Can't stand Irene and Phil!!!!!! - The Forsyte Saga (2002) Discussion

[–] crooked_spoons 13 years ago

I won't spoil anything for you in case you haven't yet seen the rest but I echo your sentiments exactly. I honestly could never really stomach Irene but after that business with Phil I wished her nothing but ill. She was a cold hearted bitch and yes, not nearly as beautiful as we were repeatedly told she was. I honestly found her to be one of the most loathsome characters I've seen in fiction in a very long time.

And it was made worse by the fact that when you really look at it, Soames wasn't really such a bad guy. Maybe if he was cruel to her or abused her in some way I could sympathise but this was just a case of a selfish woman marrying a man for money then playing the role of prisoner. Denying him affection? Children? Hell even a kind word? With? Even a gold digger knows her place.

I can't even begin to speak about Phil. Wretched man, and without the decency to end his engagement promptly once he "discovered" he was even interested in, not to mention in love with Irene.

__________
Have you held your hostage today?.

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

Well, I watched the next episode and Phil thankfully died. I was happily thinking YES!!! The sad thing is that I am sure the audience is not supposed to happily think YES!!! I am also sure the audience is supposed to feel for Irene. I seriously don't understand how the writers can believe for a moment that those two are sympathetic characters. They are SO SO SO wrong. I want to slap some sense into them. It's so obvious that those characters are written to capture the hearts of the people, but the writers didn't consider that crazy, undying PASSION doesn't give you the right to hurt others. With just one little scene that shows the lovers' regards and compassion for their legal mates everything would've changed. I don't get it. So maybe I am wrong, maybe Phil and Irene are supposed to be loathsome... Hello writers --- will you please let us know?

reply

[–] gabbyslp 13 years ago

Well, I just finished the series, and the whole time I got the impression that Irene would never have married Soames if her stepmother and Soames himself hadn't pushed her into it. Isn't that why she made Soames promise to let her go if their marriage didn't work out? I do feel bad for somes, Irene is very cold and didn't seem to really try to make the marriage work, but I don't necessarily think that she "married for money". If she was really all about the money, wouldn't she have taken money or jewelry or something like that from Soames when she left him? Just a theory.

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

I didn't go on watching because I really didn't want to see Irene anymore. The characters I cared for didn't have a chance to be explored further because of the stupid jump 12 years ahead... I lost interest in the series.

Anyway, as for why Irene married Soames - it had to be the money and security. She surely wasn't attracted to him. She really didn't care for him at all, may have even LOATHED him from the beginning. The moment she married him he thought he had a chance to change her mind. Irene acted very selfish, and if she was miserable in her marriage then it was her own fault. He did not mistreat her (well, until the rape) - and there were a lot of women who were in loveless marriages - but instead of being lost in self-pity, Irene could've enjoyed her friendship with June, she could've made other friendships, she could've immersed herself into charity work. But instead she walked around like a sourpuss all the time. It's a wonder why she didn't kill herself. And then she turned around a 100 percent and behaved like a nut when her lover-boy came to the ball. She embarrassed everybody, hurt her husband and her best friend - and she didn't give a *beep* That's the definition of a bitch.

If the author wants me to feel sorry for her, this is what should've happened: She realizes she is falling in love with the ass-architect (he's even worse than her), but instead of managing to run into him she could've avoided him FOR HER BEST FRIEND'S SAKE! If she then would've met him over and over again through coincidence after coincidence and would've fallen for him without sneaking out to go on private walks etc. then I could say "she couldn't help it". But that wasn't the case.

Even if, as they did, actively sought out this romance, the way they behaved once they knew they loved each other was unforgivable. Soames and June did not deserve this! They could've been discrete and then tried to let the people who loved them down as easy as possible. But they where absolutely CRUEL.

I don't believe Irene should stay in a marriage just because she made the mistake to marry Soames. I don't blame her for this mistake in itself. Everybody does some stupid things in their life. What shows true strength and character is how you DEAL with it later once you realize you made a mistake. Are you selfishly pursuing your own happiness without regard for others, or are you trying to fix the mistake without hurting anybody else?

