MovieChat Forums > Women in Love (1970) Discussion > Janet Suzman and Susannah York

Janet Suzman and Susannah York


I think these two ladies would have been my ideal Gudrun and Ursula.

Gudrun isn't supposed to be traditionally beautiful in the book, but she should possess a certain fire to become irresistible in certain men's eyes. I could never see the slightest m.appeal in Glenda, not even in a necrophiliac sort of way. Janet is certainly much more beautiful with her enigmatic, sphinx-like face and those incredible blue/purple eyes, but she's also the type of woman likely to be appreciated by intellectual admirers above all. And the feverish touch she can give to her characters, her burning eroticism, that "erupting volcano" feeling she possesses ... all makes me think she would have given a much more powerful performance than Jackson. I also think she's a superior and more charismatic actress overall, although she didn't have the same luck with film roles. I would dare to say Suzman was possibly the definitive Hedda Gabler of the century (tough btw her and Delphine Seyrig) and the fact that Trevor Nunn actually did a film version with Jackson while he was still married to Janet is baffling. I suppose the producers really wanted a bigger star. I can see some similarities between the two , although I find Janet to be more talented and attractive. Ironically, she gave a spectacular performance as Frieda Von Richtoven (Lawrence's wife) in "Priest of Love". A strong, Gudrunesque female who hugely influenced her husband's writing for years.

Any comparison between Jennie Linden and Susannah York would be quite unfair. Jennie was the weak link in the movie IMO and her involvement in it was some kind of lucky accident in an otherwise mediocre and completely forgettable career. She was lovely and feminine and, because of this, she worked in certain ways and didn't really ruin the movie, but her most dramatic and intense scenes would have required someone with superior authority and command of the scene. Susannah would have been perfect: she possessed that kind of delicate, classical beauty that made her an obvious choice for most literary heroines, but at the same time she had an unmatchable grit that allowed her to hold her own against the most accomplished of co-stars since she was in her early 20s. So she would have been wonderful as Ursula. I think Charlotte Rampling could have also been a good choice, although she was possibly a bit too young.

On the other hand, I think the casting of the male leads was perfect. I doubt anyone could have been as exceptional as Bates at playing Birkin and, even if I could think of other actors that would have been as good as Reed at playing Crich, Ollie remains a winning choice.

And no one else than Eleanor Bron as Hermione!

reply

"

... I could never see the slightest m.appeal in Glenda...
"

What does m mean?

I thought Glenda was OK. Jennie Linden was as weak as water. I wonder who would have been a blond Gerald as DH Lawrence wanted?

reply

What does m mean?


Man appeal, as in appeal to the men. It's an expression that was used in the 60's, think it was coined by the producers of a TV show when they were looking for a desirable female lead. It's kinda stupid. Not sure why I used it.

I wonder who would have been a blond Gerald as DH Lawrence wanted?


Albert Finney, perhaps?

reply

...Albert Finney, perhaps?...


Ooh yes, he would have been a better match for Bates.

….Suzman was possibly the definitive Hedda Gabler of the century….


How do you see Ingrid in that small black-and-white version?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSqm4VMl3wY
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057135/board/nest/114088010

reply

How do you see Ingrid in that small black-and-white version?


Oh, I rank her very highly too, even if I must say that the 66 TV version is kinda pedestrian and lifeless, albeit well-acted. I just thought that, in Ingrid's most quiet moments , I didn't seem don't seem to feel the languishing sense of a destructive force that was present in other portrayals. But her passionate moments are really powerful.

Anyway, when one says things such as 'best of the century', it's obvious that he has to judge the filmed versions and the theatrical ones he may have seen. Considering that the role has been some veritable 'test bench' for so many greats, it's just impossible to give a definitive verdict.

reply

Please. Jackson was the perfect Gudrun.

reply