MovieChat Forums > Bright Star (2009) Discussion > Nobody else thinks Fanny was an emotiona...

Nobody else thinks Fanny was an emotionally unstable psychotic lover?

posted 12 years ago by crazyj89
22 replies | jump to latest

While watching this film, I was actually quite disturbed with how Fanny was portrayed. I thought the acting was good, but why did the script/direction make her seem so emotionally unstable? I don't know much about the real Fanny Brawne, but surely she wasn't insane as she was portrayed in this film. She's as emotionally unstable as Bella from the Twilight franchise.

-Keats has to leave, not because he necessarily WANTS to, but because he has no money and is basically reliant on his friend, who is leaving to rent out the apartment to make money. Upon hearing about this, she doesn't say, "Oh, boy, that's really too bad. I'll miss you for sure. But I know this doesn't mean you don't love me. You have to do this because you are poor and have no other choice. Be sure to write me! I will be sad and thinking of you while you are away." No, instead she immediately plunges into a psychotic rage, crying and screaming, saying she hates him and will never love anyone again. For some reason he puts up with this. And then she is catatonic for several days/weeks and even wants to commit suicide with a knife...until she gets a letter from Keats.

-He mentions in one line of one letter some metaphor about butterflies, so what's her response? Not "Oh, that's sweet. What a cute metaphor!" No, it's "OMG THAT'S SO BEAUTIFUL I MUST MAKE MY BEDROOM INTO A BUTTERFLY SANCTUARY IN ORDER TO KEEP OUR LOVE ALIVE"

-Cut to two weeks later, she hasn't received a letter from Keats in a few days. Doesn't think, "Hmm, haven't heard from my beau in a while. Maybe the post is late, got lost, or maybe he's travelling or otherwise hasn't had time to send me a letter." Nope it's "OMG MY LIFE IS OVER SO THE BUTTERFLIES MUST PERISH TOO. LET THEIR CORPSES BE A REMINDER OF MY DEAD LOVE FOREVER"

The whole film she just ran around like a crazy jealous, overattached girlfriend. Sure, Keats had his moment of being crazy jealous in love or whatever, but man oh man did she need a big prescription of chill pills.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

First you must take into account that when we first meet Fanny she is 18 years old. And only 3 years older at the conclusion. Not only very young, but living within the constricted society of the impoverished upper class. She has a very limited exposure to people beyond the small society within she dwells and because of all those things, very little hope for a future beyond someday marriage someday to a man who might be craving companionship and/or perhaps needing a home drudge.

We see that Fanny is not dim witted, nor even conventional in many ways. She designs and sews her own clothing and does not hesitate to speak of it. I don't think you realize how daring that was. Women of a certain class were to only stitch for entertainment upon a pillow or embroider a collar. They were to draw a little, and play a musical instrument. All to show that they were refined. But never to fill a necessity.

Fanny is pushing back on the restrictions placed upon her. There must be deeply felt passion within her, all of which we get an early glimpse with her treatment of Mr. Brown. I can't imagine what meeting and getting to know such a deeply creative unconventional man such as Keats must have affected her. But I do think that we see that he quickly became her whole world and hope and love.

And she does remarkably mature in the short time frame. When denied the ability to travel with him to Italy she is stoically resigned, although she fully realizes that this will be his last trip, and away from her.

If you can't allow yourself to sink into the society of early 19th century England, then I can see why you can't enjoy the characters or this film.

"I'd never ask you to trust me. It's the cry of a guilty soul."

[–] crazyj89 12 years ago

Sorry, but none of what you just said relates at all to what I was saying. I don't care that she rebelled by sewing her own clothes or only knows about "the constricted society of the impoverished upper class". That has nothing to do with her ridiculous, over the top, melodramatic reactions to one summer spent out of his presence nor her actions after receiving and not receiving letters.

Surely even in that time period it was not normal for an 18 year old girl to go flying into a mad, screaming rage just because her boyfriend would be out of town for the summer, upset even to the point of not moving and wanting to commit suicide. And surely during this time period it was normal for letters to go missing or arrive late. There weren't any automatic mail sorters back then.