In my opinion Irene left the money and jewelery behind not to do the "right" thing or to show that she isn't after the money - but because she hated Soames so much, she didn't want ANYTHING from him. She has so much disgusting hate inside her it ate her from the inside out. IMO she wasn't attractive to begin with (that persistently pursed mouth got on my last nerve - I didn't mind that strange feature on Soames, they could be brother and sister in that respect LOL), but her hatred, mean spirit and callous betrayal of her friend made her so ugly inside that it spread to the outside. Usually I love a great villain I can hate in a film but in this case something has gone wrong, because we were not supposed to hate her. Quite the opposite I believe. And that makes it unbearable to watch for me.

Gimme Downton Abbey with O'Brien and Thomas any time over this! LOL

reply

[–] randommovies2002 13 years ago

Irene was cast so much better in the 1967 version. The role was also more fleshed out and the character seemed much more genuiine. (But I really hated the casting of the 1967 Phil Bossiney. Yuck! -- who could fall for HIM?)

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

LOL i gotta check him out...

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

OMG i found pics.... you are right!! ugh, but fits the nastiness of his character.

reply

[–] randommovies2002 13 years ago

but WHY would June fall in love with him? Yuck. He just didn't "do it" for me.

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

because they told her "you are an actress and you have to love this guy or you're fired!"

reply

[–] Liz10 13 years ago

You are absolutely right about the casting of Irene in 1967. Even though the production was B&W and terribly dated her character (which is key to the story) is exactly as described in the book---fair---light haired and with deep dark eyes. She was described in the book as striking woman that turned men's heads. Not the dark---depressing looking 2002 version. I do not blame the actress----she was miscast and it is not her fault. I blame the casting person. I am sure there was some actress with blond hair (or dyed) with brown eyes that was attractive that could have pulled off this part. Irene is also a confident woman in the book---not this wimpy portrayal. Disappointing.

reply

[–] audioliquor 13 years ago

HAHAHAHAHAH This is the first time EVER that I LOVED the spoiler!!! I am at 3rd episode and stopped in the middle coz I was about to puke watching Irene tearfully talking to Phil. I want them both to be dead to be honest. Soames deserves way better. He had nothing but affection for Irene and she never even TRIED to get to know him or at the very least respect the fact that he made his own money, and was a talented solicitor. What a b88ch!!!!

SO THANK YOU for telling me what will happen to Phil. Otherwise I might not keep watching because the thought of the two adulterers living happily ever after makes me reach for barf bucket!!

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

LOL, audioliquor, you're so very welcome! :D This was the first time for me to boldly put an unmasked spoiler into a thread. I just didn't care. I was too happy the *beep* died :) and the other *beep* suffered because of his death :)

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

I am only writing this because I found (finally! and not on THIS board) someone who knows the 1967 adaptation well and laments this bitterness and the violent, PRUDISH, reprobation against poor Irene, when it is actually SOAMES who is the selfish, bitter, jealous RAPIST!

First, though, WHY would you think that Phil had "thankfully" died, when HE loved Irene, as Soames never could? Have you no heart? Are you that far gone? Do you believe so in the "Right of property"? Sick! I say it is SICK to think so!!!

Anyone who cannot see that, like Susannah in "Legends of the Fall", who was ready to marry a man she THOUGHT she loved, but did not really know, the young, innocent Samuel, so Irene was, 20 years earlier, in the same circumstances, marrying a man who pursued her and gave her (supposedly, LYINGLY!) a "way out" of debt, of victimizing at the hands of her stepmother's odious suitor)...WITH a promise of freedom if it did not work...anyone who cannot see that is as vile and underhanded as any piece of blackmail, does not deserve to have any more understanding or forgiveness than that which is eventually given to Soames, the ruiner of lives, even his own daughter's!, than that person should remain cursed and lost!

MY only sorrow in reading this segment of The Forsyte Saga is that Bosinney never made it to Soames, to cut out his filthy, rapist heart and shove it into his mouth, as revenge for raping Irene!

This would have been just, everything the lying, selfish, Soames deserved, at least, but had I been Irene (without her personality), let's just say that Soames would have had ONE try at me, and ONLY one and if he did not succeed, he would have been lying on the pavement below, his filthy, man-of-property neck broken! I, as Irene, would have laughed in triumph, as would many of the women of London, that day!

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

[–] furienna 10 years ago

And yet again, thank you Shannon for being a beacon of common sense!

Intelligence and purity.

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 10 years ago

Thanks, furienna! I doubt that the "person" on this thread who basically blamed Irene for her own rape will agree! I went bonkers, thinking that ANYONE could justify rape! Just scroll through since today and you'll see. Yikes! I just say what I think and feel. Manners be damned!

