:43. > :38:48.it is because Americans are fascinate bid British culture.
:38:48. > :38:52.there be any more Harry Potter stories? No. I'm not entirely sure
:38:52. > :38:57.I agree with that. Excuse me, I have started so I will finish. I
:38:57. > :39:00.think she will carry on, it is not about money, JK Rolling has plenty
:39:00. > :39:04.of that, it is about the writer's need to write. She has done perhaps
:39:04. > :39:08.the most difficult thing, to create characters which mean something to
:39:08. > :39:17.her readers. They want more. I don't think she will be able to
:39:17. > :39:22.resist the urge to give it to them. Well, well. What brings you here
:39:22. > :39:28.Potter? Can you believe it's the Harry Potter final film, in a sense
:39:28. > :39:37.it has been, what, seven book, set films, in real time. Only eight,
:39:37. > :39:41.really. It seems like 27 to me. don't mean that. What have they
:39:41. > :39:48.contributed to the film industry, apart from anything else? Apart
:39:48. > :39:52.from giving aen to of people a tonne of people a huge tonne of
:39:52. > :39:56.work. I think they have realised British film makers, they are
:39:56. > :40:00.British book, set here, there was an option early on made by
:40:00. > :40:05.Spielberg in America, no, they stayed here, they stayed very
:40:05. > :40:09.British, it is a positive British brand. A film studio exists in this
:40:09. > :40:13.country that wouldn't be here if it hadn't been for the Harry Potter
:40:13. > :40:17.films. That's worth celebrating. I'm glad to see the back of them.
:40:17. > :40:20.Just before we end this conversation, space shuttle, Harry
:40:20. > :40:26.Potter, News of the World, what will you miss the most? I'm not
:40:26. > :40:32.going to miss any of them, never see Harry Potter films unless you
:40:32. > :40:39.send me, I have never read News of the World, space shuttle maybe, the
:40:39. > :40:45.only thing at the moment is Wimbledon and the sun. A going
:40:45. > :40:50.backwards not going to space, we don't read books but strange
:40:50. > :40:53.screens. I'm always saying goodbye to Harry Potter, if the News of the
:40:53. > :40:57.World goes permanently that would be a great thing, but it might be
:40:57. > :41:03.replaced with something that could take us to the past. It has to be
:41:03. > :41:08.Harry Potter, a true case of plot over everything and working for it.
:41:08. > :41:13.The shuttle, now I won't get the chance to fly t I thought maybe I
:41:13. > :41:16.would be able to sort it out as co- pilot. Sorry to leave you on a sad
:41:16. > :41:21.note. That is almost all for tonight.
:41:21. > :41:25.Remember we are standing by for your tweets. My thanks to Sarah
:41:25. > :41:31.Churchwell, Paul Morley, Natalie Haynes and Matthew Sweet, we take a
:41:31. > :41:36.short break until the Edinburgh Festival next month, but it is
:41:36. > :41:42.entertainment galore on The Culture Show on Wednesday at 7.00 BBC Two.
:41:42. > :41:52.We leave you with Frank Turner from the album Peggy Sings the Blue,
:41:52. > :41:56.
:41:56. > :42:02.# Peggy came to me # In my sleep
:42:02. > :42:07.# In the middle of the night # On a Friday night last week
:42:07. > :42:12.# She whispered hot shot # Now don't be scared
:42:12. > :42:15.# Got me through words of wisdom # I came back to share
:42:15. > :42:22.# She said # It doesn't matter where you come
:42:22. > :42:28.from # It matters where you go
:42:28. > :42:33.# I said Peggy won't you stay here for a while
:42:33. > :42:39.# We could drink whiskey # We could play cards
:42:39. > :42:43.# We could get wild # She said we'll play poker
:42:43. > :42:45.# Play for keeps # I only play angels
:42:45. > :42:48.# They never let me cheat # She said
:42:48. > :42:58.# It doesn't matter where you come from
:42:58. > :42:59.
:42:59. > :43:03.# It matters where you go # No-one gets remembered
:43:03. > :43:06.# In this senseless life # For the things they didn't do
:43:06. > :43:12.# You could say you had a good start
:43:12. > :43:16.# You could say I had class # You could say I was born beneath
:43:16. > :43:21.# The ceiling made of glass # I always kept an open house
:43:21. > :43:24.# And always do right by my friends # And when I got to St Peter's gate
:43:24. > :43:34.# I told the keeper # I'm not the one
:43:34. > :43:40.# Who needs to make amends # Because better times are coming
:43:40. > :43:50.# Bad times ahead # No-one gets remembered
:43:50. > :43:52.# My death is # To rest too long in # Peggy said
:43:52. > :44:01.# It doesn't matter where you come from
:44:01. > :44:09.# It matters where you go # No-one gets remembered