Yes, you are correct, she is a bit more mature by the end when he has to leave for Italy. However, he did have tuberculosis and was coughing up blood and stuff, so perhaps she thought that might be crossing the line to get super upset about his leaving. I supposed she also probably thought that was his only chance to possibly get better.

If you can't allow yourself to sink into the society of early 19th century England, then I can see why you can't enjoy the characters or this film.

Except I am - I don't think those were normal reactions, even then. Within the context of your so-mentioned "constricted upper class" would it really have been considered proper or appropriate to make such outbursts or hoard butterflies and then not clean up their decomposing corpses but just let them decay all over your room while you cry into your pillow because an envelope has not shown up at your door??

Also, while it is important for films like this to maintain a historical accuracy and perspective, the director and screenwriter must also keep in mind that the viewing audience will automatically watch the movie with a modern perspective, since nobody currently living has first hand experience with 19th century England, and if you are making a film intended to be viewed only by avid 19th century English historians you have a very small viewing audience.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

I don't even know where to to begin with some of your statements and if you failed to find the significance in what I've already stated, perhaps this is for naught. But I will try.

Hysteria among females was well known at that time. Melodramatic behavior was quite common. There has been much written about the causes, oftentimes involving discussions of the tight societal restraints put upon women. Their options were few and most of them involved finding an advantageous marriage to a sympathetic partner who could provide for her and their offspring. Self expression, ambition, & self fulfillment were all supposed to solely center around such a marriage and not personal satisfaction. Fanny's behavior would have been considered ill advised by those who loved her, but not excessive by society in general.

Surely even in that time period it was not normal for an 18 year old girl to go flying into a mad, screaming rage just because her boyfriend would be out of town for the summer...

Just your use of the term "boyfriend" negates your understanding. Women in those days, no matter what their class but certainly upper class, did not have "boyfriends." Courtship was done in public, or at the minimum with a chaperone. Just to write and receive letters from a man whom one is not related was scandalous. However, for it it have taken place assumes a permanent attachment. Later we see them walk away privately together, once again potentially scandalous behavior. That she was not ostracized shows an assumption of the status of their relationship. In other words, pre-engagement. (Which goes a long way to explaining why she was cautioned by her family friend as well as her mother that Mr. Keats "does not have the means to marry.")

Surely the filmmakers knew that their audience would be modern. But short of handing out a tutorial on 18th century society, we must judge the characters within the context of the film, by the responses and reactions of the other characters. Did you see Mr. Brown kick out when he is describing his regrets at not accompanying Keats to Italy? Would you expect a modern man to so act? Or wear such ridiculous clothing? Accepting these things is part of sinking into the atmosphere of the film.

"I'd never ask you to trust me. It's the cry of a guilty soul."

[–] crazyj89 12 years ago

In other words, pre-engagement.

So "almost fiance". My bad.

Surely the filmmakers knew that their audience would be modern. But short of handing out a tutorial on 18th century society, we must judge the characters within the context of the film, by the responses and reactions of the other characters.

I'm sure they knew, but they also made Fanny look like a crazy, obsessive psychopath. I think they were more going for "crazy in love" instead of just plain crazy, but that's how her character acted. If I were to judge her actions by the actions and reactions of the other characters, I'd still have to label her as stupid crazy since none of the other characters acted remotely like she did at any point in the movie except for that one instance when Keats lost it because Mr. Brown gave her a valentine as a joke. Also it did seem that Fanny put them on edge when she was acting so crazy, like they were constantly afraid she'd do something even more ridiculous if they did little more than sweep up the dead butterflies and speak in soothing tones. So even in that argument, Fanny still ends up being portrayed as an insane woman.