Don't get me wrong...
It might be unbelievable,
But let's not say so long

reply

[–] furienna 10 years ago

I had to restrain myself, or I would have shouted too. You have to wonder how these people's minds work. Because even if Irene and Phil were adulterers, Soames was a freaking rapist. You would think that people would remember that, so there would be some sympathy for his victim (whether she was his wife or not), and for the guy, who died as he tried to defend her honor. But there obviously is something about Irene, that puts a lot of people off. They don't seem to understand her situation when she agreed to marry Soames, or indeed what women from that social class could be put through back then. Maybe they also love Soames as Damien Lewis played the character, while they didn't like Gina McKee as Irene?

Intelligence and purity.

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 10 years ago

This whole "forgiveness of the rapist" thing is quite baffling! And as you asked I believe it has been going on long before Damien Lewis lent his (in my mind DUBIOUS) "charms", leading people (astonishingly both men and women), to "justify" Soames' rape of Irene.

These debates took place about the story itself, as well as about Eric Porter's portrayal of Soames. So one must ask, "WHY?!"

The only thing I can conclude is that people are so hell-bent on "justifying" rape, especially that of a husband's on a wife who is resistant, that they will seek out any possible rationalisation for his actions, no matter how brutal and selfish!

A thing that also occurred to me when reading your description above is (brace yourself!) that many people (mainly men but also women) actually GET OFF on the rape scene! This is far from unheard of, and can we really say that the Medieval people did not have porn as disgusting as ours? I doubt it.

Furthermore, I believe that modern viewers think that "vintage" or "antique" porn is somehow more acceptable than the modern stuff. It has that shimmer of antiquity and hint of something "academic" that ALL porn users (or so my research has led me to think) seek if they are ever asked to explain and/or justify their use of it.

Don't get me wrong...
It might be unbelievable,
But let's not say so long

reply

[–] furienna 10 years ago

It is indeed quite baffling. I know that there still is a stigma against infidelity, especially when it involves "stealing" a friend's man/woman, and I usually agree with that. But still, you would think that a rape would stand out as the worse crime. And then, we have people complaining at how "grave" and "cold" Irene was, but they won't even try to understand her situation. But they would probably be "grave" and "cold" too, if they found themselves stuck in a marriage to a sociopath. But oh, let's all forget what Soames did to her. Irene was a "grave" and "cold" adulteress, so she simply deserved to be beaten, raped and stalked. 

And yeah, how can these people be glad that Bosinney died? Sure, he was never my favorite either. And I can understand that June was heart-broken by him having an affair, and with a friend of hers no less. But he was what Irene needed at the time. He gave her the kind of happiness, that she had never gotten with Soames. He saved her from being assaulted by Monty and tried to punish Soames for raping her. But yeah, let's want him dead and feel sorry for the rapist! 

Intelligence and purity.

reply

[–] nutsberryfarm 8 years ago

yep, they lack a sense of humor.

The food I've liked in my time is American country cookin'-Colonel Sanders 🇺🇸

reply

[–] lassitera 13 years ago

I don't like Irene either and it irks me that she would betray her friend June and she married Soames knowing that she didn't love him and could stand to be married to him. She's attractive enough, but not drop dead gorgeous as you'd think the way men fall over her.

reply

[–] QuietDreams821 13 years ago

I do not think Irene was a gold digger at all. Have any of you considered the fact that women at that time didnt have much options? Irene was not educated or trained to WORK and she was well aware of that. Her stepmother guilt tripped her and Irene felt she had no choice but to marry him. Of course Im not justifying her affair. And although to some of you Soames isnt "that bad" he DID in fact rape which i find to be pretty horrible. Not to mention the fact that their previous relations seemed unwanted by Irene. You may say "oh but there were other women who were stuck doing the same and that were in loveless marriages but they dealt with it and tried to be happy" and yet I think thats the worst part about the whole thing. Rather than judge Irene, try putting yourself in her own shoes. How would you REALLY feel being in a loveless marriage in an era that gave women little options to provide for themselves or choose their own way of life?

reply

[–] fidgette 13 years ago

Yes but she COULD have worked. She did later in life as a piano teacher so couldn't she have done that? It's like once she realized her Stepmother wouldn't just pay for her lifestyle, that she would have to choose between working and getting married..so she chose the latter.

