BBC2's "Daphne" Explores Du Maurier's Bisexuality

i didnt know this about dear ol' daphne... no wonder why i love "rebecca" so much haha...

Having seen this movie it's always interesting to see how different people's experience of a film can be.

Interesting to read this view but I find the last remark somewhat puzzling. If it was not true Daphne had a sexual affair I would say it's more than exaggeration if a film claims she did. I think many people would in fact consider it a lie!

Is the writer suggesting that because one person lies in a biographic film about someone not having a sexual relation it is somehow compensated for by someone else to pose the opposite lie in an biograpic film on an entirely different person?

And if so, does the writer of this review really think it will "help the cause" so to speak for people to lie about this either way?

Or did I completely misunderstand the last paragraph?

having reread the last paragraph I see the reviewer could have meant other biographic films on du maurier!

Having said that I still wonder what she means to say? the reviewer I mean.

As for "those days" ! Having read several biographies of people living in "those days" one of them being noel cowards biography I am not sure I agree with your take on how hidden the lives of many people were. I would say that others like the press did stay out of peoples lives more than todays media!

And a biography, in general, is not supposed to be fiction! Unless it is called a fictional biography! ;)

So, still wondering at the intended meaning!

Is a good actress but she was pretty rude upon meeting her briefly outside a theather in NYC.   I met her inadvertently in New York when she was starring in A Dolls House 10 years ago.  I was talking with my theater going girlfriend and someone noticed this gigantic woman and she is freakishly tall and she may have appeared bigger then she was because she was wearing motorcycle leathers and big boots.  She apparently overheard someone saying she was approaching us in her leathers and big boots and under her breath she mumbled in roughewn tones "stay away from me" with eyes buldging and teeth gritted.   She scared the bejesus out of everyone in earshot of her.  The theater goers, me and my pal included, made a pathway for this tempermental, but good actress, much like I would imagine Moses parted the Red Sea and she very conspicuously slinked away into the alleyway into the theater.

She did give a great performance and won the Tony for it and deservedly so, however much she acted like a big old asshole before she entered the theater.  Good actress. Not very nice woman.

I attended this theater production 10 years ago because I kind of enjoyed her performance of one of my lezzie icons (not hero's because I never thought of her in that regard), Vita Sackville-West in Portrait of a Marriage,  although I thought some of her performance was way over the top, I still enjoyed it for the sheer fun of it.  I actually loved the actress who played Violet Trefusis much better and thought her

 performance was truly brilliant.  Her name is  Cathryn Harrison and is the great-granddaughter of Rex Harrison of My Fair Lady fame. 

What is weird about McTeer and Geraldine Sommerville appearing as lovers in this film is that McTerr played Sommerville's mother in The Black Velvet Gown not long after I saw Portrait of A Marriage.  I don't know how I am going to react to seeing these two now play lovers because their performance as mother and daughter was very strong and has stayed with me until today. 

That said, can anyone of you Brits please post something on You Tube.  It would be very much appreciated. ;)

What don't you understand?  I made my point and made it as clear as I could.  I gave a critique of Mcteer plain and simple.  And, provided a personal albeit brief encounter with her and my viewing knowledge of Sommerville and McTeer's past performance together. 

And, your point is except to provide what you think passes for snark?  Hardly!

Cathryn Harrison is Rex Harrison's granddaughter not great granddaughter.

I can understand an actress wanting to get to work without having to exchange pleasantries with fans outside the theatre, especially at a time when Portrait would have meant lots of those fans were crazed lezzies - I love us but we can be a bit full-on.

It's not very nice to refer to her stature as freakish.  She's only 6'1" which isn't that tall really.  She was on an episode of French and Saunders years ago just after The Governor had been on, and I thought she was very very funny.  She's a brilliant actress, absolutely gorgeous and I certainly wouldn't judge her on one brief grumpy encounter.

is that your comment is totally off topic.

What does your personal encounter with mcTeer have to do with either the movie or the review? Or for that matter what does Cathryn Harrison have to do with this movie or this review? Or your opinion on two entirely different movies whose only connection to this movie/review is one of the actresses?

Besides which...hate to rain on your big moment but accidentally being in the same space and overhear somebody mutter something hardly constitutes as a personal encounter.

However if you do consider this kind of thing to the point...let me tell you about the time when at 13 years old I was walking on the streets here in utrecht and I bumbed into the world and olympic champion judo. And he just kept on walking!!! Possible he was on his way to a showing of "my fair lady" in which Rex Harrison plays professor higgins. He is btw the grandfather of Cathryn Harrison whom Seriously likes much better than Janet mcTeer and he ( Rex Harrison that is!) was married to Lilli Palmer who starred in maedchen in uniform! A movie I personally liked better than "daphne"!

Now for my opinion as to his performance as ioc member..... !

And to get back on topic...does anybody else have an opinion on that last paragraph of the review?

If the mods on this board want to delete my post for being off topic as you say, then they can please do so.  Right now all I can say is that you are one nasty bitch and that is my non topic opinion.

