The Turn of the Screw

With all due respect to flinty-but-dear Megs Jenkins (Mrs. Grose in both the 1961 "The Innocents" and the Lynn Redgrave made-for-TV Ben Bolt-directed rendering), Pam Ferris' housekeeper seems closest to the illiterate, fierce, none-too-genteel woman of James' story. Maybe it's her sheer size, but she grounds the story completely and serves as splendid contrast to the slim, neurasthenic Jodhi May as the Governess. No "The Innocents" (the only dramatization with a point of view), still, this "Turn" works pretty well and may have the best ever staging of Miles' death.

First of all, I must point out that I've never seen other versions of Henry James' novel and neither have I read the book itself. Judged on its own merit, however, this film is 100 minutes of your life ill-spent.

Sometime in the mid-19th century, a governess goes to a country mansion to look after a boy and a girl, but begins to have sightings or visions of 2 dead people who are seemingly possessing the children, and gradually driving her mad with fear and anxiety,

I'm one who delights in all psychological thrillers (Sleuth is one of my favourites) but this lacks in any real horror or tension. "Horror" scenes involve the appearances of a mysterious but passive man and a woman, both thought to be dead. Ooh. Somehow there is never a sense of motivation for the heroine's behaviour, most of the time she comes across as an overreacting, hysterical fool. The children's "evilness" is also ridiculously innocent. I suppose in Victorian England you would be branded morally corrupted if your shoelaces got untied . For example: Niles goes out into the garden at night. "Miss" goes after him, and he tells her that he could have done this any night. The next day she rants to the housekeeper about him being given over to evil. What, I mean WHAT? The whole ghostliness and evilness element is handled with decided incompetence.

The script also contains a lot of very stilted lines, seemingly out of character, a lot of serious material sounds somehow ludicrous. This is only aggravated by bad acting. Jodhi May (the governess) seems to spend about 80% of her onscreen time with her eyes bulging and her mouth agape in disbelief. There are about 10 scenes where she is trying to convince the housekeeper about her visions, and all of them seem alike. Niles and Flora are also very badly portrayed. I know they are only around 10 in the story, but just about any other child actor (Haley Joel Osment, Nadia Mikhalkova) would have appeared less self-conscious and less reliant on the same facial expressions for their acting. And if you're a Colin Firth fan, don't bother. He only appears for the first 5 minutes or so.

4 out of 10.

The most daring thing about this adaptation of Henry James' classic tale is the way that stunning newcomer Jodhi May plays the ghost haunted governess as a living, breathing girl with flaws rather than a lifeless model of prim perfection. Deborah Kerr's interpretation in the earlier film version (titled THE INNOCENTS) was so cool and crisp that there was never any doubt that the governess would overcome the evil ghosts (and save the rotten children who serve them)through sheer icy self-control, pure virginity and stubborn virtue.

Jodhi May's performance shows more psychological depth, depicting a governess who is menaced not only by the ghosts themselves but by her own voluptuous desires. Temptation surrounds the governess in this version, not only in the attentions of her devastatingly handsome employer (a stunning and very youthful Colin Firth) but also in the very comforts and luxuries of her position on the secluded estate.

Watch the way she succumbs to the charms of Miles' piano playing in the film's climactic scene, not only losing track of the time but falling little by little into a deep, drugged sleep. The two children are both shown as being more alert, more aware, than the lovely governess, whose nights have been quite sleepless owing to both ghostly terrors and erotic dreams of her employer. During the piano scene, Jodhi May's shifting expression is worth watching closely, as her bewitching gray eyes sink from stern watchfulness to drooping weariness, an unwilling surrender every bit as haunted and erotic as her dreams. Note how the camera very knowingly cuts back and forth from the heavy eyes of the governess to the light fingers of Miles at the piano, his skill meant to suggest the feather-soft touch of a lover. There can be little doubt that this image suggests a woman who bears her crystal pure virginity not as a shining shield but as an exhausting burden. She wants to have her employer's hands touching her lightly and knowingly, drawing forth her full desires the way Miles draws exquisite melody from the piano. Her deep sleep leaves her at the mercy of the children, but it results from the adult strain of holding her own sensual desires at bay. What a rich, haunting story, and what an authentic, womanly performance from the beautiful Jodhi May!

This is a solid adaptation of a novella often used in highschools and colleges. Like James's book, this version uses point of view masterfully.

A note for teachers: This adaptation is an excellent way to teach interpretation, especially when it is compared to the 1961 Jack Clayton production "The Innocents."

This was an interesting adaptation of James' equivocal little masterpiece. This production leaned a bit towards the Freudian camp/interpretation.

I liked it. They took a bit of liberty on some of the Jamesian dialogue e.g. Flora's speech to the governess by the lake. Not as many liberties, though, as in "Wings of the Dove"

Note for the pedantic: One surprising bit was the first apparition of Quint; he appears in the afternoon in broad daylight. Devotees of the James' piece and the ghost story frisson will surely remember that this occurred in twilight.