Passion -
rated - TEPID
The Bio-pic (like breaking up) is hard to do. After I saw this film I
was thinking that, even after 102 minutes, I still didn't know who
Percy Grainger really was. Then after a while one of the lines in the
film popped into my head. It is spoken by Grainger (played by Richard
Roxburgh) to his girlfriend Karin (played by Emily Woof). She is trying
hard to "master" the piano and achieve a concert career. Grainger says
to her words to the effect of "Do you really think whether or not you
conquer this beast [indicating the piano] matters as much as your
marvellous life?" I realised that there it was: the essence of Percy
Grainger. The reasons why he was so eccentric, so unpredictable, so
full of promise but never one of the great names of music. He loved
life in all its aspects! He was not prepared to dedicate himself to one
pursuit - the classical piano - over all his other passions.
So, for me, the film passed one test of a successful bio-pic. It gave
me one critical insight into what drove the man - what made him who he
was. And that's a pretty high achievement.
But I have only given this film a pass mark (I rated it "Tepid")
because despite that one critical achievement, it has so many other
shortcomings. One major shortcoming is that it feels incomplete. It
leaves so much out about Percy Grainger. For one thing, it assumes that
the audience has some knowledge of the man and his life. I think that's
pretty unlikely, for most people. For another thing, even though it
deals frankly with some of Percy's sexual obsessions, such as excessive
mother-love and some very enthusiastic flagellation, bondage and
discipline, it still skimmed and skirted around so much. I was
astonished when the film finished: I felt like one critical reel of the
film was missing.
Passion is miles away from films like Shine (Scott Hicks,1996) or even
Hilary and Jackie. (Anand Tucker, 1998) It is much more detached. It
does not have the emotional immediacy of those two films. On the other
hand, in its favour, you could say that those films were classic
melodrama - that they went for the simplistic "explanation" of why
their subjects were so troubled, and that life just isn't like that,
especially if you are a genius. The writers and the director of Passion
don't seem to want to deal with why Percy is like he is - he just is.
They show us that he accepts himself as he is. They challenge us to do
the same.
That's a valid and noble aim, but I don't think the filmmakers quite
brought it off. One of the reasons, I suspect, is that some of the
frictions which accompanied the film's development show up in the final
product. The finished film seems to show signs of production
wear-and-tear, and the involvement of a few too many writers. The
screenplay of the film is based on the play "Percy and Rose" by Rob
George "in collaboration with" Maureen Sherlock. The original
screenplay was by Rob George and the acclaimed novelist Peter
Goldsworthy. But the film was "written by" political advisor Don
Watson. That sort of billing makes it seem as if the journey from page
to screen was not an entirely smooth one. Add to that the facts that:
(a) director Peter Duncan was hired to make the film after the original
director and the producers parted ways; and
(b) there was another film version of Percy Grainger's life (I think it
was called something like Blue Rose) which was vying for finacing at
the same time as Passion and lost out at a fairly late stage,
so you get the feeling that the filmmakers might have felt somewhat
fraught.
Compare that sort of pedigree with the genesis of Shine, which was a
10-years plus labour of love by director Scott Hicks and his team. The
critical difference between the Shine and Passion is, ironically,
consistent and intense passion. In the final analysis, Passion lacks
passion!
But then again Richard Roxburgh was born to play Percy Grainger! He's a
very passionate actor (I saw his extraordinary performances in Hamlet
and Burn This for the Sydney Theatre Company) and he brings as much
passion and fire as he can to the role. Barbara Hershey never seems to
nail her role as Percy's mother Rose, who suffered from syphilis in the
days when the "cures" were almost as bad as the disease. She has her
moments, particularly in her first "mad" scene, when she goes all red
and blotchy and throws herself onto the floor. However, she is clearly
overshadowed by the other syphilitic character in the film, John
Grainger (Percy's father), who is played brilliantly by Bille Brown. In
a few short scenes, Brown creates a memorable and moving portrait of a
shattered and critically-ill man.
Simon Burke, and particularly Claudia Karvan, are excellent in their
roles as Danish friends of Percy's. Emily Woof seems at first to be
impersonating Claudia Karvan, but eventually she comes into her own in
her role as Percy's girlfriend.
I have a few other, minor quibbles with the film. It was far too easy
to see when Duncan was filming London in Australia - the light gave it
away, as did the robust and tanned bodies of the barrow-boys lining up
to enlist for World War I. The opening of the film was a worry - the
dialogue seemed trite and there was too much quick cutting. It seemed
to me that the director was rushing to set the scene and give us all
the detail we needed to bring us up-to-date so as to enable him then to
slow to a leisurely pace to cover the period of the film. And the
important conversation between Rose and Percy's patroness/ lover
(played by the excellent Linda Cropper) was marred by almost
impenetrable dialogue. And yet this was meant to be a critical
explanation of Rose's attitude to her almost-incestuous relationship
with Percy. And I could have done without the shockingly
clichéed close-up of the tea trolley which punctuates this scene
- but now I'm really nit-picking!
Still, as I have said, the news isn't all bad. Passion marks a new
maturity in the filmmaking of Peter Duncan (Children of the Revolution,
A Little Bit of Soul). He has graduated from fairly silly and piecemeal
comedy to serious biography. It's just a pity that Percy Grainger
emerges from that biography as a weird bundle of attributes rather than
a whole person.