Judge Dennis Davis
The Lion in Winter

Judge Dennis Davis - The Lion in Winter

- Good morning, good afternoon, good evening to everybody. Tonight, in our sort of movie series, as it were… I hope you’ve got your popcorn and Diet Coke ready. We are going to be dealing with “The Lion in Winter,” a 1968 film. You may recall about a week or so earlier, I had given a lecture on “A Man for All Seasons,” the 1966 film which had won five Oscars, and of course, focused on the relationship between Thomas More and Henry VIII. Here we go back about three, 400 years to Henry II, who has his own problems with the church and marriage and family. The events in this particular case, that is the events which are the subject matter, “The Lion in Winter,” are not accurate historically and the playwright has drawn a whole series of implications, which I’ll come to in a moment. But it too was an extremely successful film which won three Oscars, perhaps the most significant being for the magnificent Katharine Hepburn, who won her third Oscar, and during her career, was the most celebrated Oscar winner amongst actresses until Meryl Streep came along. So the question in “The Lion in Winter” is, what is this all about? But it’s interesting that when I lectured on “A Man for All Seasons” a couple of weeks ago, I started by foregrounding my lecture on the basis of the Parshat haShavua, the reading of the Torah, which had taken place at the time that I was giving this lecture. And of course you may recall that in that particular question, I was focusing on this idea, the teleological suspension of the ethical, the idea that the ethical, which Abraham would’ve conceived, was essentially being countermanded by God and Christians.

What do you do in that situation? Here, we’re talking about the idea of succession and family. And it just so happens that this week, yesterday on Shabbos, people would’ve read about the way in which Rivkah, Rebecca, collaborated with her son, Yaakov, in order as it were to deceive her husband, Yitzchak, Isaac, the father of Jacob, to bestow on him the blessing, the blessing which essentially would mean that he would take the tradition forward rather than his slightly older brother, Esau. And therefore, the entire narrative of the Torah, insofar as this is concerned, relates very, very significantly to this question of, as it were, the future of the family and who is going to become the next, as it were, in line. And of course, the Parsha, the portion which we read, has a major amount of really interesting and significant debate, which I’m not going to go into ‘cause I was just trying to give you the framework. But just to give you an instance, it’s interesting that the reason why Isaac was deceived was by the time he blessed Jacob, thinking it was Esau, he was blind. And the Midrash tells us that the reason he was blind was when he was put on the altar and his father, Abraham, was about to kill him, the angels, tears of the angels, dropped into the eyes of Isaac, which caused, as it were, eye illness and disease and eventually blindness. And so it’s rather interesting just to think about the way in which that succession story panned out, that because he was blind, as it were, the narrative took on a course of its own.

So here we are with Henry II, and in which the narrative is about, essentially, what is going to happen in the family. As I say, let me make absolutely clear the facts of the case, the facts of the film and the play upon which it was written, The play written by James Goldman, about of whom a little bit in a moment, really are not accurate historically, but they give, as it were, the framework for exploring this internecine warfare within the family with regard to succession. Henry has convened his court to Chinon Castle in 1183. He’s invited his sons, that’s John, Geoffrey, and Richard, who becomes Richard the Lionheart, for a Christmas get together. Actually, I’ll come back to the actors in a moment. The unitized present that Henry is dangling is the chance to become his heir, rule over England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and a nice little bit of France, which he held at that time. Present at Chinon is Alais, who is technically going to be betrothed to Richard, but who has basically been Henry’s mistress, just to add to the internecine tensions. And into this particular framework emerges Eleanor, Henry’s estranged queen who’s been imprisoned for a year for plotting to overthrow him, and generally, Henry would regard as very much a pain in the neck, but more about that in a moment.