Yes women in that day had little choice but she had SOME choice. It's not like she was a dirt poor woman who really had no choice. Soames wasn't cruel to her (in the beginning). He seemed to want to do anything he could to make her happy. But she always appeared cold and grave. She didn't seem to try to make her marriage work at all, she checked out mentally and emotionally once she moved into the house.

I don't know if it was the way it was filmed but she was not a likable character. Neither was Phil. He was so "in love" with his fiance but once he sees Irene he's all over it? June brings him into her wealthy family, tries to get him work and he just uses her and sleeps with another woman, a married one at that.

And the fact that Irene has no sympathy for her good friend June is beyond me. It also seems bizarre that June would welcome Irene back as her step-mother in the end and still hate Soames so much. It's Phil's own fault for running into the street in dense fog, why blame Soames?

reply

[–] ilahilda 13 years ago

Good synopsis on all characters. I think Soames should have gotten a mistress, Irene was not being faithful and had no feelings for him , he might as well find someone who cared. He should have divorced her and never looked back. She would deserve it. I can understand Phil being upset, the woman he cared for had been assaulted. But he should have been careful.

reply

[–] furienna 10 years ago

Gah, another thread like this! Oh well, I guess I'll choose this post and try to reply to it...

Yes but she COULD have worked. She did later in life as a piano teacher so couldn't she have done that? It's like once she realized her Stepmother wouldn't just pay for her lifestyle, that she would have to choose between working and getting married..so she chose the latter.

Irene was young and naive when she got married to Soames, and it seems like teaching the piano wouldn't be enough to support her. And yes, she was used to a certain lifestyle. But every girl from her social class was back then, so can you really blame her? As a matter of fact, most women from the middle class in the 1880s did not work. They got married, or they would live on their inherited fortune or the good-will of their family. Irene got married to Soames, because she only had very little money and no family.

Yes women in that day had little choice but she had SOME choice. It's not like she was a dirt poor woman who really had no choice.

Actually, Irene would have had more choices if she had been "dirt poor". Because those girls could take a job as a maid or as a factory worker. But for a professor's daughter like Irene, that was out of the question, even if she had no money.

Soames wasn't cruel to her (in the beginning). He seemed to want to do anything he could to make her happy. But she always appeared cold and grave. She didn't seem to try to make her marriage work at all, she checked out mentally and emotionally once she moved into the house.

Irene probably did try in the beginning, but she and Soames were just so wrong for each other. There was no way that the marriage would work. And you also conveniently seem to forget all the things, that Soames did do to her (battering, rape, stalking). And how the Hell is "appearing cold and grave" worse than being a rapist?

I don't know if it was the way it was filmed but she was not a likable character.

That is your opinion, but not mine.

Neither was Phil. He was so "in love" with his fiance but once he sees Irene he's all over it? June brings him into her wealthy family, tries to get him work and he just uses her and sleeps with another woman, a married one at that.

It seems like Phil never loved June. I guess he liked her well enough, but he didn't love her. Yes, it wasn't cool that June had to suffer that heart-break. But in the end, I guess she was better off without him...

And the fact that Irene has no sympathy for her good friend June is beyond me.

I wouldn't say that she had no sympathy for June. But alas, things will happen. Irene had been pushed into a terrible marriage, and Bosinney never loved June like she loved him.

It also seems bizarre that June would welcome Irene back as her step-mother in the end and still hate Soames so much. It's Phil's own fault for running into the street in dense fog, why blame Soames?

Her side of the family had never liked Soames, and after he had raped Irene, they turned against him for good. No, Soamed didn't push Phil into the street. But he did rape Irene, and the accident happened because he was rightfully enraged by that.

Intelligence and purity.

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 10 years ago

I'll grant you Irene's inexplicable lack of sympathy for June (though in the book, it plays out QUITE differently--she "cedes the field" to June and leaves Bosinney's rooms, not knowing he is alread dead thanks to that bastard, Soames!!!

Aside from that, if you can't understand why rape is WRONG, EVIL and DESTRUCTIVE, and why NO woman's aversion to a man, or "coldness" justifies it...EVER! Then you are truly one of the lost! Morality means nothing to people who "think" this way..in fact...are they thinking at ALL? I doubt it!

