Dangerous Liaisons (1988)

October 11, 2023 1:10 PM

Stephen Frears' 1988 adaptation of Laclos' 1782 French novel stars Glenn Close and John Malkovich as two awful aristocrats scheming to destroy morally upright Michelle Pfeiffer, with young innocents Uma Thurman and Keanu Reeves as collateral damage. Nominated for Best Picture, it won 3 Oscars, including the costume and production design awards. 94/83 on RT. Includes rape and sexual manipulation. Also includes a Keanu/Malkovich swordfight.

Adapted from the 1985 play by Christopher Hampton, who also wrote the screenplay. $2.99 rental at various streamers.

posted by mediareport (22 comments total)

Oh, also has a young Peter Capaldi having fun as Malkovich's sleazy servant, and the wonderful Mildred Natwick in her final role.

Been on a period costume kick and wanted to revisit this one after seeing it decades ago. The performances from Close and Malkovich are completely compelling (especially Close, who knocks the Marquise's various moods out of the park). Pfeiffer has less to do as the pure Madame de Tourvel, but pulls it off. The very young Uma (she was 17 when this was filmed, which makes her toplessness and one of the rape scenes highly problematic) is surprisingly good throughout, and Keanu is fine playing to his main strength as the quiet dumb naif with nothing interesting to say.

The plot is twisty, Malkovich is demonically fascinating, and the settings and costumes - oh my god, the costumes! on both the women and Malkovich are gorgeous eye candy. I recommend the DVD commentary if you can find it, in which Hampton and Frears discuss Malkovich's war with the wig department, Keanu's dislike of opera, Close's brilliant idea for the gut-wrenching final scene, and lots more.

One complaint is that I didn't quite buy Malkovich and Pfieffer falling for each other in the end; he doesn't really show it, and that leaves little for the viewer to go on when Pfieffer goes off the deep end for him.

Note: Malkovich's character rapes Thurman's character, and forces himself on Pfieffer more than once. Both end up happy to be in his arms. This will be problematic for many viewers, but I do think the film is worth a watch, as a period piece for 2 periods separated by centuries, perhaps.
posted by mediareport at 1:30 PM on October 11, 2023 [3 favorites]

a young Peter Capaldi having fun as Malkovich's sleazy servant

Oh my God, he was "tyalk about devotion to dyuty"?!?!?
posted by praemunire at 1:57 PM on October 11, 2023 [1 favorite]

Oh yeah, Capaldi is adorably cute and young in this, keenly attentive to his boss and not hesitating in the slightest to connive against whomever Malkovich wants him to screw over, or to just plain screw.

If folks don't mind the massive spoiler, the Keanu/Malkovich swordfight scene is on YouTube. It's not quite climactic, as there are scenes with Glenn Close that are the true climaxes, but it's definitely final, and spoils the end part of the film. It was initially tightly choreographed, but according to the disc commentary, Malkovich turned it into more of a street brawl during the filming, which Frears ultimately liked better.

Also according to the commentary, Malkovich did a lot of his own adding to the script in general, slouching and sneering and making faces and just oozing sleaze all over whenever he thought it was needed. It's a really fun performance of an awful person doing awful things.
posted by mediareport at 2:20 PM on October 11, 2023 [8 favorites]

Every time I see this on TV I have to watch the entire thing. I cannot help myself.

It's beyond my control.
posted by Faintdreams at 2:26 PM on October 11, 2023 [11 favorites]

The play this film is based on was written for the RSC with Alan Rickman and Lindsay Duncan as Valmont and Merteuil and Juliet Stevenson as Mme de Tourvel. Rickman and Duncan owned those roles through runs in Stratford and London, the West End and Broadway-- but when the film rights were acquired, it was deemed necessary to replace them with American stars.

So whenever I see the film, I can't help but resent Malkovich and Close for not being the actors I wish I were watching.

