22 thoughts on “Trailers: Fall Content Edition

  1. Oh, fun, fun, fun! Thanks, Kendra; I need something to take my mind off the endless indictments of a certain person who does NOT dress well.

  2. I’m very excited for Killers of the Flower Moon after reading the excellent book, though I’m not sure it’ll provide much by way of costume excitement. I’m also looking forward to watching the new season of the Gilded Age, even though I’m sure I’ll complain the whole time about some of the actors (mostly the non-Broadway ones, who seem to have so much trouble with the period accent) and about Fellowes and his prim refusal to admit he really wants to go full soap opera. I adore The Color Purple as a novel but am a bit worried about how Disney this adaptation looks (ditto The Buccaneers). And cautiously intrigued by Lessons in Chemistry and by Mary and George, which should at least be juicy and fun? We’ll see!

  3. I ghave my concerns about the Buccaneers. How are they going to top the wonderful 1995 miniseries adaptation?! Lack of Hairpins in the Gallows Pole, alas, did she forget them at the Abbey?

  4. A Haunting in Venice looks so completely different from the source material that it was allegedly based on that I have no desire to see it, despite liking the cast. It seems to have nothing to do with the book “Hallowe’en Party” at all!

    1. I really wish Branagh would give up doing Poirot adaptations. I don’t think he suits the character at all and his adaptations just aren’t hitting the mark. And this is coming from a Branagh fan!

      1. I agree! I saw Murder on the Orient Express and was thoroughly unimpressed with how he characterizes Poirot and the way he had to make everything more dramatic at the expense of the cleverness of the writing

  5. I think Josephine is supposed to be dressed for a “Victims Ball”, where relatives of those sent to the chopping block during the Terror would cut their hair like those prisoners and also wear red ribbons around their necks to evoke beheading. Look up Incroyables and Merveilleuses, it was a whole “aesthetic”.

  6. O mon Dieu that Napoleon trailer. Napoléon’s looking particularly old for a 20-something who barely saw any campaigning before his first major battle. He was still described as “young looking” when he was in his late 40’s.

    Napoléon being present at Marie Antoinette’s execution? No. Blowing up the tops of the damn Pyramids? Literally nothing about that makes sense. Hiding an entire battery under canvas at Austerlitz – when nothing like that ever happened? There’s also a promotional image of Napoléon meeting Wellington in person. Wow.

    And I suppose it’s early to tell, but what’s going on with the acting? Napoléon was quite famous for his charisma and confidence. Even his British enemies who met him in person were quite taken in by Napoléon’s charisma. Yet the way Scott and Phoenix seem to interpret this is: mumble. Just mumble everything.

    Ridley Scott really does have a 10th grader’s understanding of history.

    1. And don’t get me started about the casting of Vanessa Kirby (13 years younger than Phoenix, and almost looking like she could be his daughter) as Josephine, who was six years OLDER than Napoleon.
      That is just straight up sexist.

      1. Thank you!

        For all the faults of the 2002 mini-series Napoléon, I thought they cast Isabella Rossellini perfectly as Joséphine. Wisely casting an older woman; she was graceful and beautiful.

      2. The good folks over at The Court Jeweller had very similar reactions to the ages of the actors, and those fine folks are mostly only interested in the production’s jewellery!

    2. I confess, I am worried about “Napoleon.” Phoenix is a good actor, but he’s middle-aged now. Napoleon was a young punk, and that was part of his appeal: “the Little Corporal,” and all that. (Although he was not particularly short.)

  7. That’s a lot of armpit cleavage for the 1860s in the Leopard! I have my questions about the Buccaneers and the Gallows Pole! Did Daisy leave all her hairpins at the Abbey? Facepalm for A Haunting in Venice, not even the same genre as Agatha Christie. She’s rolling in her grave! Also the second season of World On Fire is premiering in October, I may watch the 1st episode, I wasn’t that impressed with the 1st season!

  8. Also, What’s with the 250+ years too early Minnie Mouse ears in the Decameron! I was hoping they’d lean into a Pre-Raphaelite/fantasy version of medieval dress, kind of like Ophelia did? I have a lot of thoughts!

  9. OMG….usually I try to answer the orienting question at the end of your posts, but that’s practically impossible! MOST of these are so intriguing for various reasons. 1. I had NO interest in the Willy Wonka movie, but now that I know the production team from Harry Potter is involved, I’ll have to see it. They make the most BEAUTIFUL movies! 2. I did not know that TAHAR RAHIM (sigh) was in Napoleon. Now I HAVE TO see it historical inaccuracies notwithstanding (whereas I was on the fence about it before). 3. It’s been so long since I read and watched Belgravia. I thought the first series covered the whole book. Will season two be comprised of “new content”, or am I confused? 4. I was already SUPER hyped for The Musketeers, but now I’m even MORE hyped. And a lot of the ones I never heard of before look really interesting too, especially the Amber Heard one and the Chemistry one. 5. Does the little boy in the Amber Heard movie have heterochromia, or am I seeing things? In other words, I’m hyped! Thanks for this post!

  10. The costumes in this new version of the “Buccaneers” are just a massacre to the eyes. The set design and hairstyles are puke-worthy too. Overall, this production looks mega-cheap and amateurish. Sorry for my harsh words, but compared to the “Buccaneers” of 1995 this is just a sacrilege.

Comments are closed.