It seems insane and bizarre to me that you place FAR more blame on Irene for falling in love (which nobody can control!) and betraying her friend who really just used Irene to get work for her fiancee, btw!, but you can "forgive" and even justify Soames brutal act of treating a woman like a piece of property! If she were a hired horse, you would, I've no doubt, speak out against her ill-treatment by Soames...but, WELL! SHe's "just a woman" so ...who cares? OBVIOUSLY NOT YOU!!!! AND YES I AM "SHOUTING"...not that you'll hear..too damned STUPID, I guess!

Since your user name seems feminine, what would YOU do if your husband raped you after you found that he repelled you????! Yeah, I thought so.

Don't get me wrong...
It might be unbelievable,
But let's not say so long

reply

[–] Lolyeah (79) a year ago

You're defending rape.

reply

[–] VMasina 13 years ago

QuietDreams, I explained my take on the situation in an earlier comment. I guess you didn't read it, because it pretty much answers your questions I think. I understand a woman's position in those days - but to say the least, in the case of Irene and Soames (and in extension the affair with Phil), it hasn't been handled right. Okay, I'll just copy and paste my thoughts, because I want you to understand what I mean (because I do understand what YOU mean):

Anyway, as for why Irene married Soames - it had to be the money and security. She surely wasn't attracted to him. She really didn't care for him at all, may have even LOATHED him from the beginning. The moment she married him he thought he had a chance to change her mind. Irene acted very selfish, and if she was miserable in her marriage then it was her own fault. He did not mistreat her (well, until the rape) - and there were a lot of women who were in loveless marriages - but instead of being lost in self-pity, Irene could've enjoyed her friendship with June, she could've made other friendships, she could've immersed herself into charity work. But instead she walked around like a sourpuss all the time. It's a wonder why she didn't kill herself. And then she turned around a 100 percent and behaved like a nut when her lover-boy came to the ball. She embarrassed everybody, hurt her husband and her best friend - and she didn't give a *beep* That's the definition of a bitch.

If the author wants me to feel sorry for her, this is what should've happened: She realizes she is falling in love with the ass-architect (he's even worse than her), but instead of managing to run into him she could've avoided him FOR HER BEST FRIEND'S SAKE! If she then would've met him over and over again through coincidence after coincidence and would've fallen for him without sneaking out to go on private walks etc. then I could say "she couldn't help it". But that wasn't the case.

Even if, as they did, actively sought out this romance, the way they behaved once they knew they loved each other was unforgivable. Soames and June did not deserve this! They could've been discrete and then tried to let the people who loved them down as easy as possible. But they where absolutely CRUEL.

I don't believe Irene should stay in a marriage just because she made the mistake to marry Soames. I don't blame her for this mistake in itself. Everybody does some stupid things in their life. What shows true strength and character is how you DEAL with it later once you realize you made a mistake. Are you selfishly pursuing your own happiness without regard for others, or are you trying to fix the mistake without hurting anybody else?

In my opinion Irene left the money and jewelery behind not to do the "right" thing or to show that she isn't after the money - but because she hated Soames so much, she didn't want ANYTHING from him. She has so much disgusting hate inside her it ate her from the inside out. IMO she wasn't attractive to begin with (that persistently pursed mouth got on my last nerve - I didn't mind that strange feature on Soames, they could be brother and sister in that respect LOL), but her hatred, mean spirit and callous betrayal of her friend made her so ugly inside that it spread to the outside. Usually I love a great villain I can hate in a film but in this case something has gone wrong, because we were not supposed to hate her. Quite the opposite I believe. And that makes it unbearable to watch for me.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 8 years ago

Well... It has been five years since you wrote that post, and I doubt that you will ever read this reply to it. But still, I feel a need to defend Irene again.

Irene was bullied into this situation, that she didn't really want. But she also was young and naive when she got married to Soames, so she just hoped that things would turn out for the best. But they didn't, and she only became more and more miserable. Of course, your feeling about that seems to be that Irene deserves no sympathy. You seem to think that she should just have suffered through decades of being married to a man, whom she found repulsive. You argue that many women did that back then, and that is true. :( But here is the thing: We now live in the 21rst century, and we now know that forced marriages make nobody happy. But you seem to be like one of those people from the Victorian era, who pushed all of those twisted values of their generation upon Irene and Soames, so that she thought that she had no other option than to plunge herself into this marriage, and he thought that he had the right to beat and rape and stalk his wife.

