The first scrobble for this title is still propagating, but a community review is already indexed below.
Reviews
Longform community posts about this title
THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE & HER LOVER (1989)@steemychicken1735d
THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE & HER LOVER (1989)
I didn't know what to expect from this movie beyond a superficial description of the plot. Nor was I aware of the tone it would have. However, it managed to keep me glued to the screen for 2 hours, which automatically places it in the category of 'they don't make them like they used to'. And rightfully so.
Firstly, Greenaway does incredible things with great inspiration from theater and opera, with the set design reaching unparalleled heights. The setup is such that the viewer's eye never tires of the meticulously detailed sets that exhaust the existing color palette. If you wonder how this movie was made, then we are searching for the same answer.
It's not just the set that elevates the movie, but also the performances. I was unaware that Michael Gambon has the ability to dominate the entire scene and trample it with his boot, while simultaneously chewing on something from a French recipe. He's loud, he's a thief, he's brash, and he controls everyone, and if he wants, he sets them on fire too. A pure product of unbridled Thatcherite nouveau riche. Both Helen Mirren (I'll say it: excessively hot in the movie) and Alan Howard comfortably play the more subdued characters, in direct contrast to Gambon.
I'm generally trying to find if anything is missing from the movie and I can't see a single element that isn't there. This movie also makes me think about how rare it is today to see such an expression of creative freedom that Greenaway uses to the fullest here. What a movie.
›Film Review: The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover (1989)@drax1405d
One of the more embarrassing episodes in late 20th Century Hollywood history was the major tightening of censorship and the way it was made possible with introduction of new MPAA ratings that had been originally devised to give more creative flexibility to the film makers. One of the films that contributed to the process was The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover, 1989 British drama written and directed by Peter Greenaway.
The Cook, one of four main characters, is Richard Borst (played by Richard Bohringer), French chef that runs La Hollandais, elegant and classy London restaurant, which is frequently visited by the Thief or Albert Spica (played by Michael Gambon), powerful, arrogant and sadistic gangland boss. Spica comes there with the retinue of henchmen, because he fancies himself enjoying gourmet food, but even more enjoyment is given by his practice of insults, intimidation and physical violence directed at his men, restaurant staff and other patrons. Among Albert’s victims is his elegant but long-suffering wife Georgina (played by Helen Mirren) who, while forced to endure husband’s misbehaviour happens to notice Michael (played by Alan Howard), quiet bookseller who spend much of his time at the restaurant table reading book. Two of them are quickly attracted to each other and begin using Georgina’s visits to toilet to start torrid affair, which would continue even when Richard becomes aware of it. Despite their precautions, Albert finds about the Georgina’s infidelity and exacts brutal revenge on Michael. Georgina reacts by asking Richard to help her exact even more brutal revenge of her own.
Films of Peter Greenaway is an acquired taste, and the very beginning of The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover gives rather graphic answer why is so. Scene begins with dogs eating thrown meat on the street and continues with Albert having one of his late paying “clients” stripped naked, forced to engage in coprophagia, smeared with dog’s excrement and finally “washed” by Albert’s urine. This is just one of many excesses in the film that would also include scenes that depict murder, mutilations and torture, including those of children; film also features nudity, although used in quite un-erotic way, even in love scenes. However, all this content, which would test the tolerance of many viewers, is presented with the context of meticulously conceived narrative structure and great care about the form. Film was shot entirely in the studio with the help of cinematographer Sascha Vierny, production designers Ben van Os and Jan Roelfs, as well as famed fashion designer Jean Paul Gautier who designed characters’ costumes. Greenaway insisted on slow tracking shots that allowed audience to notice various details, but mainly emphasis on different colours used for different settings – red for restaurant, green for kitchen, white for toilet and blue for street. Music was provided by Greenaway’s old associate Michael Nyman, but his score, although atmospheric, wasn’t as memorable as those Nyman would compose later in his career.
