Il destino nel dipinto

This film is a history of a painting and people who owned it over 300 years. It is told backwards through flashbacks, from its current owner, an eccentric art professor (Glenn Close) to its origin. Each chapter tells of the price they paid for their love of the painting. The individual stories are all involving, and there is rather morbid twist at the very end you won't see coming. Two hours well-spent. James Welch Henderson Arkansas. 4/17/21.

This is a fascinating film by Brent Shields which, although made for television, was largely shot on location in the Netherlands and must have had a substantial budget for a TV movie. The production values are very high, with excellent sets and costumes and wonderful old Dutch buildings used to great effect. The film has two spectacular performances, one by the amazing Glen Close, as you have never seen her before, and the other by the brilliant young British actress Kelly Macdonald, who was such a strong presence in the British TV series 'State of Play' and in various films since. There are many other fine performances as well, a number of them by Dutch actors unknown to those of us who do not wear clogs, eat pea soup, and pronounce strange vowels. The story is based upon the imagined existence of a lost Vermeer, which for the film was specially painted by a Dutch artist named Jonathan Janson, who succeeded admirably in imitating a Vermeer. The painting is of a girl wrapped in a cloak of hyacinth blue and sitting in the usual Vermeer room by window light. The film investigates the history of the painting through the centuries, in the manner of the famous film which follows the history of a violin, 'The Red Violin'. 'Brush with Fate' is rather a weak title, and must have depressed the DVD sales a lot. This film is really very charming and entrancing in many respects. There are some amazing twists in the story, which is a series of strange tales going back further and further in time until we discover who the girl was in the painting and have a lot of Vermeer himself in the story. The 'topper' in terms of plot twists is the extraordinary revelation at the ending. Anyone willing to sit through a film in which no one gets killed by machine guns, in which helicopters do not crash through skyscraper windows, in which people are not always pulling their clothes off so that the director can get excited, and who have some interest in art, would find this film interesting. It is also a very wonderful glimpse of the Netherlands of the past, and we see much more of it here than we do in 'Girl with the Pearl Earring'. Also, the film should be treasured as one of Glen Close's most bizarre roles, which she pulls off with true genius, and hence is a gem for those serious about great acting. As for Kelly Macdonald, she acts circles round everybody but Glen Close, and shows such fire and character that she sets the screen alight.

Thomas Gibson is a new art teacher at a high school. Glenn Close is good as usual as a history teacher who invites Gibson to see a painting of a young girl at a table, which she believes to be a genuine Vermeer, and she tells him stories, which we see as flashbacks about the people who owned the painting in the past. All of the stories take place in Holland, and for the most part each story takes place earlier than the one preceding it. I have no idea what happened in the first story, from the late 1800s, except that it seemed to involve a romance and may have had flashbacks within flashbacks. At this point I was not enjoying the movie. Another story took place in the early 1700s when a baby was abandoned during a flood after a dike break. The painting accompanied the baby and was intended to be sold for the baby's expenses.

Things got a little more interesting in the next story, which had some of the movie's few humorous moments. A man left a university to take a job working with the machinery used for the dikes. He got interested in a servant girl who was punished by being put in stocks, and their romance was not seen as a good idea. We find out in this story where the baby came from.

The next story was very brief, but a woman, who was unsuccessful in bidding for the painting at an auction, seemed to know more about the painting than the auctioneer. The next story revealed how Vermeer came to paint the girl's picture, and this was somewhat more interesting than the rest of the movie. At this point we have seen relatively little of Gibson and Close, but it appears things will get better as they return. Gibson doubts the painting's authenticity, so one more story about Jews in 1942 is necessary.

This was part of the 'Hallmark Hall of Fame' series, and I usually enjoy these movies, but I found this one to be a disappointment. The best things about the movie were probably the beautiful Dutch houses in the city, and the camera shots of windmills. But this was just not for me. Maybe others would enjoy it.

I had seen this movie years ago when it first came out and while it isn't the best movie ever made, I enjoyed it. First of all, it's original. Based on Vreeland's book, the author presents us with the idea of a lost Vermeer painting. What an exciting thought because it's believable! We live in a world where treasures from sunken ships are retrieved and Dead Sea Scrolls are discovered. Why not a lost painting? And then she creates a whole history of that painting. I have not read Vreeland's book, but I may if only to read the description of the painting, which must have been quite good in order for someone to be able to create the painting shown in the movie. It makes me wonder who actually painted "Girl in Hyacinth Blue" for the movie. I will search a bit more to find out. I'll bet other people will too. Any movie that inspires you to search further whether it be to look at the real Vermeer paintings and discover an appreciation for art or perhaps to read a book written by Vreeland or Russo (Richard Russo wrote the script for this movie and has also written one of my favorite books) is worth while.

I suffered through half this film before I switched to "Dr. Strangelove" on TCM. It is yet more proof that the "Hallmark Hall of Fame" has become hopelessly bad. Glenn Close misleadingly gets top billing, and delivers a magnificent performance, but she is in less than a third of the film. Her performance as an art enthusiast makes everyone else, including the usually reliable Ellyn Burstyn, seem even worse.

The film, following the pattern of such films as "The Red Violin", tells the stories of several owners of a beautiful lost Vermeer painting through the centuries. Perhaps the producers of this mawkish telefilm were hoping that lightning would strike twice, but if so, they forgot the need for subtle writing and direction, which are both hopelessly sentimental and hardly above the level of soap opera in this film. Ms. Close, as if sensing this, gives a performance that wipes away everyone else. In fact, the acting, with the exception of Close, is uniformly bad, as if we were watching a bad daytime drama in period costume.

The people who made this film obviously thought that by tackling an intellectual, sophisticated subject like a great Vermeer painting they could give the "Hallmark Hall of Fame" the class it once had, but they forgot to leave behind their recent tendency for corny writing and dramatics.