And then just to add to the tension of the day, the young King Philip of France, the successor to Louis VII, who happened to be the ex-husband of Eleanor, he also arrives, when what he wants is either the return of his half-sister Alais’ dowry, which is a large tract of land, Aquitaine, or Alais herself. Henry doesn’t want to give the land and he certainly doesn’t want to give up Alais because she is his mistress. Now that’s the sort of framing of the plot. Of course it goes on, which is that what Henry wants to do is he finally lets his ex-wife out, Eleanor, to strike a deal. John would get the land in France, Aquitaine. Richard would marry Alais and effectively would then become, the whole system would essentially have its laid-out succession plan. The problem, of course, is that Richard doesn’t want to go through with this. And then of course, what occurs is that Henry, realising that his grand plan is about to go down the tubes, locks up his three sons, seeks annulment of his wedding with Eleanor so that he can marry Alais. None of this eventually transpires because what happens is that he finally decides he cannot go ahead and kill his three sons. He has to let them go and the film basically ends with Eleanor going back to being imprisoned because the deal has fallen through. Now that’s the broad framework and it’s this… But the thing about it is not so much the great sort of moral and ethical implications which flowed from “A Man for All Seasons” and which we discussed when we were with each other last time. But it is the foreground for some extraordinary acting and, in a sense, a reflection on succession, the tension within families and the way in which, as it were, succession actually works in these kinds of dysfunctional families.

Let me pause here for a moment to tell you a little bit about dramatis personae before we get into the clips that I want to show you, and in particular, the last clip, which is really, I think, a serious treat for reasons I’ll explain in a moment. The director of the film was a British filmmaker called Anthony Harvey. Did make 13 films, none hugely consequential, but his first was a film called “Dutchman” in 1967. It basically was a film ahead of its time because it reflected upon race tensions between a black man meeting a white woman. And it clearly had impressed a whole range of people, including the 35-year-old Peter O'Toole, fresh from his triumph in “Lawrence of Arabia,” and who two years, sorry, four years earlier than the making of “The Lion in Winter,” had played Henry, same Henry II, in his contretemps with his once upon a time friend, Thomas Becket. The film version had Peter O'Toole as Henry and Richard Burton as Thomas Becket. It didn’t really take off as a film, and apparently, the best acting, according to many of the critics, took place in the pub afterwards between O'Toole and Burton, but that’s for a different story. But O'Toole was certainly at the top of his game. He was 35 years old when “The Lion in Winter” was made. He had read the script of James Goldman, who was the playwright, who had thereafter did quite a few plays, “Anna Karenina,” “Oliver Twist,” “Tolstoy,” to give you about three examples. And O'Toole was particularly impressed by both the play and, in addition, he was impressed by the directing of Harvey in “Dutchman.” And it was he who essentially reached out to Katharine Hepburn to be part of the cast and to take the role.

Now, before we get to Katharine Hepburn, this was a very challenging role. Eleanor, who she plays here, was the queen of France for a while and divorced her husband, that’s Louis, to marry Henry and become queen of England. She had gone on a Crusade when she was queen of France. She had ridden bare breasted part of the way to Damascus, apparently, according to historians, to raise the morale of the troops. And she may well have poisoned her second husband’s mistress, Rosamund Clifford. She was patroness of the French troubadour poetry that had raised France from the muck of the Middle Ages. And she certainly supported the development of the female religious order at the time. She was, in many ways, the richest and most powerful woman in Europe and the most legendary at her time. Of course, the problem was that she fell foul of Henry, but we’ll get there in a moment. But in the real Eleanor, it doesn’t appear that she could read or write English or that she could write even her own name at the time. There is also no evidence that the Plantagenet family spent Christmas together in Chinon or that she still had to fight for Richard’s status as the heir to the throne or that Henry had contemplated annulling the marriage. This was all part of the play. So therefore, the play and the film are largely fictitional, but it’s a challenging role to play.

