795. Drowning by Numbers (1988)

Running Time: 118 minutes
Directed By: Peter Greenaway
Written By: Peter Greenaway
Main Cast: Joan Plowright, Juliet Stevenson, Joely Richardson, Bernard Hill, Jason Edwards

THE GAMES WE PLAY

I had been looking forward to this one for quite some time. Not only is the title one that just seems to get my attention, but it would also be the second Peter Greenaway film I'd taken in. Despite not making the cut on my TOP 20 lists, a particular favorite of mine from THE BOOK was "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover" and I was anxious to see what else would come from the mind of Greenaway.

It's going to particularly difficult to relay the events of "Drowning by Numbers", mostly because the three main actresses all have the same character name - Cissie Colpitts. For the sake of making this easier, we'll call them Cissie #1 (the elder), Cissie #2 (her daughter) and Cissie #3 (the younger and the niece of the elder). The film begins with Jake - the husband of Cissie #1 - being unfaithful and having an affair with Nancy, a neighbor in town. Cissie #1 (Plowright) happens to catch Jake in the act and as he takes a bath, while intoxicated, she drowns him. Realizing she's just committed murder, she calls upon her friend Madgett (Hill), who also happens to be the town coroner. She requests that he cover up the murder for her, stating on the death certificate that Jake had a heart attack while bathing and drowned. Madgett hesitantly agrees. From there, we meet the rest of the Colpitt girls: Cissie #2 and Cissie #3. Later, we arrive at the home of Cissie #2 (Stevenson) and when she becomes enraged at her obese husband, she decides to drown him as well. When he's in the ocean, taking a swim, he gets a cramp and instead of rushing out to save his life, she rushes out to end it. Again Madgett is called upon to cover up the crime, except people are starting to suspect foul play. One who knows what the ladies' have been up to is the husband of Cissie #3 (Richardson), who threatens to go to the cops. Not wanting her family to be incriminated, Cissie #3 drowns her husband too - a life long non-swimmer. Meanwhile, we also meet the son of Madgett, Smut (Edwards), who becomes a prominent character by always showing up. The boy is fascinated with numbers and has a penchant for counting everything and documenting violent death, be it of humans or animals.

You know, I couldn't help but be reminded of Wes Anderson when observing the Smut character. He just seems like someone who would exist within the confines of one of Anderson's movies. Anyway, I really liked this one. It made me realize just how much I loved "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover" and how that movie REALLY should've been put into one of my TOP 20 lists. But seriously, what's not to like here? You have a very good little story. Three women, feeling betrayed by their spouses in one way or another take matters into their own hands. So you have a revenge story and a good one at that. However, the thing that really adds the cherry and the whipped cream to this movie is Greenaway's unique touch, how he makes everything seem very cinematic, while never undermining the story or his characters. THE BOOK makes note of Greenaway's dark perception of Britain and the seedy underbelly that exists and that's so true. This world doesn't seem to be quite real, it's too dark, too inelegant to actually be feasible. Everything about this film screams, "This is just a movie", yet not in a bad way. It's very much a film, but one that is easy to get lost in, almost like an "Alice in Wonderland" type world.

The home of Cissie #2, which seemed to resemble a house of cards.

Sure, it's not going to be for everyone, but I had a blast with it and wish there were a dozen more Greenaway films in THE BOOK. Looks like I'm going to have to take matters into my own hands and seek some out for myself. It's worth noting that this film was taken out of the "Life of Pi" edition of THE BOOK, in exchange for Greenaway's "The Draughtsman's Contract". I haven't seen that one, but I can't be happy about "Drowning by Numbers" being ousted. A true gem and yet another reason to thank THE BOOK.

RATING: 7.5/10  Really good and something that I needed after a round of stinkers. Nuff said.

MOVIES WATCHED: 782
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 219

January 14, 2014  5:19pm

800. The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover (1989)

Running Time: 124 minutes
Directed By: Peter Greenaway
Written By: Peter Greenaway
Main Cast: Richard Bohringer, Michael Gambon, Helen Mirren, Alan Howard

GOOD FOOD AND SEX

Another film that graces my 120 strong list of unfound films, pops up on the streaming portion of Netflix and I take the opportunity to see it before it's too late. "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover" has a title that attracted me, a synopsis that detracted me and a final result that left me hungry for more.

The titular cook is Richard Borst (Bohinger), a french chef who prides himself on specializing in delicacies and experimenting in the culinary rarities. However, he is not our main character, that role is reserved for the thief, Albert Spica (Gambon), a mobster, complete with lackeys and henchmen and the man who owns the restaurant where Borst creates his meals. Spica is a ruthless man, who will not only make you pay back your outstanding debts, but humiliate you in the process. This is shown early on when he urinates on a debtor, preceded by force feeding him feces. Albert is married to the beautiful, high-faulting Georgina (Mirren)...or the wife. She is abused and ridiculed constantly by Albert and when his ignorance of her reaches an all-time high, she has no choice but to seek outside companionship. Enter the lover, Michael (Howard), a regular patron of the Spica owned restaurant (titled Le Hollandais) and frequent eyeballer of Georgina. Sneaking off to the bathroom, night after night, to enjoy a delicacy of her own, Georgina and Michael engage in an affair, right under Albert's nose. At first, Albert isn't suspicious, but that doesn't mean he won't eventually find out about his wife's extra-marital affairs.

POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT!

When I read the Wikipedia synopsis for "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover", I read a line about "scatological, violent and nude scenes" and was repelled. However, it actually wasn't that bad, as the sex scenes were well done and the scenes involving the use of fecal matter and urine were quick and came right at the beginning and never came again. The film is set up kind of like a play. The sets are very hollow, the script is very dialogue driven and the characters are few. If a film is strong in dialogue and light on action, then it's my kind of film and "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover" is just that. There are also many scenes, notably the sex scenes and the flirtatious scenes between Georgina and Michael, where dialogue is totally forgotten and it was the music and gestures that spoke to me.

When the film began, I was almost immediately turned off. It seemed like it was going to be a very flashy, in your face sort of film. And while it kind of is, in a way, it really isn't either. The film doesn't hold a lot back and the sets are very colorful, but it also looms, giving things time to build and giving the viewer a chance to take in the characters. I'm still not really sure what the colors stood for. There was red in the main dining room of the restaurant, white in the bathroom, green in the kitchen and blue on the streets. I'm sure there was some sort of symbolism being evoked here, but what it all meant was lost on me. There was apparently a very substantial political statement being made as well, as Greenaway supposedly made this film to counteract Margaret Thatcher's England. I left the symbolism and politics to the pro's and instead sat back and enjoyed the marvelous acting, the devilish story, the fleshed out characters and the sometimes 'in your face' dialogue. If I had my way, the characters of the cook, the thief, his wife and her lover, would have been left nameless and Michael would have never spoken. They actually address the "silent Michael" theory at one point in the film, when he eventually does break his silence, but in my opinion, he should've been left enigmatic.

RATING: 7.5/10 That rating could rise. At this point, I'm still a little flummoxed on just what rating to give this picture, but a '7.5' seems the appropriate, so we'll go with it.

MOVIES WATCHED: 290
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 711

July 12, 2011 5:36pm