An Awfully Big Adventure

Shame on all of those who gave most of the plot away. This is a worthwhile film, one I have seen at least twice and will watch any time it is on. True, I am a fan of Alan Rickman, but it goes beyond that. As a slice of British theatre life it is up there with "The Dresser" and is about as depressing. A romp it is not, but so what? Was it marketed badly? Yes, perhaps. But it is well acted, tightly directed and even fun to watch at times. It doesn't end well, but as Brad Pitt said in character in "The Devil's Own" ... "this isn't an American story." Hooray for that.

As a character study of several people, it is about as good as it gets, although I might want a little more depth, especially on Rickman's character. He is gentlemen enough to be destroyed by what he does in the end and it enobles his character. I enjoyed watching Hugh Grant, who is a delightful man in person and not quite the twit he often plays, cast against type as a nasty, bitchy queen. Yeah, he can act. So what if they pay him a lot of money to be himself, more or less, most of the time? When pressed, he can deliver.

If you like Grant and Rickman, you can't go wrong. If you like dark stories of behind-the-scenes theatre life, this is a good 'un for you. And young Ms. Cates, married to Skeet Ulrich gives a great performance, even if she had to lie her way into the part.

I've been curious about this movie for a long time. I finally saw it on IFC.

It was great! In this age of VERY expensive, predictable, committee-approved "art", I was relieved to watch this story unfold. Although I suspected early on about the relationship between Cates and Rickman's characters, it's execution was much better than the usual pap that pretends to be a surprise or twist.

Or even interesting.

The real twists in this story, was its own mirror of the real human forces and decisions that keep some of the sweetest, and unfortunately, worst stories going on. The twists were the tiny reasons why such things, sometimes painful and abhorrent to our collective cultural sense of what's right and decent in a society, to continue within it.

The hypocrisy of denying that these dark parts of ourselves exist often cause them to continue. Often times, the self-appointed moral-police of our culture make this inevitable in their pursuit of human frailty, the aftermath of its hunt, and the white-washing of the events (and non-events) they discovered.

No character represented total evil, good, decadence or purity, including Stella. She had as much (subtle) emotional weaponry with her, as she had emotional scars.

Many Americans don't like, or have been trained (over time) to not have patience for such imperfect main-characters in fiction anymore. The one-dimensional, mass-marketed character, is the norm here now.

That's sad. Because of that, this movie (and others like it) didn't do very well here.

Having this story take place within the entertainment industry is an excellent way of displaying so much of the world's human tragedy AND stupidity being covered up by some people's treachery, some people's nobility, or a combination of both.

And even at the end of this tale, all of the stage crew, like life itself, executed their own particular versions of the adage, "The show must go on."

No perfect hollywood story here, with it's base and stupid doling out of come-uppance of everyone's flaws...or Evil.

I particulary enjoyed this film. I thought Hugh Grant did a great and decidedly out-of-turn portrayal of the deviant Meredith. Alan Rickman looked so cool on that motorcycle it wasn't even funny. The lighting in this film was excellent, and it's portrayal of petty theatre politics was pretty accurate even by modern standards. Georgina Cates was a wonderful Stella and the plot was well-developed. It seems as though most English adaptations of books tend to be better cinematically than original American films. Go figure.

This is one of the better films about theatre and what it does to some people. It resembles "The Dresser" in atmosphere to a certain extent, and in the portrayal of many of its characters. Both are set in Northern England during the 1940s, in rather faded theatres. Characters from one film could quite easily have inhabited the other. Here however we follow primarily the journey of a stage-struck young girl as she enters the strange and often unpredictable world of a repertory theatre -her own awfully big adventure. Note the irony of the title. Secret desires and yearnings linger under the surface, bitchiness and petty jealousy escort humour and the spirit of "the show going on" no matter what. It is however quite a dark film, and bravely allows us to get to know characters who are unsympathetic but not altogether unlikable. Alan Rickman underplays beautifully as always, and a restrained Hugh Grant demonstrates his considerable skill as a character actor. This is one of the most interesting of all his screen performances. Georgina Cates gives a stunning performance of the innocent (but not THAT innocent) girl drawn into the world of the theatre, and the supporting cast are faultless. Prunella Scales, Carol Drinkwater and Peter Firth deserve special salutes however. Lots to like here, but it is not at all a feel good movie. Nor is it meant to be.

Whatever you do, do not-I repeat, do not watch An Awfully Big Adventure with your father. Gents, do not watch this movie with your daughter. I don't care if one of your greatest childhood memories is going to see Peter Pan with your dad, or if both of your favorite actor is Alan Rickman, don't watch it together. You will be so sorry, but spoilers prevent me from telling you why.

I rented this movie thinking it would be fantastic. Released the same year as Sense and Sensibility, Alan Rickman and Hugh Grant team up again in a film about a theater troupe and its eccentricities. Coming from a theatrical family and having spent my fair share of time in that world as well, I always like watching movies that depict it accurately. Georgina Cates stars as the young ingenue in search of connection and a mature role model. She joins a theatrical production of Peter Pan, but she soon learns that theater people aren't any more well-adjusted than she is. She first develops a crush on the director, Hugh Grant, but he's not very nice and isn't interested in her at all. Alan is far nicer to her, and she winds up in his bed instead.

The acting in this movie is very good. If you don't have a daughter, or if you don't have Daddy-issues, and you love dark movies with good acting, you'll probably like this one. Georgina Cates, a newcomer to the big screen, truly embodies the lost, emotionally wounded qualities of her character. Hugh Grant deviates from his usual screen persona, and his snippy, cold delivery is very convincing. Alan Rickman, who's always great, puts so much into this role. Playing an "actor" stepping into a small production and making an impression on a youngster, while showing the audience that he's not worthy of her hero worship, takes a lot of nuances during every scene. His performance is flawless, but the story might be too upsetting for you to want to watch.

The story is extremely dark, but as it's set amidst a theatrical background, it's very good. It feels like it could have been adapted from a classic opera, and I'm almost tempted to read Beryl Bainbridge's original novel. If you've never seen either Hugh or Alan in a film, or you really like them, you might not want to rent this one. Stick with Sense and Sensibility instead, since it also has great acting and a good story, and it's not upsetting. Hopefully this movie won't ruin Peter Pan for you, but chances are you won't forget it as long as you live.

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to nudity, graphic sex scenes and upsetting subject matter involving a child, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.