And the role, as I say, is played by Katharine Hepburn. And what is interesting about that was, at the time, when Katharine Hepburn actually was approached to take the role, which in many ways meant that “The Lion in Winter” was very much “The Lioness in Winter,” being her, what had happened was she had already won, as I said, two Oscars. She had been probably the most prominent actress of her time. She had a reputation as a fighter. She’d fought for everything, for votes for women, for victory on the playing fields as a sportswoman in adolescence, for good acting parts on the stage for women in screen, for liberal political causes in the 1940s. And then, in many ways, perhaps for the greatest of all her challenges, the real love of her life, Spencer Tracy, whom she never married, they were, in a sense, inseparable, but in 1967, Tracy had died shortly after filming “Guess Who’s Coming for Dinner.” And those of you who know that film may recall an extraordinary declaration of love by the character played by Tracy, which was his last film, he knew his dying. And most people who knew him knew this wasn’t acting. This was a heartfelt, as it were, speech in which he was articulating his existential love for Katharine Hepburn. When she was approached to take the role, Spencer Tracy had just died, and for her, it was really very difficult to do.

But the point was she found, firstly, she’d found the play, sorry, the film which Harvey had directed, “Dutchman,” to be particularly captivating. Not surprising for a politically orientated person like herself. And she said, when she was approached, she really didn’t need much persuasion. The film was located, her location was shot in Fontvieille, an abbey town in the south of France. And of course, as we will see later, it was the first film that Anthony Hopkins played in a film. And I’m going to play for you right at the end a wonderful interview which Anthony Hopkins gave reflecting on this particular point. And essentially, it was a film which was centred so much on the acting of Katharine Hepburn and, in a way, it became almost an Indian summer for her because she would play a whole series of roles for years thereafter. But many regarded this as the greatest of all her roles. Now, what I want to do in some ways is to show you some of the film. It’s extremely difficult to, as it were, in one lecture of this kind, capture the entire film. It’s sort of the thing where ideally, as I said to Lauren, for whom, again, I thank enormously for the clips that she’s going to do, otherwise I’d totally cock them up. The point I said to her was, you know, the ideal way would be to watch the film together, if we could, for two hours and then have a serious conversation about it. Because some of the acting is absolutely spectacular. I’m going to start with clip one.

It’s interesting for the following series of reasons. It firstly has music from John Barry, who was one of the three recipients of an Oscar, which was won for “Lion in Winter.” It’s a magnificent score and he won that. But I’m going to play the first scene because it’s the arrival of Elizabeth in the film to the castle. I want to also say, I was very grateful to Benji Meyers, who apparently tells me that he was the accountant who was involved in the actual financial background to this film, and he told me a whole lot of wonderful things for which I’m eternally grateful. And one of them was that when they had to build the castle, which was going to be Henry’s castle, which was supposed to be in Chinon, the fascinating thing about it was that they paid people, experts hordes, lots of money, lots and lots of money to go around the world to find the best castle. And finally, they didn’t find one so they had to build one, which the question was what sort of happened thereafter to the money, which went into the castle, he tells me, which is an interesting question in itself. But why I want to play you the first scene is because it’s very differently to the way Harvey films the rest of the film. Here, we’ve got a wide expanse as she comes to the castle, but down the river with this beautiful music being played, and it’s a much wider expense of the cinema, as it were, than we see in some of the other clips I’m about to show you. So Lauren, let’s have a look at the arrival, which is our first clip.

CLIP BEGINS

• [Henry II] How was your crossing? Did the channel part for you?

• It went flat when I told it to. I didn’t think to ask for more. How dear of you to let me out of jail.

• [Henry II] It’s only for the holidays.

• Like school, you keep me young. Here’s gentle Alais. No, greet me as you used to. Fragile I am not. Affection is a pressure I can bear. Oh, but I do have handsome children.