I thought the BBC kept this awfully quiet, or maybe I just missed it being advertised?

Either way I feel that as a stand alone piece of drama regardless of content or context it was very effective, subtle and gentle in its protrayal and relatively sensitive to the issues it explored.

A documentary type programme was shown prior, about the life and work of Du Maurier which set the drama up nicely.

I think at the moment the BBC are somehow the front runners in providing any sort of representation of women being in love with women. Fingersmith, Tipping The Velvet, this admittedly, really isn’t hard in the current climate. Maybe some protrayal of Lesbians in the last decade would be nice? Instead of having to dress up in big skirts and funny outfits!! Not complaining at all though...

It was well shot and an interesting insight into how we perceive the relationships between women during, I suppose the time in which Post-War and "Modern Britain" were being shaped. There is seldom any representation or acknowledgement of the lesbian community existing in wartime on television, I don’t know who it may offend but clearly someone??!!

I enjoyed it. I had an urge to re-read Rebecca and watch The Birds all over again. The actresses did a grand job of reflecting the time, and being based on letters and a biography I think television allows a little flexibility with character which the former formats do not. All in the name of fun!

More of this sort of stuff from the Beeb please!!

Errm, I really enjoyed 'Daphne'! I don't agree that Geraldine Somerville was the weak link. Her performance was subtle and quietly affecting. Just what the role demanded, I believe. I think a few actress might cower in Janet Mcteer's shadow but Somerville's performance had to be that bit more muted.

It's interesting that the next day(or two days later)the Daily Mail ran an article that said Daphne was most definitely NOT a lesbian. My memory is poor and can't remember who it was but I just thought it was typical of that stupid newspaper.

Yeah totally agree.

They aren't well known for their strong links to the LGBT community, hehe.

Sadly typical...! 

I can see the point being made about the last paragraph. Just because it has been denied in other biographys, it is not fair to compensate this fact by insinuating Daphne had an affair with Gertrude, if this was not actually the case. 

That said, I thought this drama was based on Du Maurier's own private letters? Surely if the facts were not in there, the authour of Daphne would not have been allowed to make such claims.

Surely the family would have taken some action against the authour. Or am I being a little naive?

Gali, asinteresting as your point was, I fail to see how everyone has to reply to it for their comment to be regarded as relevant. I found 'Seriously's comment about the actress interesting. This is a comments section of a website afterall, and not an essay about Portrayls of Daphne Du Maurier in Film and Television. If she wishes to discuss the actress, then so what. In an article about a Tom Cruise film I am certain people would write about Tom Cruise.

Any yeah, there are plenty of letters written by Du Maurier and her female lovers that discuss her relationships with women. The last paragraph is a bit unneccessary. She is portrayed as bi in this because she was, not bacause of the lack of queerness from other film depictions about her.

Perhaps I am also naive but I also heard the affair was known from her personal letters and I am inclined to, like you, presume if it was not true that there would have been some respons from the family. Unless they are incredibly open-minded and don't care if a film unjustly claims said affair!

And I have to say I liked the film and thought it had the high quality fans of bbc drama have come to expect! Not knowing much of the person Daphne du Maurier I took it that Sommerville was portraying her as a somewhat chilly and aloof character. I understand she had been described as such by some!

As for my confusion about the last paragraph of the review...I just felt there seemed to be a suggestion of the "two wrongs make one right" there! And that it is good for lbgt community if we are somehow portrayed ! Even if it is a lie in a biographic movie!

So my confusion and questions are...did anyone else understand the last paragraph to say this and do people agree with that sentiment?

And I was not implying a comment has to refer to my post to be relevant.

It just seems logical to me that after reading a review of a movie, comments would refer to the movie, aspects or intentions of the movie or the review of the movie.

Guess I just like to compartimentalise but when I want gossip I read the national enquierer . And if I want to read about a movie I will read a movie magazine. If someone wants to talk about a person in general it seems to me she is also free to start a thread on Janet mcTeer in the section meant for such discussions. I think it is called "other people" or something like that!

I think this review was clearly meant as a serious piece!

Yes, 2 wrongs definately don't make one right. I doubt the queerness has been exagerated. The last paragraph seems a little bit unnecessary.

But although the review has been meant as a serious piece it doesn't mean the replies have to be. I am sure most people can differentiate between the article written by the author and the comments written by the reader - to help them the comments have a slightly pink background. One of the benefits of the internet is the interactivity between the writer and the audience (and between the audience itself). Of course 'Seriously' could have started up a whole new thread, but it would have been a little random. Here it fit in. It was a little piece of opinion after an article that discussed the actresses performance. When I first started coming on this site there were no opportunites to reply to the articles so there was a bit of a seperatness. Now people can put what they like afterwards. I appreciate this may not be exactly to your taste, but I don't feel she has turned the article into a piece from the National Enquirer.

Movie magazines usally feature interviews with the actors themselves, and questions will veer into their personal life, their hobbies, their taste in film. It's a fluid world. Really, unless someone is being offensive or spamming, does it really matter what people write at the end of the articles? You can always skip it.

