The Invisible Woman

A 6 or a 7? I went with 6, but would have preferred 6.5.

The film is beautifully made, which is no surprise, with beautiful costumes and scenery from the Victorian era, as well as being beautifully acted and well produced. However, although loosely based on the biographical book of the same name (The Invisible Woman), the plot line is vague and esoteric; that is, "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest."

We see glimpses into the life and behaviors of Dickens, his mistress Ellen "Nelly" Ternan, and Dickens' wife, but the film provides little depth or detail, and certainly no explanation for the meaning of these glimpses, or even a clear time line. If you know enough about Dickens ahead of time it will make sense; if not, it will remain a mystery (such as, "what was that scene about?") unless you, as I did this morning, start learning more about Dickens' life as he lived it, including better understanding the book the film was based upon. We see otherwise unexplained glimpses into the life of Dickens and Nelly, some of which seem to be inaccurate dramatizations (poetic license?), which have little meaning on their own, and leave you wondering what just happened, and why was that important. You'll get the overall picture, but it will be like a jigsaw puzzle with many missing pieces, some of which , because of those missing pieces, are actually incorrectly put together. If you're not already familiar with the life of Dickens and Ternan, read up on Dickens before you go, or be prepared to read up on him after you see the movie. But don't otherwise expect to come up with a clear picture of anything, except that Dickens and Ternan had a long-standing affair that affected her past his death.

I did not plan to see this film, feeling that seeing 'The Invisible Woman' did not offer me anything unexpected, however a quirk of fate meant that I was fated to see it. This is rather appropriate, since fate seems to play an important part in this film.

Film opens on a beach. A woman is striding along it with a most purposeful gait. However she has rather a distracted manner about her. As the film develops, through long flash-back scenes, we learn about her earlier life.

The woman, really no more than a slip of a girl, is Nelly, played by Felicity Jones. Nelly is an actress, part of an acting family. A play is the device which causes Nelly to meet the famous writer Charles Dickens, played by actor Ralph Feinnes.

This film is a true story of how their meeting changed their lives. In style it reminded me of 'The French Lieutenant's Woman' (1981). Like that film, this one too jumps backwards and forwards in time. However, unlike 'TFLW', this film is not a film within a film. Although, having said that, the play where they met, does set the tone for the film. This is of course a story of fatal attraction, however there are no bunny-boilers in this film. Here rather, the protagonists, play out to the full, the hand dealt by destiny.

The film is set in the Victorian era. This was a time of high moral standards that restricted freedom in social behaviour. It was also a period of much (secret) hypocrisy. All this is captured well in the film. Captured too, is the keen eye of Charles Dickens, which made him justly famous. This is shown well in a key scene.

Charles Dickens was very famous, and his celebrity-status has an almost modern-day feel to it. He is a larger-than-life character, the life-and-soul of the party, a real party animal. Other actors could have played the role, the excellent Simon Callow has in the past, however one year on from his title-role in 'Lincoln', once again Ralph Feinnes becomes the character he is playing. Not for one moment do you doubt that you are seeing Charles Dickens in this film.

Wilkie Collins, a friend of Dickens, is played by Tom Hollander. This supporting role is well played by this versatile actor. Last year, he impressed this reviewer, with his two contrasting roles in 'About Time' and 'Byzantium'.

While the men in this film are shown enjoying life to the full, the same cannot be said about the women. In the title role, and completely deserving of her top billing, Felicity Jones gives a pitch-perfect performance. We see an innocent girl mature, realize the realities of her situation and the times, but at the same time remaining gutsy and upholding her standards. These inner struggles are at the heart of this film.

Nelly's mother is played by Kirstin Scott Thomas, and she gives a very subtle performance, that perfectly captures the ambiguities of the situation, and the time. Joanne Scanlan, has perhaps a very hard role, playing Mrs Dickens. She is the mother of his large brood of children, some still young children. However the scenes between husband and wife show that they are very different and convey problems in the marriage. Mrs Dickens seems a rather stoic figure. She is not portrayed very sympathetically, but rather as dull, quiet and unimaginative. In this film, the part of Mrs Dickens, was never going to be an easy or sympathetic one, but Miss Scanlan delivers a believable and poignant one.