CLIP ENDS

• Now that scene, which is the first, is in very significant contrast to much of the rest of the film. Because what is so interesting about the way in which the director, Harvey, dealt with matters was that he didn’t, as it were, have many expansive scenes. And the other thing about it, which was particularly interesting, was, unlike “Man of All Seasons,” this doesn’t really have that sort of plush, kind of regal manner. It’s much more blood and guts. In other words, what I’m trying to say is that Henry strides around the castle in this little shabby leather jerkin, the crown and the fur ever only worn very, very infrequently. Most of the scenes really reflect the kind of, if you wish, the age of war, disease and death, which is very much the case of the 12th century. And the scene that I’ve just shown you is so unusual for that. And of course, the music by John Barry, I think, is absolutely magnificent, and understandably, he won the Oscar for it. But of course, Henry has not let out his estranged wife for nothing. He wants, as it were, to spend Christmas with her in order that he can resolve the fact that his sons are locked in a struggle over the succession to his throne and he knows that he’s got to do something about this. How are you going to deal with these three sons?

We know that, at a particular point, the fourth son, who died, had plotted with Eleanor in order… I’m sorry, I think I called her Elizabeth at one point. It means I’m going senile. Eleanor had plotted against Henry, which caused her to be imprisoned. And so now the question is, can he strike a deal with her? There are a lot of critics who say there’s a huge amount of bellowing and shouting, and it’s true. There is a huge amount of electricity in the air between these two actors, O'Toole at his very best, and Hepburn the consummate actress. But there is also a subtlety and nuance to it. I want to play you, if I may, the second scene, a clip I wanted to play, which is where Henry now discusses with Eleanor the possibility of a deal which would ultimately wrap everything up into a neat package for the succession to his throne. And here are Eleanor and Henry discussing this in which Henry puts a deal to her. We can have the next clip.

CLIP BEGINS

• I adore you.

• Save your aching arches. That road’s closed.

• Eh. I have an offer for you, my dear.

• A deal? A deal? I give the richest province on the continent to John for what? You tell me, mastermind, for what?

• Your freedom.

• Oh.

• Once Johnny gets the Aquitaine, you’re free. I’ll let you out. Think, on the loose in London, winters in Provence, impromptu trips to visit Richard anywhere he’s killing people. All that for a signature.

• You’re good.

• I thought it might appeal to you. You always fancied travelling.

• Yes. I even made poor Louis take me on Crusade. How’s that for blasphemy? I dressed my maids as amazons and rode bare-breasted halfway to Damascus. Louis had a seizure, and I damn near died of windburn. But the troops were dazzled. Henry, I’m against the wall. To be a prisoner, to be bricked in when you’ve known the world. I’ll never know how I survived. These 10 years, Henry, have been unimaginable. And now, you offer me the only thing I want if I give up the only thing I treasure.

• Sign the paper and we’ll break the happy news. The queen is free, John gets the Aquitaine, and Richard marries Alais.

• Yes, let’s have it done. I’ll sign, on one condition.

• Name it.

• Have the wedding now.

• What’s that?

• Why, I’ve surprised you. Surely, it’s not sudden. They’ve been marching down the aisle for 16 years, and that’s a long walk. John can be best man. That’s a laugh. And you can give the bride away. I want to watch you do it.

• Alais, I can live without her.

• And I thought you loved her.

• So I do.

• Thank God. You frightened me. I was afraid this wouldn’t hurt.

• What a tragedy you are.

• I wonder, do you ever wonder if I slept with your father?

CLIP ENDS

• So there they are, the two of them. O'Toole by then, by the way, is 35. Katharine Hepburn was 60. You’ve noticed the way her neck is covered. She was obsessed by the idea that because she was 60 and there were wrinkles in the neck that they shouldn’t be shown in film. But it is a magnificent piece of acting at the end. And you’ll have noticed here that this is a very different type of scene than that expansive one that I showed you in the beginning. And it’s interesting that when Hepburn was interviewed about this film, she said, “It grabbed me by the throat. This was exactly the approach that our material needed, not a glossy, old MGM stuff, but cold people living in cold castles.” In many ways, as one of her biographers noted, Hepburn had sheltered her sorrow in the wake of Tracy’s death, which had been a shattering blow for her, in this kind of austerity, seeking out a form that expressed the very antithesis of sentimentality.