I saw this on the BBC the other weekend and really enjoyed it regardless of how much of it actually happened or not. I recommend watching it.

As for whether it's truthful or not, it's worth remembering that the (excellent) screenplay is based on a biography based on the letters, at the discretion of the owners of those letters, of someone who created fantasy for herself and the public as a way of life. So the layers of contamination of any "facts" are myriad and unqualifiable by anyone.

Similarly, the Daily Mail article would seem to be written by someone claiming to be a close friend and therefore knowing Daphne Du Maurier better than the biographer Margaret Forster (from whom he also states he withheld letters) and holding up a load of other "facts" as an alternative and more likely "reality". I would never presume to know someone so well as to know of their entire private life and interior experience, no matter how long and how closely I had been friends with them.

I'm just enjoying sitting back and taking in the myth that unfurls around someone who has got hold of the public's imagination. Fascinating and fun, isn't it?

Sorry if this is "off topic". I'm new to this stuff; but catch the show and the biography too. Both are worthy of your time.

 Let It Be...

I thought "Seriously's" comments/asides were interesting and most certainly not out of line.  "gali", however, really needs to lighten up; overly serious and pendantic appears to be a common malady among pseudo-intellectuals.  One needs to enjoy life and share in the experience of others. 

That said, I would agree that the last paragraph of the review is puzzling.  It is almost as if the reviewer is in lock step with anyone who denied the truth of the matter.  Very puzzling.

yeah, I definitely have to learn how to enjoy gossip! And find joy in sharing the experiences of the stupid! Sure would make life easier. Maybe then I also won't be bothered with seeing a difference between "off topic" and "out of order"!

But, I gather I am the one doing both now, so let's just say I take things too seriously and leave it all at that!

i watched this on BBC2 - it was either that, or watching Serbian lesbians winning the Eurovision Song Contest on BBC1, so it was a close-run thing! - and i thought that the whole programme was hugely derivative of Portrait Of A Marriage.  from the opening sequence (involving a message being relayed about a former love) to the flashbacks (started off by the writer retreating to her den), it felt oh-so-familiar and not a patch on POAM.  i'm quite surprised that Janet McTeer - whom i adore, muttered asides notwithstanding - agreed to be in it, as it was so similar to the (In My Humble Opinion) far superior Portrait.  and i thought that the character of Daphne (Geraldine Sommerville) was really whiny and self-pitying, which didn't do much to endear herself to the audience......apart from that, i don't have an opinion ;-)

oh well, at least we've got re-runs of Bad Girls to keep us entertained on ITV3... altogether now (in a Helen Stewart stylee, with a cheeky wee flash of the tongue) - "nice suit"!

some of us in the states (or without bbc2) would really like to view this. can anybody hook a poor lesbian up?

thanks-

I didn't read the Daily Mail article (as newspapers go its about one step up from the National Enquirer in terms of journalistic accuracy and integrity) but whoever played down DdM's bisexuality clearly didn't watch the documentary about her that premiered before the fictional drama. This consisted of "celebrity chef" Rick Stein (odd choice but I'll go with it - seems to have due to the fact that he lives in Cornwall as well....) visiting her haunts and talking about the geographical inspiration for her novels as well as her life. However he actually visited and talked with DdM's children, and her daughter in particular was very clear and firm on the point that DdM did have crushes on and deeper feelings for women (and referred to them as "Venetian Tendencies"), although I don't remember her explicitly acknowledging that DdM had a sexual relationship with a woman.

The Daily Mail is a homophobic rag that only has negative things to say about anything remotely non-heterosexual so I think we can safely ignore whatever it had to say on the subject....

I didn't realise though that Margaret Forster had written a biography - must check that out as her books are fab...... 

I know I'm incredibly late to the party on this discussion, but I wanted to say I saw this film last night and absolutely LOVED it!  As was mentioned in the review, it felt like I was watching a film from the 1950s, with the lighting, cinematography, make-up, music etc.  Except rather than all the lesbian content being coded, it was right out there for all of us to see.  How exciting!

> i thought that the whole programme was hugely derivative of Portrait Of A Marriage.  from the opening sequence (involving a message being relayed about a former love) to the flashbacks (started off by the writer retreating to her den), it felt oh-so-familiar and not a patch on POAM.

I saw POAM relatively recently, and while there are some plot similarities,  thought the style of this film (per my comment above) was SO different that it was a worthy piece in its own right.   I think many of the narrative or visual techniques felt familiar or overused because the whole film was an homage to films of an earlier era.  So it purposefully felt familiar, from the flashback device to the scenes of the crashing waves, to the sequence where we see the seasons change outside Daphne's writing studio window.  All of that has been used in many many films before, but to see it used to tell and explicitly lesbian story felt inherently different to me.

I completely agree with everyone who praised Geraldine Somerville.  I thought she was exquisite and subtle, and managed to convey a huge amount of emotion on the face of a character who generally hides their feelings.

--abzug

Visit http://www.badgirlsannex.com!