Apparently My Brilliant Career, the 1901 semi-autobiographical novel by Australian (Stella) Miles Franklin is having a moment. A year or two ago there was a staged musical adaptation, and despite it already have been adapted into the PERFECT (if dated) film adaptation in 1979, Netflix is remaking it as a six-part miniseries, which premieres August 13. After my initial gut reaction, which involved a lot of swearing and punching things, okay, yes, doing a new adaptation of what is a wonderful novel brings it to a new audience, which, yes, is a good thing. But did we have to add in corset yanking, some weird costume choices, and modern dancing, among whatever else awaits us?
My Brilliant Career‘s story focuses on Sybylla, a headstrong, intelligent young woman growing up in rural Australia during one of their worst droughts. Her family is struggling, which isn’t helped by Sybylla’s determination to be a writer; Sybylla, of course, feels misunderstood and like her nascent genius is being wasted. Her mother becomes so frustrated that she sends Sybylla to stay with her well-to-do grandmother, where she meets wealthy neighbor Harold and things get complicated. As I wrote in my Top 5 Historical Costume Movies for Book Lovers, Sybylla “faces the ultimate choice: love or an independent life of the mind? … Have tissues ready, not because it’s tragic, but because it will resonate so deeply.” Despite my bad attempt at summarizing it, it’s a WONDERFUL novel that’s a great example of Actual Historical Feminism and not the stupid “Lady Doing Man Things” trope.
In 1979, director Gillian Armstrong (Little Women) made a feature-film adaptation starring Judy Davis and Sam Neill (RIP), with costumes credited to Anna Senior (but if you read my in-depth review, you’ll find out why they were actually designed by Luciana Arrighi but she didn’t get the credit). My review details just why I love this story so much. Okay, so I tried to make Trystan watch it and she was bored — you need to be in the mood for a naturalistic story that will creep up on you slowly. But a big part of my love for the film (in addition to the excellent performances by Davis and Neill) ARE the costumes, which just read as real and true to the era in a way that reinforces the emotional resonance of the story.
So, okay, we get another remake, in which obviously the filmmakers have decided that contemporary audiences can’t handle a story that’s just Of Its Period:
Things I don’t object to:
- 75% of designer Mariot Kerr‘s (Anzac Girls, Deadline Gallipoli) costumes:
- Casting Anna Chancellor as Granny:
- Christopher Chung (Blitz) as Henry:
Things I do object to:
- A stupid corset yanking scene complete with YANK foley effect (as my friend Julia said, “When they have the corset tight lacing scene, you know she’s not like the other girls”):
- This faux-Balenciaga nightmare:
- “Ooo how cool are we having them dance like modern people!” (Possibly a rant for next Snark Week?)
- Whatever the fuck this rando is wearing in blue and orange:
- And I’m sorry but is Granny wearing TIE-DYE??
I’ll definitely be hate-watching (but hey, I’m open to being won over??) and reporting back.
Do you have Feelings about this new adaptation of My Brilliant Career?
WHY?
THANK YOU
There should be a constitutional amendment forbidding Netflix from making historical dramas. WTF is that bizarre evening gown???
They’re also remaking Age of Innocence and Portrait of a Lady on Masterpiece. God please No!
This list of pointless remakes or adaptations keeps growing!
ah yes, Bridgerton strikes again, I bet the sound track is all instrumental covers of cold play songs
The modern dancing is so cringeworthy! WHY do a period piece and ignore the period in which it is set?
Another THANK YOU
Well, once upon a time, there was this aspiring writer-director, see, and she had A Vision, and that Vision had nothing whatsoever to do with her source material.
Having never seen the original, all I can say about what I’ve seen about this new adaptation is: no thank you. They purposely made the young lady look like a fish out of water. At least with Judy Davis’s character, she looks like she would fit in with her grandmother’s society. If it’s a period drama, Netflix will surely go out of their way to stomp on it.
I’m with you…NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! This is one of may favorite movies of all time. It was the first time I saw either Judy Davis or Sam Neill and I fell in love with all of it. So at this point I would give the new production a hard NO!
The
The lovely original Australian film had Australian actors except Sam Neill who was NZ. Why Anna Chancellor? Please God she won’t try a Meryl Streep “Australian” accent.
I’m hoping they make her character English/immigrated in her youth kind of hting.
Your memory is inaccurate! No one in the film spoke with an Australian accent. Their accents were British, with just a few Australian inflections now and again. Grandma even rrrrolls her rrrs! The British people who moved to Australia on their own did as much as possible to recreate English gentry society, which they’d had no chance to be part of back in England. In Australia there was land to farm and build lovely houses on, whereas there was none in England. Those living harder lives didn’t speak as though they were English, but remember Sybilla’s mother married “beneath” her, and ended up living a hardscrabble life in the bush, but she’d been taught how to talk by her mother. You can go to YouTube and watch clips to refresh your memory.
You had me at ‘Anna Chancellor’ and I may someday forgive you for roping me into a movie that doesn’t actually look like my cup of tea.
That crazy yellow dress makes me think of Molly Ringwald making her prom dress. Maybe Sybilla’s true talent is fashion forward design!