The film’s glaring skies, its mildewed castle offered a powerful allegory for the equally frozen places in the heart of Eleanor of Aquitaine, which this particular scene, in that way in which they manipulate each other, it’s quite an extraordinary reflection of acting. And as I said, I wanted to show you this because many critics suggested that, you know, Henry bellowed right through the whole floor, or should I say O'Toole. But there was something far more nuanced about the acting of which this particular scene reflects. So now we come to a further scene I want to show you, which is of course where Henry is now determined to marry off Alais to Richard because it’s part of the deal, and of course, it all goes horribly wrong. But let’s have a look at clip three then, if we may.

CLIP BEGINS

• What’s wrong? What’s happened?

• Richard’s getting married.

• Getting married? Now? He’s getting married now?

• I never cease to marvel at the quickness of your mind.

• You can’t hurt me, you bag of bile. But you can, Father. Why?

• Because I say so.

• My lord, the bishop’s waiting in the chapel.

• Good. Let’s get this over with.

• You’ll make a lovely bride. I wonder if I’ll cry.

• You sound as if you think it’s going to happen.

• I do.

• He’s only plotting. Can’t you tell when Henry’s plotting?

• Not this time.

• He’ll never give me up.

• You think I won’t?

• Because you told me so.

• You’re not my Helen. I won’t fight a war to save a face. We’re done.

• I don’t believe you.

• Wait 10 minutes.

• Please! Richard, Richard we’re not . Honestly, we’re not! Please! We love each other! It’s lunacy! I won’t do it! I won’t! It’s lunacy! Let me go, Henry. Richard, no! I won’t say the words, not one of them. It makes no sense. Why give me up? What do you get? What are you gaining?

• Why, the Aquitaine, of course.

• What’s that again?

• Your mother gets her freedom and I get the Aquitaine. That is the proposition, isn’t it? You did agree.

• Of course she did. I knew it. It was all pretence and I believed at all.

• I meant it all.

• No wedding. There’ll be no wedding.

• But, my boy, look. Durham’s waiting. You should be happy to marry her, for my sake. It isn’t much to ask.

• Never.

• But I promised it to Philip. Think of my position.

• Damn the wedding and to hell with your position.

• You don’t dare defy me.

• Don’t I?

• You’re the king of France. For God’s sake, speak up. Do something.

• Make a threat. Come on, frighten me.

• Dunce!

• Am I?

• He never meant to have the wedding.

• Come again?

• You’re good at rage. I like the way you play it.

• Boy, don’t ever call a king a liar to his face.

• I’m not a boy, to you or anyone.

• Boy, you came out asking for a wedding or the Vexin back. By God, you don’t get either one. It’s no to both.

• You have a pact with France.

• Then damn the pact and damn France. She never marries, not while I’m alive. Your life and never are two different times.

• Not on my clock, boy.

• Ha, ha, ha! Listen to the lion. Come on, flash a yellow tooth and frighten me.

• Don’t spoil it, Richard. Take it like a good sport.

• How’s your bad leg?

• Better, thank you.

• Your bad back? You’re getting old. You’ll have me once too often.

• When? I’m 50 now. Good God, boy, I’m the oldest man I know. I’ve got a decade on the Pope. What’s it to be, the broadsword when I’m 85?

• I’m not a second son now. Your Henry lies in the vault, you know.

• I know. I’ve seen him there.

• I have the crown.

• You’ll have what Daddy gives you.

• I am next in line.

• To nothing.

• Then we’ll only have the broadswords now.

• This minute?

• No, on the battlefield.

• So we’re at war?

• Yes, we’re at war. I have 2,000 men at Poitiers.

• Can they hear you?

• Call and see who answers.

• You’re as close to Poitiers as you get.

• You don’t dare hold me prisoner.

• Until we’re all agreed that John comes next, I can and will.