Also, you gotta take the way I'm talking about this more lax. I am aware that these sort of connections were not historically in that time called "boyfriends" or "girlfriends," but that's just the way I talk about these things. I'm not going to be super proper if you couldn't already tell, but also - I still stand that from any perspective, modern or within the universe of the film, Fanny still appears to be crazy. Even if hysteria were normal and common, none of the other characters acted in this manner and that still does not change the fact that she was off her rocker. That would just mean that EVERYONE WAS COLLECTIVELY CRAZY

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

Anyone who sees this film and has a take that Fanny is a "crazy obsessive psychopath," or "insane," is not the audience for this film. I think there's not much more to say.

"I'd never ask you to trust me. It's the cry of a guilty soul."

[–] crazyj89 12 years ago

I'm not saying it wasn't entertaining. I mean, Helena Bonham Carter is one of my faves. I'm just surprised that nobody else came to this conclusion. I mean, seriously. Fanny Brawne of Bright Star and Bella Swan of Twilight both went into catontic states when their lover left them. Both made passes at suicide attempts. Both are obsessed with their lover and would go so far as to alienate themselves from their families and friends to be with the man they love. Yet, Fanny Brawne is widely considered a "hopeless romantic" in this film because it's a costume drama based on a historical character, while Bella Swan is widely considered to be in one of the most abusive relationships ever because it's a teen franchise involving a vampire.

Just saying.

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

Wow you are totally off the mark and are totally out of tune with not only modern females but also 18th century ones as well.
Fanny did not look like a crazy, obsessive psychopath. She was merely in love and didn't want the man she loved to go away. She was a young girl who did not know how to deal appropriately with these situations.
This wasn't exactly a film for someone who didn't want to experience naked emotions or passions. Perhaps you should stick with, oh I don't know, a super hero film or a more male oriented film where people are portrayed as emotionless drones and blow a lot of things up.

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] Felixthecat34213 12 years ago

I actually agree with the OP, she does come off as emotionally unstable in comparison to the other characters, but I think she's supposed to.

For many reasons, one being that this is typical of drawing room dramas. They often portray romantic melodramas, but then it wouldn't be interesting to their sappy audiences of middle aged stay at home moms. I guess what makes this strange is the fact that it's based on a true story and real human beings. Did Fanny actually react this way to John Keats? Are there diaries? I'm not so quick to believe something just because it's "close to historical fact" or....something...Did Fanny really react this way? We'll never know, but the film is taking a huge liberty in portraying her as emotionally and mentally unstable concerning her attachment to Keats.

In some ways I can understand why the character reacted that way. Your first love is often very intense, you may find yourself reacting in ways you never imagined you would. Most of the other characters, besides Keats, were probably too young or too old to experience a first love. Younger siblings were too little and grandma had been there and done that. So naturally they would appear totally nutso in comparison to the other characters.

Think about adolescents and teenagers and how they react to everything. The characters in this film are essentially in that age range and when you're in that age range, everything seems over exaggerated and intense. The world will end because your lover goes away for the summer and your lover doesn't care about you anymore because you don't receive a letter until 3 days later. I've seen teen girls freak out because their boyfriend doesn't text them immediately after they send them a message....yeah. It's a crazy fcking age.

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

"sappy audiences of middle aged stay at home moms"...I can tell from this one statement how out of touch you are with middle aged women, let alone women who are 'stay at home moms'. Funny how Quentin Tarantino saw this at a film festival and raved about how beautiful it was...He doesn't seem like a middle aged stay at home mom to me, does he you?

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

Well said, tigerbos. And exactly right. Tarantino was enraptured by this film, in fact, he sent the writer/director Jane Campion, the following note.

"My favorite film of yours," Tarantino writes. "I don't like period pieces like that. I loved this!!! Never has heartache been so realistically and movingly portrayed as Abbie taking to her bed ... The lovers kisses ... Abbie and Ben ... touching ... Brilliant. I loved it!!!" The note is signed, "Love - Your fan - Quentin Tarantino."

“It’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it is about it.” RIP Roger Ebert

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

Exactly! I already like Tarantino's work but my opinion of him sky rocketed after I heard about those wonderful words he wrote to Jane!
The man has taste.