You put a lot of hate on Irene and Phil, and I agree with you about Phil hurting June. Irene though was stuck in this terrible situation, so she would have been desperate for any kind of happiness. And no matter what you feel about it, Phil could give that to her for a short while. I feel no sympathy for Soames though. Your claim is that he never mistreated Irene until the rape, but that is not true. Yes, it is true that he didn't understand at the time that he mistreated her. But neither could he understand her wishes and needs, because it was all about his wishes and needs. And he did things like pushing her up against a wall and threatening her during that carriage ride. But like every other Irene-hater, you seem to have slept through all those scenes. You seem to even gloss over the rape, as if that was no big deal for a Victorian wife to endure. :/

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 8 years ago

I can see why you'd be angry about Irene having an affair with her best friend's fiancé. But you gloss over the circumstances under which this ill-fated affair happened. Again, Irene had become stuck in what was a marriage from Hell to her. She knew by this point that she was never going to become happy with Soames. And then, another guy appeared and swept her off her feet. Could you really expect her to not have an affair with Phil? Even if June got hurt in the process, Irene had to consider her own happiness and her own sanity at this point. And if you hate her that much, I guess that you can find some sick joy in that it all blew up in her face anyway. She got raped and Phil got killed. So there was the end of that... And in the novels, it is explained that Irene stayed away from June for years. Because yes, she did feel shame about what she did towards her! And also, June decided to forgive Irene after she found out about the whole situation.

And if you can even consider that Irene was meant to be some kind of villain, then I have to wonder if we have even watched the same TV show. I mean, she was the victim of one terrible circumstance after another for years and years! At least you can tell that you're not meant to hate her like you sadly do, and that is a start... But really, I don't believe that there was meant to be any typical villain in this story. It is much more complex than that. Soames (and no, not Irene) is the FS character, who would have been the villain in a story with a black/white morality. But here, we've got a more gray morality, where even the "good guys" will have their moments of stupid hypocricy, and even a "bad guy" can get his share of redeeming qualities.

reply

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

And then, another guy appeared and swept her off her feet. Could you really expect her to not have an affair with Phil? Even if June got hurt in the process, Irene had to consider her own happiness and sanity at that point. […] And in the novels, it is explained that Irene stayed away from June for years. Because yes, she did feel shame about what had done towards her! And also, June decided to forgive Irene after she found out about the whole situation.

Neither Phil nor Irene could be blamed for the attraction between them, but for taking action on it, and especially for flaunting it the way they did at the ball, absolutely. The problem with Irene was she was considering her own happiness and sanity, not anyone else's, not even June's, who had been a true and good friend to her. In fact, her only friend. She, more than Phil, should have at least had second thoughts or some hesitation, for that reason alone. For Phil's part, June had been very good to him too. But we're never shown that either of them consider her at all.

In the scene where Irene, Soames, Bosinney, and June are having dinner, June sees and senses there's something between Irene and Bosinney, and reacts in a very understandable way. But Irene and Bosinney gaslight her, acting like it was all in June's head.

Good to know that in the books Irene stayed away from June for years because she did feel shame. The writers of this adaptation should have given us some hint of that.

But instead, in this version, not only does Irene betray her good friend, she shows no remorse whatsoever in the scene in Bosinney's apartment, and is instead cruel and cutting toward June. Actually, I don't think Irene ever showed any remorse or made any apology to June, again in this version.

Which is why it made June forgiving her difficult to swallow, even if she did find out Soames had raped her, and she'd always disliked him.

reply

[–] RubyHypatia 13 years ago

Agreed. Irene wasn't nearly a beautiful as she's made out to be, she married for money and didn't even try to make the marriage work, and she stole her best friend's fiance. I'm supposed to feel bad for her? I don't think so. And Phil was a jerk for running around on his fiance. Also, I hate how what's-his-name abandoned his wife and daughter for the governess. My god these characters are selfish.

reply

[–] croak-1 12 years ago

She didn't steal him. He left June of his own accord. People can't help loving when the right person comes along, which is why Joly (Sr.) forgave his son and made up with him later in life (before Sr. he died). He, at least, understood that.

Soames was a cold-hearted bastard. He may have been in love with Irene, but he wanted her as his possession. Remember his "proposal"? "Will you be mine?" Not "will you do me the honor of becoming my wife?", or even "Will you marry me?"

I thought the way he asked it was extremely telling of his character (or lack thereof).