• You’re a king’s son so I treat you with respect. You have the freedom of the castle.

• The castle doesn’t stand that holds me. Post your guards.

• My God, I’m king again. Fantastic. Are you happy for me, Geoff?

• I’m happy for us both.

• [Eleanor] You played it nicely. You were good.

• Yes, I was. I fooled you, didn’t I? Oh, God, but I do love being king.

CLIP ENDS

• Just a fabulous actor. And O'Toole was really at his best at that point in time. I just noticed again, look at his, the clothing he’s wearing. It’s not for nothing that the director, Harvey, said that, “I’m not making a pretty historical film full of sumptuous tableaux, heaving bosoms, gilt-edged ceremony.” That’s why it’s also grubby, more so 12th century. And then he said, “My main concern,” this is Harvey, “was not to make another historical film about pretty pictures, that the thing would give a real primitive, desperate look; little fireplaces, people huddled in corners shivering.” A scene I didn’t play to you for you, but gives a good taste to this, is that on that morning of Eleanor’s arrival… There is a clip, I was desperately trying to find it but couldn’t, where Henry has his, they have a scene of Henry’s bare hands smashing the ice in the barrel of water he used for his ablution. He stands in front of fires, warming his backside, grinning roguishly at the king of France. When the fires then warm his ageing bones, he fights, sparring with his favourite son, John, or skirmishing with Eleanor. This is not that sort of tableaux type scenario which we saw in “Man of All Seasons.” There’s much more sort of blood and guts there. And in a sense, it does focus on the relationship between Eleanor, on the one hand, and Henry. By the way, just out of interest, you might have noticed a few interesting characters in the clip I just showed you.

The one, the king of France, is Timothy Dalton playing his very first role. I think he ended up by playing James Bond at some point. And then of course, even much more significantly, there is none other than Anthony Hopkins playing his first role. My understanding, again, from Bernie is that he’d broken his leg when they were doing this film; therefore, probably only added to the difficulty of doing it. It is also true, he tells me, that they were so careful. Katharine Hepburn, which perhaps befits her character, was prohibited from driving her motorcycle because they were particularly anxious about her too. So there’s an extraordinary cast of characters. But if you look at that particular scene on the screen at the moment, it just, you know, he said, “Oh, I love to be king.” I mean, there is both an acting on his part and Hepburn’s part, which is quite remarkable and which essentially was what the director was trying to show, that here were manipulative people, to a large degree, the centre of attraction being Eleanor because she was trying to negotiate between her children and Henry, not an easy thing to do. Of course, the film ends on the basis that they never get a settlement. Eleanor’s sent back to her imprisonment, and the last scene is basically a repeat scene of the first scene where she’s put back on that boat which we saw at the beginning. And what, therefore, this entire play by James Goldman reflects and done in the film is just this wondrous tension of a dysfunctional family, all quibbling and cobbling about who, in fact, is going to take over the deal.

Now of course, it’s true that there’s a rule of primogeniture, but of course, the one thing that Henry and certainly Eleanor knew was that the eldest was hardly likely to do a particularly fine job, which reflects in an interesting way, does it not? On my introduction to this talk, when I referenced Isaac and Rebecca, the interesting question as to why Isaac preferred Esau rather than Jacob. But that again is for a different time. And I’m not going to be accused here of trying to give you another discussion on the Parsha of the week, but I did want to foreground it in that way. The interesting point about it is this was Anthony Hopkins’ first film. And before I conclude with a few concluding remarks, nothing better to reflect upon this, that Hopkins himself, reflecting by way of an interview on the experience of the 1968 “Lion in Winter” and his role in his very, very first film. So Lauren, if we can see the next clip, please.

