Moral aristocracy Reading the book, I found out that it was filmed. Since the content was amazing, I decided to watch it. Not to say that I was delighted, only "Fistful of Dust" really shocked with its revelation. The film, as well as the book, well show the depraved mores of high society of the 20s of the last century: with their pretense, irrepressible desire to live at someone else's expense, gossip and intrigue, entertainment, often crossing all the limits of reason, hypocrisy and betrayal. A few moments were particularly striking: among them, when during the organization of the funeral of his own child, his father has fun and plays cards, and his mother thanks for the fact that her child died, not a lover! In the center of the film is the discord between the spouses Tony and Brenda.
Tony Last is the one who's most sorry, given his fate. Although, if you look, he was always just floating with the flow, succumbing to circumstances and the will of chance, was sluggish and uninitiative, did not fight for either his family or his future in the end. An inglorious end, though it may have been created out of nobility—for why return, what awaited him in England—a dead child, a traitorous wife, seeking to take away the last, highest society, mired in debauchery? James Wilby portrayed the character well, or rather his absence. Charles Sturridge did not lose out, inviting D. Wilby to the main role in this film, because a year earlier he had already noted himself in the similar atmosphere of the successful film Maurice. The 80s - early 90s of the last century - the heyday of his cinematic career.
Interestingly, Rupert Graves, who played John Beaver, and James Wilby had already played together a year earlier in the already mentioned drama Maurice (1987). The actor still successfully stars in the main roles. This is the second adaptation by Charles Sturridge of Evelyn Waugh's novels - seven years earlier, the director had already embodied "Return to Brysehead" - one of the author's most famous works.
Christine-Scott Thomas did not have much film experience at the time. The only big success is the main role of Mary in the drama “Under the Cherry Moon”, where Christine also plays a rich spoiled person who falls into the clutches of Christopher’s fire. What is not the analogy with "Piglet dust"? Her Brenda Last is used to constantly satisfy her whims, has a husband that indulges her in everything, but he is “sick”, and does not go out into the world, while his friend Beaver is very gallant and polite, although far from selfless, like Brenda herself. It is unlikely that she believed that her relationship can be called love - that for her - just another toy, although worthy of his mistress.
In general, the film is literally full of such moments: lies and betrayal, the desire to get the “best place in the sun” literally in every frame. The wife is cheating on her husband, and everyone knows about it, but not the husband - just like in a joke. And when Anthony still finds out - Brenda demands a divorce from him, and even blackmails with nobleness, seeking to get more money for the maintenance of lover John Beaver. From all this fall, after watching, you remain impressed for a long time, with a certain feeling of emptiness from hopelessness.
The film about the mores of the prim English aristocracy of the 20-30s of the last century is a lot, and in almost all of them it is depicted similarly. Only this film is literally filled with pessimism, perhaps due to the fact that Evelyn Waugh wrote “A Fistful of Ashes” back in 1934 under the impression of still fresh dramatic events experienced by the author himself. An interesting detail: on the monument of one of the heroes, the date of 1934 is stamped - just the year of the creation of the book that formed the basis of the screenplay.
A few words about the history of the creation of "Fistful of dust" - turns out to be at its heart - a real story. While studying at Oxford in the first years after the Great War, the future famous writer became close to the “golden youth”, and these impressions formed the basis of many of his books. Novels about the English "dissolute aristocracy", oddly enough, were received by critics and readers with a hurrah. In 1928, Evelyn Waugh married the Lord’s youngest daughter, ironically also named Evelyn. However, the marriage was unsuccessful. “Evelyn-he” did not often see his wife (their friends called them “Evelyn-he” and “Evelyn-she”), preferring to spend time separately, the wife began to cheat (or was it the opposite?), only the marriage broke up after two years. As the writer himself claimed, her betrayals prompted him to write a novel, where there are many parallels between the Lastov couple and the real Ivelins. So the novel is somewhat autobiographical.
6 out of 10