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

Good for you! Pls. read my reply to the last person who wrote here, praising Soames for causing Bosinney's death! What a filthy piece of work...SO not understanding Galsworthy's intent!

If you would like to start a discussion group for PRO-IRENE-PHIL-and PRO-LOVE threads based on this classic work, please message me and I will set one up. I am heartened by those who are not led by the small-minded, selfish urges of characters like Soames, who, after over 100 years, some idiots STILL praise, beyond understanding!

I am also forming a writers' group to further the study of Victorian and Edwardian classics, using actual novels, but film and other media, to try to understand the Western concept of marriage, love and legal possession that has wrought such havoc in our times, not only the Victorian, but the 20th and 21st Century, regarding male-female, and possibly, inter-sexual relationships.

Please message me for more info. and updates.

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

[–] catbookss 8 years ago

Hi Shannon,

Hopefully you're still around and get notifications whe someone's replied to your posts.

I don't see anyone praising Soames for Bosinney's death, but I do see several posters saying they're happy he died.

As you know, I have only seen this version of TFS, which I personally love for all the nuances and ambiguity in the characters, which, judging by so many posts, escapes many viewers and polarizes them.

In the book, how was Soames responsible for Bosinney's death, and Fleur's marriage to Michael Mont? In this version he wasn't responsible for either one, so I'm curious how Galsworthy wrote it.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 8 years ago

Well, I am not Shannon. And I have to confess that I have never read the original novels as meticulously as she seems to have. But I will still try to answer your questions, as I understood the situations from this TV adaption:

1: Soames was responsible for Bosinney's death because of how he had raped Irene. Bossiney was rightfully enraged by this, so he didn't care about the dangerous fog, ran around the city without control, so he could find Soames and make him pay for what he did to Irene, only to end up being killed in the traffic. So while it is true that Soames didn't exactly murder him, it was indirectly his fault that the accident happened.

2: Soames was responsible for Fleur's marriage because he assaulted Irene, which made Jon break up with Fleur when she reminded him of her father. Fleur only married Michael Mont while she was on the rebound from Jon, and I don't believe that she ever became happy with him.

reply

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

"1: Soames was responsible for Bosinney's death because of how he had raped Irene. Bossiney was rightfully enraged by this, so he didn't care about the dangerous fog, ran around the city without control, so he could find Soames and make him pay for what he had done to Irene, only to accidentally end up being killed in the traffic. So while it is true that Soames didn't exactly murder him, it was indirectly his fault that the accident happened. "

I understand what you're saying, but using that logic, one could equally well say Irene was responsible for his death because Soames wouldn't have raped her had she not been having an affair with Bosinney, and that the two not flaunted it in front of him at the ball. Or that Bosinney himself was responsible for the same reasons, and on top of it being so hot-headed and impulsive once he found out Soames had raped her.

"2: Soames was responsible for Fleur's marriage because he assaulted Irene, which made Jon break up with Fleur when she reminded him of her father. Fleur only married Michael Mont while she was on the rebound from Jon, and I don't believe that she ever became happy with him."

But again that's putting the responsibility where it doesn't belong. Jon chose to react the way he did, as did Fleur by marrying Mont. I don't believe Fleur would have been happy with anyone, not Jon, not Michael, not anyone.

reply

[–] Lolyeah (79) a year ago

Wow, you're defending a rapist.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 8 years ago

**Irene wasn't nearly a beautiful as she's made out to be.**
Maybe not, but so what? Beauty is not everything.

**She married for money and didn't even try to make the marriage work.**
That is not true. Irene tried for two years before she gave up and just realized that she would never be able to stand Soames.

**She stole her best friend's fiance. I'm supposed to feel bad for her? I don't think so.**
That has already been answered by me elsewhere in this thread. So I can only ask you to read through my replies to other people.

**And Phil was a jerk for running around on his fiance.**
Yes, but here is the thing: Phil had never really loved June, but he did love Irene. So that would explain why he did what he did.