CLIP BEGINS

• My agent phoned up and said that Peter O'Toole wanted to meet me. And he looked at me and he said, “Those great blue eyes that he has.” He said, “I’m very interested in you playing Richard the Lionheart.” Couldn’t believe it. I said, “Who’s in the film with you?” He said, “Katharine Hepburn. It’s Katharine Hepburn.” And it was wonderful. I did the film test. He seemed to like me. He said, “All right, you’ve got the part.” And that was just like that. I’d never seen a film camera. I’d never been in front of a camera. All my life, I wanted to be in films.

• I beg you to believe my reputation. I am a constant soldier, a sometime poet, and I will be king.

• So to start from my film debut with those two was quite an event.

• My, what a greedy little trinity you are. “King, king, king!” Two of you must learn to live with disappointment.

• Ah, but which two?

• [Eleanor] Let’s deny them all and live forever.

• Tusk-to-tusk through all eternity.

• You know, and it was a kind of showy, big, glossy historical movie like “The Unforgiven,” pure old-fashioned entertainment, “Fugitive” entertainment, “Lion in Winter” entertainment.

• My lord.

• Your grace.

• [Henry] Welcome to Chinon.

• But the one powerful charismatic figure I’ll never forget is O'Toole ‘cause he was something unique. He was special, he was extraordinary. And he still is, I think a real acting genius.

• I deny you! None of you will get my kingdom. I leave you nothing and I wish you plague! May all your children breech and die!

• You’re still the marvel of a man.

• And you’re my lady.

• I remember feeling… I don’t waste time by saying that I was nervous. I was never nervous. I’m never nervous as an actor. That’s wasted time. So I wasn’t nervous of her, but I did manage to get my cloak caught in the door and I fell over a few cables because obviously, deep down, I was a bit in awe of her.

• We leave you, madam, with pure joy.

• Departure’s a simple act. You put the left foot down and then the right.

• Mother!

• Hush, dear, Mother’s fighting.

• At the end of the rehearsal, she said, “Let’s talk a moment,” so we walked off the set and we had a coffee. She said, “I’m going to give you a few tips.” She said, “Don’t act.” I said, “Oh, what do you mean?” She said, “Don’t act. You don’t need to act. You’ve got a good face, you’ve got a good voice, you’ve got a good body.” She said, “Don’t act. You don’t have to.” She said, “Leave that to me.” She said, “I act all over the place,” she said. She said, “Watch Spencer Tracy. Watch the real American actors who never act. They just do it, you know, speak the lines and show up.” And I took that advice as the best advice I’ve ever been given as a film actor.

• Well, that’s how deals are made. We’ve got him, if we want him. He’ll sell us all, you know, but only if he thinks we think he won’t. Why did I have to have such clever children?

• But I remember that when she said, “Isn’t it wonderful,” she said, “being here? We are in the south of France being paid to do what we do, being paid to play games.” And she turned and she said, “Don’t any of you forget that,” she said, “because this is movies. "This is the best you can be doing.” And that stayed with me for 27, 28 years, whatever it’s been now. And I still do that every day when I go on set. I think, “They actually pay me to do this?” And it’s fun, it’s wonderful.

CLIP ENDS

• So that was Hopkins. It is interesting that Hepburn had told him, basically, to do method acting, just don’t act. She herself had been criticised often for a tendency to overact, her mannerisms, the anglicised speech, the queenie disdain. She was called by the press Katharine of Arrogance that once alienated Hollywood. But by the 1960s, the world, I think, had gotten used to her. She hadn’t played a queen since Mary, Queen of Scots in 1936. But in this particular film, not only was she central to it, but she also apparently was the one who kept everybody going on the crew, even O'Toole, who was by then known to have had a drinking problem, which quite tragically essentially affected his career in all sorts of ways, behaved apparently enormously well in her company. But of her acting, in a sense, captures the nuance of Eleanor and the attempt to, as it were, negotiate a deal for both herself and particularly for her favourite son, Richard, the truth is that O'Toole’s acting was also extraordinary. His ability to rage, as we saw on one or two occasions in the wedding clip, certainly was regarded as one of the great screen performances of the decade. And there’s some incredible stunning moments, one I was trying to find, but I couldn’t, where he’s standing on the steps of the castle. Because the deal has actually unfolded to his disadvantage and he screams, “You dare to damn me, do you? Well, I damn you back. God damn you!” He damns God.