All of the women in this film show that they are trapped by their environment. Their choices are limited, and this is shown well in the film, as well as by the actresses playing their parts.

The last film I saw at the cinema, previous to this, was 'Jack Ryan: Shadow Agent'. Like that film, this one too is directed by one of the actors, and also directed well too. Mr Feinnes demonstrates a fine directing eye. I particularly liked, the slightly disconcerting shots; the complete silence that emphasised the enormity of the passion, the extreme close-ups that reinforced the concept of memories. Even the short horse race scene, which at first seemed artificial, ended authentically, and very cleverly conveyed the anticipation, immediacy, and speed, of a race. From the first bustle onwards, costumes and all other aspects of this period drama seemed truly authentic and without a wrong note. Bravo! Mr Feinnes, Bravo!

This thought-provoking period-drama has elements of love, romance and tragedy. It is a perfectly crafted piece of work and a fitting tribute to all involved. True story. 10/10. Bravissimo!

"Every human creature is a profound secret and mystery to every other."

In this follow up to his directorial debut, Coriolanus, Ralph Fiennes directs himself as Charles Dickens focusing on a specific period of his life rather than on a full blown biography. I am a huge fan of Dickens' work and have read many of his novels, but this film focuses on his later years after he had become a successful and respected writer. He was a very popular figure during the Victorian Age and we get glimpses of this here in The Invisible Woman as he struggles to hide his affection for a teenage stage actress he encounters named Nelly Ternan (played by Felicity Jones). Dickens is married, but he finds no fulfillment in his wife who doesn't understand his work. But since he's such a public figure, he must keep his affair a secret which is something Nelly finds hard to accept. This period piece stands out visually thanks to the beautiful costume design and setting which transports us to the Victorian Age. The Oscar nomination for achievement in costume design was well deserved although it lost out to The Great Gatsby. The performances from Felicity Jones and Ralph Fiennes were superb and the chemistry between them was strong, but the major issue with this film has to do with its slow pacing. The film is a little less than two hours long, but it feels like much more. However it's hard to resist this film due to the charm that Fiennes' Dickens evokes on the viewer. We have read his novels where he bears his soul about his troubled and difficult past (David Copperfield is my favorite work of his and it is his most autobiographical one), but I really never pictured him as this successful writer who enjoyed the spotlight and had such charisma. Its that very essence of Dickens that got me through the movie.

The Invisible Woman was adapted by Abi Morgan from Claire Tomalin's book and it focuses on Dickens' affair from Nelly's point of view as she dealt with the pain of their secret relationship despite having a privileged life. Everything about this period piece looks beautiful, but still it feels like its missing something and I quite can't figure it out yet. I can't fully grasp the mystery as to why Nelly accepted to live this life while internally she despised herself for it. The film doesn't bear her soul, but only shows signs of this externally through her strong performance. She is troubled and despite her admiration for Dickens' work we don't see that same passion in her eyes that he shares for her. The supporting performances from Kristin Scott Thomas, Tom Hollander, and Joanna Scanlan do lift the movie. Scanlan plays an important role as Dickens' wife as she comes to grasp the reality of her husband's affair. It's the poor way she's treated by Dickens that turns her off. However, Dickens is so charming that it's hard not to like him. Scott Thomas plays Nelly's mother and she is the one that convinces her to accept the life Dickens offers her. The film explores this complex relationship and it succeeds in most part thanks to the strong performances but it still fails to engage us more in their world. Just like Nelly's repressed emotions, the film at times feels repressed and doesn't quite manage to open up for the audience.

There was a film called "The Invisible Woman", a sequel to "The Invisible Man", from 1940, but there is no connection between that film and the 2013 version. This film is not science fiction but the story of the love affair between Charles Dickens and his mistress Nelly Ternan. Nelly is "invisible" in the sense that Dickens, worried about the possible effect on sales of his books, is forced to keep her existence a secret, even though it is common knowledge that he and his wife Catherine have separated. Intercut with the main action are scenes showing Nelly's later life in the 1880s, more than a decade after Dickens's death, as the wife of a man named George Wharton Robinson.