Excerpt from the Tony Awards here, though of course it doesn't have the atmosphere of a full production.
posted by Pallas Athena at 4:16 PM on October 11, 2023 [10 favorites]

Hampton and Frears discuss the recasting on the commentary track; Hampton was disappointed but if I recall correctly they say the main issue was the studio's concern that no one outside the theater world knew who Rickman and Duncan were, so they picked more well-known box office names - Close obviously more famous than Malkovich at that point, but Malkovich did have a few films like Empire of the Sun under his belt by then. (Rickman's first feature film was Die Hard that same year.)

Side note: the part where Hampton tells Frears how surprised he was at the choice of Keanu. You can really hear his surprise, ha.
posted by mediareport at 7:09 PM on October 11, 2023 [3 favorites]

Oh, having said that, I just remembered that Frears talks a lot about having to adjust his style to American actors; he comments that he was using a lot of wider shots at the beginning of filming, but once he realized how good Close and Malkovich were at expressing thoughts and feelings on their faces he began moving closer and closer until, he points out, he's using very tight close-ups much more often. He attributed that to the general emphasis on film in US actors' training, compared to the emphasis on theater in the UK.

And, having said *that*, I'll add that there are definitely moments when Malkovich pours on the sleaze in ham-handed ways; the faces he makes at the breakfast table scene with everyone the night after his attack on Thurman, for instance, are silly and pulled me out of the film momentarily. I can't imagine Rickman wanting or needing to do that.
posted by mediareport at 7:33 PM on October 11, 2023 [1 favorite]

It's beyond my control.

That line, over and over. I can't even think of that scene without bursting into tears.
posted by mochapickle at 8:30 AM on October 12, 2023 [2 favorites]

In an acting class I took in college, the instructor talked about Malkovich's performance in this film specifically. She said that actors are (or, at least, were then, circa 1990) so thoroughly trained to employ a certain stylistic formality and stiffness in period pieces like this that Malkovich's performance decisions to use a much more relaxed, modern set of gestures, body language, and facial expressions could only have been a conscious decision, and that it took at least as much craft to violate conventions in such a deliberate manner as it did to adhere to them.

Also, those very choices were indicative (or could be taken to be indicative) of that character representing an emerging shift in the social mores of the time, as a more libertine/enlightenment way of being began to spread among the aristocracy.
posted by slappy_pinchbottom at 1:46 PM on October 12, 2023 [4 favorites]

This adaptation led me to seek out Laclos’ book - which I would also very much recommend.
posted by rongorongo at 3:09 PM on October 12, 2023 [1 favorite]

Malkovich's performance decisions to use a much more relaxed, modern set of gestures, body language, and facial expressions could only have been a conscious decision, and that it took at least as much craft to violate conventions in such a deliberate manner as it did to adhere to them.

That's definitely true. You can see it right from the start, in the early scene where Malkovich first slouches into the Marquise's place as she's receiving visitors and bows to her. He's definitely making a statement, and it's a delight to see, a breath of fresh air in a period piece.

Then I rewatched with the commentary, and laughed when Frears and Hampton noted that they had hired a formal historical etiquette coach who spent hours going over the proper way to enter a room and bow with Malkovich, who promptly ignored all of that and oozed on in. So, yes, very conscious on his part, and a lot of fun to watch (even if he on rare occasion does overdo the modernisms a bit).
posted by mediareport at 6:22 PM on October 12, 2023 [5 favorites]

If you want more Malkovich in 18th century period outfits, Annie Lennox’s walking on broken glass music video is inspired by the film and also includes Hugh Laurie bemused smirking.
posted by autopilot at 1:00 AM on October 13, 2023 [5 favorites]

> Every time I see this on TV I have to watch the entire thing. I cannot help myself.

Whereas I always turn it off before the duel, so it can have the happy ending I want.
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:58 AM on October 14, 2023

Whereas I always turn it off before the duel, so it can have the happy ending I want.