And there is something quite remarkable about that form of acting that he has. So in a way, when you look at this film and what it tried to capture, I started off by talking to you about “The Man for All Seasons,” and it would seem to me right to actually just compare them for a tick. One of the flaws of “The Man for All Seasons,” with all of the magnificent acting, particularly of Scofield, was it was so graceful. In fact, the characters were sort of so well-behaved compared to Henry and the manipulative Eleanor and even Richard, played by Anthony Hopkins. The sets there were ornate. The dialogue was a form of free verse, particularly when Scofield talks. But here, that’s not so. You’ve got a world in which kings still kick aside chickens on their way through the courtyard. The costume is hardly exactly that of a king except for a short clip, which we saw in the Hopkins interview, which ultimately shows somewhat more real quality. In this England, which was some 250 years before Thomas More, Their dogs, their dirty flaws, their rough fur skins and pots of stew, pigs, mud dungeons and human beings. This is a film of great complicated intrigue. It depends on great acting. It depends on the interaction. But the director, which is why it’s such a wonderful film, is able to put it in that very intense way. I said to you earlier there were very few scenes.

There’s one you see in the Hopkins interview and there’s one that I started with and there’s the same one at the end. But other than those, where the camera sort of expands, it’s intense, it’s grimy, it’s dirty, and it is very, very, as it were, in your face. And the acting, therefore, is what makes it one of the great films of its time and certainty reflects, in the most luminous way, the tensions of families in general, which I think is probably true, and certainly where there is something to gain for it. It’s interesting, Claudette and I have been watching that HBO series called “Succession,” which of course is supposed to be a thinly disguised version of “Murdoch,” et al. And you know, it’s pretty good in terms of looking at the way in which families connive against each other. But compared to this, where the playwright takes a 12th century context, puts great actors together, puts them in an intense kind of environment where the camera focuses on them and the grime, the dirt, the kind of unhygienic quality of the 12th century, and focuses in a laser-sharp way on the manner in which they seek to get an upper hand. And then it ends with Eleanor going back, Henry not having had a deal, and in effect, almost saying this was one Christmas Day, which is what it was, in which it reflected upon the tension of her family and the filmic way in which that is depicted.

For me, it’s an utterly remarkable film. It’s surprising that it only won three Oscars, one for the screenplay for Goldman, the other for the music by Barry, which I’ve indicated, and the third for Hepburn. But of course, she’s one of my favourite actresses. I just think, you know, it was really pleasing for me to watch her performance yet again, just think how remarkable she was and the longevity of it all. By the way, her last film, just out of interest, was in 1984 in which Harvey was also the director, and that was something like 16 years later when she was almost 80 years old. Quite remarkable. With that, I hope you enjoyed that. I wished I could have shown you the whole film, but at least what I’ve tried to give you is a guide to that particular internecine family warfare so wonderfully depicted. Let’s see if there are any questions.

Q&A and Comments:

Yeah, it’s a favourite film. I agree with you, Uni.

Fay says, Eleanor of Aquitaine was one of the She-Wolves of England.“ Most certainly.

Q: "When did the rite of primogeniture become the norm? Apparently, it doesn’t apply to Henry’s family.”

A: Well, it was supposed to be there, Warren, but of course, we know, I mean, there it was supposed to be the case in the Bible. I mean, Esau was supposed to be the man and look what happened there. So there’s kind of divine authority for that. It is a mixture, you’re right, of Leah and her three daughters and succession and I agree.

And it’s interesting that you comment on that, and I agree with you. And then you’re right, there’s this wonderful line where Katharine Hepburn does say that every family has its ups and downs. I hope you all enjoyed that.

Do have a good evening.