I had previously always thought of Nelly as a gold-digging bimbo, a talentless actress who used her good looks to snare a famous, wealthy older man and lure him away from his wife. That is not, however, how she is portrayed in this film. It is, in fact, Dickens who comes off badly. As played by Ralph Fiennes (who also directed) he comes across as a jovial, fun-loving party animal, revelling in his fame and celebrity, but also deeply selfish, not only in the way he treats Catherine but also in the way he treats Nelly. Nelly herself, by contrast is portrayed as a rather serious young woman, who in many ways shares conventional Victorian attitudes towards sex. She is, for example, shocked to discover that Wilkie Collins, Dickens's friend and fellow novelist, lives quite openly with a woman to whom he is not married. She is in love with Dickens, but is distressed by her ambiguous status and by the fact that their relationship cannot be acknowledged. She is shown giving birth to a stillborn son in France, a detail which clearly betrays the film's origins in Claire Tomalin's controversial biography. I should perhaps point out that not all Dickens scholars are convinced by Ms Tomalin's thesis that Nelly bore his child. (Indeed, some even insist that their relationship was platonic). The fact that the issue is still so shrouded in mystery and controversy, however, does indicate just what lengths he went to in order to protect his privacy.

The Nelly of this film is therefore a complex character, far more than a mere Victorian bimbo, and it is a tribute to the talents of the lovely Felicity Jones, an actress I was not previously familiar with, that she emerges as someone both likable and entirely credible. Fiennes is also good as Dickens, a man uneasily aware that in leaving his wife for another woman he is betraying the family values he once so assiduously championed. (He even called the magazine he edited "Household Words"). Other good contributions come from Kristin Scott Thomas as Nelly's mother and Joanna Scanlan as Mrs Dickens. Although Catherine was the "innocent party" in the breakdown of her marriage, it is all too clear from Scanlan's interpretation just why Dickens felt unable to live with this dull, frumpy woman.

Fiennes the actor is fine, but I was less taken with Fiennes the director. The pace of the film can be excessively slow and the switches between the chronologically earlier scenes, taking place in the late 1850s or 1860s, and the later ones, taking place in the 1880s, were too abrupt and made the story difficult at times to follow. It didn't help that Felicity Jones (aged about 30) looks much the same age in the later scenes (when Nelly would have been in her forties) as she does in the early ones (when she would have been in her teens or twenties). Felicity does have a different hairstyle in the later scenes, but the purpose of this seems to have been to mark the changes in fashion between the 1860s and the 1880s, not to make her look older.

Another thing that surprised me was that the film did not deal directly with Dickens's death or with the immediate impact this had on Nelly's life. It struck me that this was one time when Nelly's status as the "invisible woman" worked in her favour; had she been openly acknowledged as Dickens's mistress she would, given the often hypocritical attitudes of the Victorians towards extra-marital sex, have found it very difficult to make a respectable marriage after the sudden, unexpected death of her protector while he was still in his fifties. (She might have found this difficult even if Dickens had obtained a divorce and made her his second wife). Possibly, however, the scriptwriters avoided any speculation of this nature because it would not have fitted in well with their view of Nelly as the innocent victim of her lover's selfishness.

The film is made in the best British "heritage cinema" style and will doubtless find favour with many fans of that style of film-making. I was, however, in some ways disappointed with it, feeling that its structure could have been clearer and that it could have dealt with this aspect of Charles Dickens's life in greater depth. 7/10

So much so that her husband forgets to name her when introducing his family. Charles Dickens was always fascinated by very young, slender, virginal girls, they are venerated in all his novel. His wife had been such a girl when he married her, but after giving him ten children in a period without anesthetic, she has naturally gained weight and aged. He may tell himself the classic, "my wife doesn't understand me," but it's clear he really just wants a new young, slender girl. The film itself doesn't seem to buy the story that his wife is intellectually boring but instead clearly shows Dickens flinching in disgust when he looks at his wife.

Neither are we shown any brilliance of mind in Nelly as the actress maintains a slack jawed, rabbit-like expression through most of her scenes.

Most biographies depict Dickens as not only treating his wife as invisible, but openly ridiculing her and inventing ways to be cruel to her. We see an example of that here when he makes her take his gift of jewelry to his mistress.

Why we should find this affair romantic I don't know. It's boring and trite and, worst of all, taints any future reading of his novels. A film about the life of Catherine Dickens sounds much more interesting.