The Draughtsman's Contract
June. 22,1983 RA young artist is commissioned by the wife of a wealthy landowner to make a series of drawings of the estate while her husband is away.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.
The movie is wildly uneven but lively and timely - in its own surreal way
It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.
Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.
the seduction. this is the purpose and the basic virtue. ambiguous, strange, cold, sarcastic, a garden of dialogues, colors and emotions. a thriller and chronicle of use of the other as simple tool. a film of its director. so, nothing surprising because the eccentricity, the fireworks of few scenes, the grotesque and its bizarre poetry are present as marks of a style. like the humor, costumes, clash between a young painter and an obscure universe of interests , plans and contracts. a film who seems be one of stories about sins in the too clear manner. and this could be its basic source of seduction.
It's everything that can be wrong in a movie. All based on dialogue - boring dialogue -, "important" details that are weird and intricate and not underlined at all, bad acting or most probably just poor stylistic choices, allegories and metaphors not understandable, repetitive images, plot that jumps from one thing to the other, stupid characters with no purpose whatsoever... The murder mystery is hinted at and not central at all, as well as the fertility myth and plot line. Greenway just wanted to make a movie about someone who drew a house "as he saw it and not as he knew it" (by his own admission in the extra of the DVD) and added all the other elements because of necessity, so he really didn't care a lot about them and it shows. What was supposed to be funny wasn't, what was supposed to be scandalous was pretty plain and what was supposed to be a big reveal or twist did not have an effect at all because it came after two boring hours and it happened to characters I did not care one bit about. Overall I found this movie not enjoyable at all. It probably wasn't the intention of the makers to make it so, but at this point they probably should have just made an art documentary.
This is the directorial debut of Peter Greenaway (Drowning by Numbers; The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover, The Pillow Book), and I found it listed in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, I hoped it would deserve five stars out of five as critics rated it. Basically set in rural Wiltshire, England in 1694, young and arrogant artist Mr. Neville (Anthony Higgins), also something of a romantic hero, is contracted by Mrs. Virginia Herbert (Janet Suzman) to produce 12 landscape drawings of the estate of her absent and estranged husband Mr. Herbert (Dave Hill). Part of the contract agreement is to meet with Mr. Neville in private, and to comply with his requests for the purposes of drawing, such as when servants and residents will not be present and obstructions will be removed during his sketching. Also Mr. Neville's contract agreement includes his pleasure, several sexual encounters follow between him and Mrs. Herbert, emphasising reluctance or distress for Mrs. Herbert, and showing the sexual aggression or insensitivity of Mr. Neville, while living on the estate he also gains a reputation with its dwellers, especially with Mr. Talmann (Hugh Fraser), Mrs. Herbert's son-in-law. Mrs. Herbert exhausted by meeting Mr. Neville to give him pleasure tries to terminate the contract before all drawings are completed, but the draughtsman refuses to stop and void the contract, he continues as before. Then Mr. Neville seems to be blackmailed into making a second contract by Mrs. Herbert's married but as yet childless daughter Mrs. Talmann (Anne-Louise Lambert), she has become attracted to him and he agrees to satisfy her pleasure, as opposed to his own. A number of curious objects appear in Mr. Neville's drawings, ultimately pointing to the murder of Mr. Herbert, who is found dead in the moat, the twelve drawings are completed, but Mr. Neville returns for an unlucky thirteenth drawing. While apparently completing the final drawing, Mr. Neville is approached by a masked stranger, obviously Mr. Talmann in disguise, he is joined by Mr. Thomas Noyes (Neil Cunningham), Mr. Seymour (David Gant) and eccentric landowner twins the Poulencs (Octopussy's David and Tony Meyer). The company accuses Mr. Neville of the murder of Mr. Herbert, as the drawings can be interpreted as evidence seeing more than one illegal act, he defensively denies these accusations, he is asked to remove his hat, which he does so mockingly, that is when they hit him on the head, burn out his eyes, club him to death, and throw his body into the moat where Mr. Herbert's body was found. Also starring Lynda La Plante as Mrs. Clement and Michael Feast as The Statue. Higgins gives a great performance as the arrogant artist paid in sexual favours, the aristocratic 17th century world looks authentic with great costumes and the beautiful estate, the drawing scenes are interesting, the sexual scenes are good, and the murder plot towards, with the drawings becoming witness evidence, is intriguing, also with great use of minimalist music by Michael Nyman that fit the remarkable visuals, and a witty script, it is a fantastic period drama. Very good!
Peter Greenaway's films have characteristic features: beautiful aesthetics, Michael Nyman scores, grotesquely humorous plots. His first film shows his gifts came fully formed: 'The Draughstman's Contract' is a bizarre costume drama that displays all of his talent, while, at the same time, being arguably about nothing. Greenaway's films really are pure cinema: his interest in what he can do with the form exceeds any external message, and there's no attempt to hide the the sense of artistic experiment. They're an acquired taste, but in an age of identikit blockbusters, his strange combination of imagery, originality and plain silliness weaves a magic all of its own.