**Also, I hate how what's-his-name abandoned his wife and daughter for the governess.**
Just like you seem to miss that Irene/Soames were wrong for each other, you seem to also miss that Jolyon/Frances was a poor match. While he was a rebellious artist, she was the typical uptight and conventional Victorian wife. Jolyon had only married her while he was on rebound from an earlier relationship, and he didn't really know her before it was too late. So they would grow apart, like many couples do. Then he fell in love with another woman and wanted to be with her instead. And I won't blame him for that. Frances was a cold woman, who didn't care one bit about Jolyon as a person. The 1960s version showed us this much clearer than this version though. But she just refused to have sex with Jolyon (she was lucky that he was no rapist like Soames), at the same time as she refused to file for divorce just to be a bitch towards him. She would have been okay though with him keeping Helene as his mistress, as long as he continued to live in their house and pretended to be happily married to her. But that only made her more disgusting than ever to Jolyon, so he just left her. People who claim that Irene is so cold and grave should take a look at Frances. She is the true ice queen of this story!

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 8 years ago

But despite all of this, Jolyon was just as generous towards Frances as any man can be towards his estranged wife. He decided to let her have the full custody of June (whom he didn't even see again until after Franced died), plus the full sum of all the money, that his father gave the family on a regular basis for their support, even though he had every right to get half of it for himself, Helene and their kids.

**My god these characters are selfish.**
No, they are full-dimensional characters with both flaws and virtues.

reply

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

Yes, I think Jolyon was as generous to Frances as anyone could be in his situation. He didn't want to take June from her, and back then there wasn't the concept of shared custody the way there is now. He removed himself from her life as much as he could. He didn't *want* to hurt her and clearly felt very badly that he had.

In this version anyway, he shows no animosity or resentment towards Frances at all, nor any reason for having any. He doesn't believe she ever had any deep feelings for him, any more than he had for her, and was coming from that perspective in that final scene between them.

It's briefly hinted at that she did have more feelings for him than he had for her, but I suspect that was more about never dreaming her marriage would end, let alone in the scandal and embarrassment of her husband leaving her for the governess.

reply

[–] RCRathgeber 13 years ago

Much as I've always liked this story, the woman playing Irene is so revolting that I just can't watch this version.

reply

[–] ladylindenlea 12 years ago

She's certainly not exactly pretty, but I totally think she was cast because she looks older than she is, and only the first half of the first season required her to be "young"

reply

[–] ladylindenlea 12 years ago

Also, it's pretty clear that no one who posted these comments last year had seen Season 2 yet, much less the end of Season 1. I hope you all kept watching to see how much better it gets and how the saga plays out! If you finished the series and now are able to see the big picture, Season 1 was really just all exposition for Season 2. If you don't like the lady playing Irene, stick it out for Damian Lewis, who is a very fine actor. Besides, it's nice to see him in something that's not Homeland or Band of Brothers, something he actually used his own accent in!

*Spoiler Alert!!* For those of you who loathed this enough to give up on it, at the end of the last episode of Season 1 we see a new facet of Soames's character, that I don't think even he knew about. We all know he's had some pretty bad baby fever up to this point, but just as he is about to check it off his list of life goals, he holds his newborn daughter, and his world stops. For a few moments, (perhaps several years), he realizes that few things in this world matter more than your own child. I couldn't believe I actually teared up when I saw him getting emotional! Probably because I have a child...

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

I'm in the US and I've seen the whole stupid version (the 2002 one) of poor Galsworthy's masterpiece, butchered, re-written and bowdlerized to death! It's not even a shadow of its former self...and...As Irene could well sing (much later!:

"You'll never know the hurt I suffered,
Nor the pain I rise above."

(Dylan - "Idiot Wind" --from "Blood on the Tracks")

No, Soames never will, nor does it bother him in the slightest not to know this. It would never OCCUR to him (until it is far too late--that anyone other than he had suffered (this includes his own beloved daughter)! A textbook narcissist...despite his conforming to everything the Victorian ideal had laid out for him...but even his own family members knew he was not the "straight and narrow"--not with Irene (his cousin George knows about his raping Irene, how it caused Bosinney's death, and he has told others), nor Soames' pursuit of her 12 years later (Jolyon witnesses it), nor how empty his wooing of Annette (25 yrs. his junior) is, and 20 yrs. later, how false his marriage is and how sick his devotion to Fleur is, causing her to become a pampered, spoiled child.

In the novel, in fact

[SOILER ALERT!!!--not misspelled]

Soames is DIRECTLY responsible for:

Fleur's unhappy marriage to Michael Mont,
Her continued pursuit of Jon, when he returns,
The tragic way in which it plays out and...
The fact that her mental state effectively causes a fire which...

Causes SOMEONE'S DEATH!

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply