28 thoughts on “Frock Flicks Free-for-All November

  1. Ohh boy, I hate when I’m right with my guesses. So, there’s an upcoming Finnish movie project based on Kullervo’s legend from the Finnish national epic Kalevala (Or well, Kullervo’s legend is originally from Ingria, an area behind the Russian border, where there lives some Fenno-Ugric minorities. Either way, we’re getting sidetracked here.) The stories of Kalevala are generally estimated to be from the Iron Age. Finland has a rich history of reconstructing Iron Age era costumes and there’s an organization devoted to cataloguing and researching “folk costumes”. So this would have been a great chance to educate people with the history of Ingria’s traditional costumes and generally, the history behind the folk lore of the Northern Europe. I’m pretty sure I talked about this earlier this year under another free-for-all discussion, but the trailer that was released and showed that no, we’re not going to get any of that. It’s budget Game of Thrones all again, with zweihänder swords and leather armors. People argued that sure, Kalevala is essentially fantasy and if they decide to make a more fantasy-focused adaptation that’s fine. And that’s right. That would be fine. But do you know what I feared? Finland’s movie world’s irrational dislike of fantasy. That they’re still going to downplay any of the fantastic elements of Kalevala and present it as a “cool and dark and realistic grimdark” story where all the whimsy is lost, while claiming that this is a more “realistic take” on the story.

    Well, guess just what the director stated recently? That he wants to “remove the fantasy elements out of Kalevala”. Are freaking serious!? Are they genuinely going to present these leather armors and mud-smeared faces as a “realistic take on Kalevala”? Like by its nature, the movie is going to be fantasy, if they make this kind of costuming decisions. I feel like they’re again accidentally sending the message that men can only be cool by wearing black and grey.

    I’m fine with anachronism and fantasy elements. I’m not fine with people pretending that this is what history looked like.

    I’m sorry about the long rant, I just needed this out of my system. Is it really too much to ask for colorful tunics in my history drama?

    1. Ugh! Yes, if you’re going to make a fantasy movie, then use fantasy costumes. But if you’re going to for the “historically realistic” take, then I want to see historically realistic costumes!

  2. Who watched the trailer for Testament of Ann Lee? She was the founder of the Shakers, I believe. More mud and shit colors, and the hairpin shortage strikes again! At least there are caps. The bar is in hell!

  3. I watched the first episode of MGM+’s new ROBIN HOOD, starring Sean Bean and it is awful. The opening states that the Norman’s brought Christianity to Britain! Say what? Um, Christianity existed in Britain for 800 years before the Norman’s arrived. Can you say, Edward the Confessor. Sean Bean plays the Sheriff of Nottingham and his daughter is named Priscilla, a name that wasn’t common until the 19th century. It’s bad and most of the women are missing hair pins.

    1. You are effing joking: the Normans Christianized Britain?! That’s plain irresponsible. (All that, plus missing hairpins, and beachy hair, I’ll bet.) Thanks for warning us.

  4. Amazon Prime has unceremoniously dumped all the episodes of “King and Conqueror” onto their platform if anyone’s interested.

    1. Hi, you asked in May where I found the new Count of Monte-Cristo series but I missed your comment back then. It was shown on Finnish TV. 😅 It’s still available on the channel’s website called Yle Areena, but I have no idea if it’s visible to people outside Finland. If the site seems to work on your computer, you can find it by searching “Monte-Criston Kreivi”. I’m pretty sure the Areena’s language can be switched to English but either way, the show should be there!

  5. I’ve been waiting for the free-for-all!

    I found floating ruffs in the wild! (Originally typed floating roughs, that sounds about right.) They were on a mannequin in a bridal shop window. At least it’s with formal wear, not a bridal gown.

    Is there a way to post photos? Because I think you’d appreciate this. The mannequin has a sparkly axe, too.

  6. Just watched Dungeons & Dragons : Honor Among Thieves, and I have to say I really enjoyed it despite not knowing doodly squat about the game. I think it could have done much better at the box office if it had a decent ad campaign. :)

    1. I agree! I knew nothing about the game going into it, but it was so fun and engaging it didn’t matter! It makes me sad it didn’t do better because I would kill for a sequel lol

  7. Just started watching Death by Lightning on Netflix, starts in the 1880s, about Pres Garfield. First funny fact: the Free Love community of Oneida (victorian sex cult anyone?) This was a real thing, LOLz. Waiting to see what else I learn.

  8. I really have a pet peeve with Hamnet as we had a discussion about it with my partner and I can’t help but say the movie, which I know received praises for story telling, the costumes are just not it for me. The costumes look very relaxed and modern, so much so that when I saw the poster I thought it was set in the modern times. I really hate the hair on the lead actress, what is with the half as pin up hair that everybody associates with “ye old medieval times”?! I can even see the same hairdo on Marian on the new Robin Hood series! Why is this hair associated with period dramas?

  9. OMG!!! Just watched the new trailer for Wuthering Heights and it looks like a nightmare. I can’t get my head around the costumes at all. Styling is allllllll wrong and the materials are questionable. Nothing about says, “See me.” Love to hear what others think.

    1. It looks awful! Genuinely the worst thing I’ve ever seen. They clearly have misunderstood the book, and the casting is awful and all wrong.

  10. I am so annoyed! I was scrolling through Facebook and found an article on Dr Mary Edwards Walker, a woman who dressed as a man and was a decorated military surgeon. They stated in the article that Mary was brought up to regard corsets are instruments of torture. I, in my sweet naiveté, commented that a properly fitted corset was a support for the bust and back and it was a lazy trope to use “instruments of torture”.
    Well………they came for me, and I quote “Back then they did not wear them properly. They were the girdles of that time. They were used to cinch down women’s waists to make them appear thinner and therefore more attractive. Calling it a lazy trope shows that you do not understand the time period they lived in. They were entitled to their opinion, just as you are yours, but please keep yours to yourself if it doesn’t add to the conversation.”….ouch!
    Also did I want to wear a birdcage on my waist and not be able to bend over, or deformed children caused by corset wearing. I commented further (I don’t learn do I?) that I emphasised “properly fitted”, how working women would not have wasted their time and money on a garment that restricted movement and referred them to your site, Prior Attaire, Abby Cox, Bernadette Banner and Nicole Rudolph.
    They still came with outrage that I would say such things, I’m sure they thought I was an agent for the Patriarchy.
    I had to go and watch and read posts on the aforementioned sites to makes sure I was not talking horse pukky. I know it just Facebook nonsense, but it was quite upsetting and annoying

Leave a Reply to Trystan L. BassCancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.