Out of curiousity, what's the happy ending you want? I recall this movie as rather bleak.
posted by corb at 5:14 AM on October 17, 2023

Okay, so, Valmont races to the convent to confess his error and his true affection for Tourvel. His words are simple and from the heart, and Tourvel is so moved by the beauty of a love fulfilled that she makes a full and remarkable recovery. Fully unburdened by his past and with the loving support of Tourvel, Valmont commits to a life of honesty and simplicity, nourished by the light of love. There is a lot of sunlight and ease, and many, many happy days. Picnics. I am certain there are picnics and earnest, bucolic scenes on green hillsides.

Merteuil, chastened by the possibility of her letters being released, steps back and lives with her secrets, brushing away any feelings of longing and armoring her mind against the unpleasantness of regret, at least until years later when the letters fall into the hands of a scullery maid and her story is spread to her peers by whispers, which are louder than words.
posted by mochapickle at 9:28 AM on October 17, 2023 [1 favorite]

It's interesting to me that you think that Mme. de Merteuil is more deserving of punishment than M. Valmont. I would've thought (if we must choose) quite the opposite.
posted by praemunire at 9:41 AM on October 17, 2023

You know, that crossed my mind when I hit Post. And I kind of love Merteuil. You really can't help it -- she's smart and glamorous and sexy and bored.

The happy ending, though... I think, for me, it comes down to Valmont having a moment of grace. That tends to forgive a lot of things, at least in fiction. In the movie (I haven't read the book), Merteuil has the greater punishment. Valmont dies, sure, and Merteuil lives. But she lives in social isolation and mockery and complete loss of status. For her, it's a fate worse than death.

It falls in line with the framework in the story -- and in so many other stories -- that's already set up: We tend to celebrate a man who dies in valor, just as we tend to also celebrate the downfall of a woman who is anything less than perfect.
posted by mochapickle at 9:54 AM on October 17, 2023

In the movie (I haven't read the book)

It's worse! In the book, she gets smallpox, so she loses her looks and her social standing.
posted by praemunire at 11:43 AM on October 17, 2023 [1 favorite]

Oh no! At least in the movie she's ruined but still gorgeous, even through all that smeared makeup.

So now I want to know what a happy ending for Merteuil would look like. What do you think?
posted by mochapickle at 11:48 AM on October 17, 2023

I don't think she'd ever be truly happy, because neither her character nor her society are constituted that way, and while Glenn Close has aged just fine (doubtless with the discreet aid of C21 tech), certainly the eighteenth century had its own prejudices against older women. I think she might grow ever richer and more respectable while continuing to enjoy meddling in the romantic affairs of her younger friends to the benefit of the women. She would end as the fabulous old crone who everyone is terrified of but daren't not invite to the best balls, but I'm not sure she'd be fully happy.
posted by praemunire at 12:59 PM on October 17, 2023 [1 favorite]

> Out of curiousity, what's the happy ending you want?

It's been decades, so I don't remember the details other than that I found it satisfying when the bad guys (Close, Malkovich) didn't get shunned or killed.
posted by The corpse in the library at 2:18 PM on October 17, 2023 [1 favorite]

It's worse! In the book, she gets smallpox, so she loses her looks and her social standing.

Could have been even worse; Hampton's play apparently ends with a stage direction for a final silhouette of a guillotine, hinting at the fate that soon may have come to them all.

Hampton and Frears talk about the various ways they considered ending the Marquise's story (and the film itself), rejecting the smallpox but keeping her public humiliation from the book. Frears says Close hit upon the solution after he quoted the line to her from the end of the book when one catty noblewoman wrote in a letter, "the disease had transformed her, and now her soul was to be seen in her face."

Close just said, "I can do that," and in one take turned in that final harrowing close-up which closes the film. (It was fortunate she was so amazing, because Frears said doing her makeup again would have taken hours lol.)
posted by mediareport at 2:01 PM on October 18, 2023 [1 favorite]