Like your Roger Ebert quote! I was sorry to hear about his passing. Now that he and Gene Siskel are gone, I have no idea who's reviews I'll be looking toward because those two were the only two I trusted!

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

Tarantino thinks of himself as a screenwriter who also directs. He is able to recognize both great screen writing and directing.

I read several, many actually, reviewers. I weigh what they have to say and decide if they have anything of note to offer...what I did with Roger, too. The difference is that Roger was always interesting to read whether one agreed with him or not.

“It’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it is about it.” RIP Roger Ebert

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

Very true on all your comments!
I didn't always agree with Roger but I always respected him. I really liked it when he and Siskel would disagree on a film. They did everything with such class!

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

Not for many years! They used to fuss and fight on screen and barely disguised their contempt for one another. At Roger's memorial service, Gene's widow said that to get to the screening room one had to ride in a small rickety elevator. Gene and Roger made very sure never to arrive at the elevator at the same time. But over the years, Roger reminisced, they became very close friends. I think he said something to the effect that for all that they came from very different backgrounds and had very different perspectives, there was no one he'd rather spend a day talking to, agreeing and disagreeing with, than Gene. And there was no doubt they both loved films and were passionate about critiquing them.

Roger's Journal, his online writings on many subjects including particular films, is still online. If you like to read, you will find your intellect tickled often. And you might find one of the several entries he wrote about Gene somewhere in there too. http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal (BTW, his autobiography is being turned into a documentary, which I think is not only apt, but wonderful.)

“It’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it is about it.” RIP Roger Ebert

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

I've been to that website and I love it. I didn't know the other stuff you mentioned here though!
I was surprised when Roger said Gene's favorite film was Saturday Night Fever!

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

How exactly would I have known that your comment was a joke?
What Quentin Tarantino is over the top how?
Really you think this film was aimed at 'middle aged stay at home moms'? If that were true, than the main characters would have probably been middle aged themselves. No. The 'target audience' was more in line with the age of the main characters. Not that I can read Jane Campion's mind or anything but the subject matter was based upon a biography about Keat's...which I'm sure was not aimed at middle aged stay at home moms...lol
I'm a caddy immature bitch? I didn't resort to name calling here and cussing as you have done so I would say you're the one being immature - among other things. You couldn't even express an opinion about this film without putting down what you considered it's target audience. In fact, that rules out any opinion you may have simply because since when does a 'review' have anything to do with a target audience? It doesn't.
As far as how the character was portrayed, I didn't see anything over the top and melodramatic about her. She didn't run screaming through the hallways and pulling out her hair for God's sake.
'Drawing room dramas'...how refreshing...You've added a genre here that doesn't fit this film in the slightest. Good one.
Even more hilarious is your calling Quentin T. a 'sappy film maker'...lol
Thanks for changing the 'target audience' at the end of your statement. That's called back peddling.
I don't really care about your gender and your age shows in your latest retort.

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] aGuiltySoul 12 years ago

Drawing room dramas are made for people who like melodramas. Most of them tend to be stay at home moms, but some of them can be young women in their late teens to mid 20s. Some of them can also be sappy film makers, like Quentin Tarrentino.

Quentin Tarrentino is a sappy film maker? Are you effing kidding me? **FAIL**

As for your summary of audience groups, you're making this stuff up as you go along. "Drawing room dramas" What is THAT?

“It’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it is about it.” RIP Roger Ebert

[–] tigerbos 12 years ago

lol Yeah I'm always saying to my middle aged house wife friends: Let's go see a drawing room drama this weekend! ha ha ha

I think she's the saddest girl ever to hold a martini.

[–] SnapCrackledThePop 12 years ago

I saw it the way you did.

[–] cuecredits 12 years ago

Odd of her to even group this with that trite adolescent Twilight throwaway crap for the purposes of comparison; but it does inform us as to where she's coming from. Obviously never been head=over=heels in love either. It can be a little crazy! Ever heard of Amour Fou?

[–] suspendiss3 11 years ago

"Mama, Fanny wants a knife to kill herself"

Now...where was I?