The greatest asset of the film is in the cast. Of four main characters, most impressive is Albert, played with great skill by Michael Gambon who portrays one of the most despicable and irredeemably evil characters in cinema. Gambon easily outshines all other cast members. That includes Helen Mirren who nevertheless gives good performance in which she easily leads her character through various stages – battered woman, passionate lover, desperate runaway and, finally, determined avenger. Richard Bohringer is effective but not particularly memorable, and the same can be said of Alan Howard who, apart for few scenes, lacks proper chemistry with Mirren. The rest of the cast is almost unnoticeable, including some actors who would later have respectable careers like Tim Roth or Ciaran Hinds. Greenaway used to describe his film was allegory at the general state of affairs in Thatcher’s Britain and critique of crass materialism and various unsophisticated nouveau riche characters that rose through prominence during the era. Some critics, on the other hand, suspected that Greenaway’s motive was misanthropy and delightful depiction of lust, violence and barbarism under the thin cloak of civilisation and high culture. Whatever the real message was, it wasn’t as effective as it could have been because of the lack of proper humour. Greenaway also had problems with pace and too much excessive content in the first part of the film made viewers too jaded, making the finale, inspired by Jacobean plays, look rather anti-cathartic and disappointing.
The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover nevertheless became Greenaway’s best known work. It had less to do with film’s quality and more with controversy that arose during US distribution. When Miramax, which had US distribution rights, subjected the film to MPAA ratings board, it was branded with “X” rating. Miramax refused to apply it, arguing that “X” was associated with pornography and opted to distribute it unrated. That led to problems with film’s accessibility in some of the more conservative sections of the country. Influential critic Roger Ebert suggested that MPAA, in order to evade associating “problematic” art films like The Cook with pornography, introduce new rating for mature audiences. His suggestion was ultimately accepted and new rating – NC-17 – was born. But that rating, just like NC-17, quickly became associated with film erotica resulting in studios removing all but mildest form of film eroticism in order to get commercially viable “R” rating while proportionally toning down similar content in films intended to get PG-13. The ultimate result was general narrowing of the scope of acceptable content and suppression of creativity in Hollywood. The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover thus, ironically, entered film history books for the wrong reasons.
Recently my brother recommended that I see a film by director Peter Greenaway. I haven't had a chance to see Peter's work before, so I wasn't sure what to expect, after the screening I can tell you that it's a masterpiece on stage.
The Cook the Thief His Wife & Her Lover, it has a long title, but intrigues from the first seconds.
The film begins with the raising of the curtain which is supposed to be a sign to the viewer that the whole thing is stylized on a theater stage.
The film takes place over the course of a week during which time we will meet various characters who will have crazy adventures.
As the title itself suggests it will tell the story of several characters who, like in a lavish restaurant, will steer us extremely stagey.
The main character is the owner of the restaurant, who is both a sadist and a thief, although he tries to be elegant at the table it comes out almost caricatured, the second important character is his wife, who considers an object and an accessory to him, ridicules her in front of friends as well as threatens and beats her. The wife accidentally finds love, which turns out to be an affair even near her husband. The lover visits restaurants every day because that's the only place he likes to read and meets the sadist's wife. The cook tries to keep the business running somehow.
Each of these vastly different characters is united by one food. Food that can sometimes be cruel, but also interesting Peter shows that people like animals change when it is more convenient for them.
The film takes place on several "sets" we have a street dark dirty even with only a little access to light, full of drunks and dogs running loose. Then we have the kitchen, which looks more like a market, full of people dirt, singing and cooking. The hall in front of the dining room, the predominant color is red though not yet intense. This is where the characters stop for a moment to open the big door. The dining room is hidden in blood red and in splendor which is supposed to symbolize dignity. Still there is the bathroom white where the lovers meet which is supposed to symbolize their innocence.
As you can see, the colors in this film even beat the viewer's eyes to get acquainted with his rather interesting artistic vision.
Everything in the film even flows the camera moves from one room to another, and the whole film rolls on these several extremely different rooms.
In places the film resembles a play similar to Macbeth or Titus Andronicus, although the film is more oriented towards black comedy, but you can feel the atmosphere when a character delivers a monologue.
The work that Peter has created can be twisted in places (like the child who sings in the kitchen)but this pinch of surrealism even adds to the charm of the whole work, creating a mixture that will not be forgotten.
High praise deserves the music, which fits perfectly into a scene.
The film tries to show through food how a person can be cruel to others, but also what punishment he will pay for it.
The almost two-hour screening takes us to the boards of an English theater, Helen Mirren together with Tim Roth create an explosive mix of
I recommend, if you didn't know this film before, it's worth a look because you can feel the art in bim, they don't just create ks on the boards, but art such that falls in the memory, it's not a high-budget film, but it makes up for it with an original plot and one of the most interesting finales I've seen in recent times.
8/10
Ostatnio brat poleciał mi bym zobaczył film reżysera Petera Greenaway’a. Nie mailem wcześniej okazji zapoznać się z twórczością Petera, wiec nie byłem pewny czego się spodziewać, po seansie mogę wam powiedzieć, ze to arcydzieło na scenie.
Kucharz, złodziej, jego żona i jej kochanek, ma długi tytuł, ale intryguje od pierwszych sekund.
Film rozpoczyna się podniesieniem kurtyny co ma być dla widza znakiem, ze całość jest stylizowana na scenę teatru.
Film dzieje się w przeciągu tygodnia w tym czasie poznamy różnych bohaterow, którzy będą mieć szalone przygody.
Jak sam tytuł sugeruje będzie opowiadał o kilku postaciach którzy niczym w wystawnej restauracji będą nam sterować niezwykle sceny.
Glownym bohaterem jest właściciel restauracji, który jest jednocześnie sadysta i złodziejem, mimo ze stara się przy stole być elekwetny to wychodzi wręcz karykaturalnie, druga ważna postacią jest jego żona, która uważa za przedmiot i dodatek do niego, ośmiesza ja przy przyjaciołach jak i grozi i bije. Żona znajduje przypadkowo miłość, która okazuje się romansem wręcz koło męża. Kochanek odwiedza codziennie restauracje bo tylko tam lubi czytać i spotyka się z żona sadysty. Kucharz stara się utrzymać interes by jakoś mógł funkcjonować.
Każda z tych skrajnie różnych postaci łączy jedno jedzenie. Jedzenie które bywa okrutne, ale i ciekawe Peter pokazuje, ze ludzie niczym zwierzęta zmieniają się kiedy im wygodniej.
Film dzieje się na kilku „planszach” mamy ulice ciemna brudna wręcz z tylko małym dostępem światła, pełnym pijaków i psów biegających luźno. Następnie mamy kuchnie, która bardziej wyglada jak targ, pełna ludzi brudu, śpiewania i gotowania. Sala przed jadalnia, dominuje kolor czerwony choć nie jest jeszcze intensywny. To tutaj na chwile zatrzymują się bohaterowie by otworzyć wielkie drzwi. Jadalnia skryta w krwistej czerwieni i w przepychu co ma symbolizować dostojność. Jeszcze jest łazienka biała, gdzie spotykają się kochankowie co ma symbolizować ich niewinność.
Jak widać kolory w tym filmie wręcz biją w oczy widzowie by mógł zapoznać się z jego dość ciekawa wizja artystyczna.
Wszystko w filmie wręcz płynie kamera przesuwa się z jednego pomieszczeni w drugi, a całość filmu toczy się na tych kilku skrajnie różnych pomieszczeniach.
Film miejscami przypomina sztukę podobna do Makbeta czy Tytusa Andronikusa, choć film bardziej ukierunkowany jest na czarna komedie, ale czuć ten klimat kiedy jakaś postać wygłasza monolog.
Dzieło jakie stworzył Peter bywa miejscami pokręcone (jak dziecko, które śpiewa w kuchni)jednak ta szczypta surrealizmu wręcz dodaje uroku całemu dziełu, tworząc mieszankę która nie zapomni.
Na wielkie uznanie zasługuje muzyka, która idealnie wpasowuje się w dana scenę.
Film stara się ukazać przez jedzenie jak człowiek potrafi być okrutny wobec innych, ale tez i jaka zapłaci za to karę.
Prawie dwugodzinny seans zabiera nas na deski angielskiego teatru, Helen Mirren wraz z Timem Rothem tworzą wybuchowa mieszankę
Polecam, jeśli wcześniej nie znaliście tego filmuje, to warto się przyjrzeć bo czuć w bim sztukę, nie tylko tworzą ks na deskach, ale sztukę taka która zapada W pamięci, to nie wysokobudżetowy film, ale nadrabia niebanalna fabuł i jednym z najciekawszych finałów jakie było mi zobaczyć w ostatnim czasie.
8/10
