Angels and Insects

Kristin Scott Thomas gives an Oscar worthy performance full of nuances and subtleness in tune with a by gone Victorian era when nothing is outrightly spoken but always hinted at so unlike our lurid confessional age. Thomas can infuse a scene with a multiplicity of meaning through a movement of the wrist or a tilt of a head and trounces Emma Thompson's lauded performance of British reserve in "Remains of the Day". To appreciate this film you need an artist eye, others who dislike it would be better off getting whacked with a sledgehammer.

This was thoroughly engaging and thoughtful film, with a rich and fascinating plot and characters.

The opening scene of the natives of South America dancing is a well edited opening, and the word 'Angels" appears over it. Indeed, all the Angels in this film are not in England (where the rest of the film takes place). William Adamson (Mark Rylance), a biologist who collects rare insects (especially the butterfly), survives a shipwreck and comes under the protection of an upper class English family. That's where he falls in love with Eugenia (Patsy Kensit). But every family has it's secrets.

Someone described this as "Merchant-Ivory meets Tennessee Williams", which is a perfect way to describe this film.

Several have complained about the actors, saying that there is not a single stand-out performance. I disagree, as both Rylance and Kristin Scott Thomas (in a performance worthy of an oscar nomination) acquit themselves well. The script is also very well written, and the costumes deserved the Oscar nomination.

One of the ten best of 1996.

When William Adamson an entomologist (Mark Rylance) marries Eugenia Alabaster (Patsy Kensit) the daughter of an aristocratic family, he realises that he will always be considered an outsider. He spends much of his time with his insect collection, drawing, and describing specimens and writing books about his butterflies and ants etc. However, Eugenia both beautiful and wealthy is one specimen he prizes above all others. Mark Rylance plays the quietly spoken entomologist with sincerity and always in character. Patsy Kensit is suitably sullen and mysterious with her changing moods and strange ways. But it is Douglas Henshall who plays her obnoxious lascivious brother who livens up every scene in which he appears. The Victorian conversations and mannerisms while well done do tend to irritate after awhile and it is quite pleasing when Eugenia's mother with her high-pitched voice quietly passes away. It seems to me that the interiors of the castle are quite incompatible with the magnificence of the exterior walls, but that is really of little consequence. As we watch the story unfold, we become aware that it is not only William's presence that is so upsetting, but something deeper, more mysterious, some untold secret brooding over the whole family. It is not too difficult to guess what that secret is. One of the early impressions of the film is the predominance of the unusually bold bright colours in the ladies' costumes - bright blue, bright red and bold stripes. Surely they are wrong for this era. I can only guess that the writer (or was it the art director?) got the idea that the women in their Victorian dresses could reflect the colours of the insects - butterflies, ants and bumble bees. Despite its selection for the Cannes Film Festival 1995, it is not a great film, but quite entertaining to watch despite its slow beginning, and for those who like a happy ending, everyone gets their just deserts. The film underlines the fact we all already know that the aristocracy is not always kind to outsiders.

As one fellow IMDb user stated, there are very few reviews in the grey area for "Angels and Insects". However, I can honestly say that when I first saw the film in 1995 (I was about 12 at the time) I wasn't very impressed. From a very young age I have been interested in period films and thought provoking themes, however, upon first viewing I was incredibly bored by the whole project.

Flash forward to 2003 and I found that I had a whole new appreciation for the film. As a matter of fact, it has become one of my favorites. I don't find the plot particularly shocking, however, the execution of the script is excellently paced. I like the fact that William Adamson realizes that beauty isn't necessarily exhibited on the outside. (However, I find Matty to be far more striking in appearance than Eugenia). He realizes that like his insects (ants in particular), the Alabaster family has a unique and questionable structure/nature.

The soundtrack, costumes, and use of light and location are superb. It isn't by accident that the costumes mimic some of the insects mentioned in the film. (For example, Eugenia's bee dress and her Morpho Eugenia sapphire gown). The Alabaster estate is quiet a piece of eye candy, as are the shots of insects set to the beautiful string based soundtrack. Though this use of symbolism may not be very original, it is beautiful just the same.

I do have to come to the defense of some of the actors, however. Some comments mention that the acting is somewhat wooden. I tend to disagree. (Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course). Okay, so Patsy Kensit may not be the next Vanessa Redgrave, however, I think she offers what the part calls for. Her "wooden" nature fits the character. I see Eugenia as having a definite mental imbalance, thus her often subdued acting seems appropriate. Kristin Scott Thomas is excellent as the clever and mysterious Matty. As for the rest of the cast, I believe that they all did a fine job portraying these somewhat difficult characters.

I have yet to read the A.S. Byatt novella "Morpho Eugenia", however, that is going to be my next project. Naturally, I would be curious to see how the film and the novella compare. Either way, I still feel that "Angels and Insects" deserves my highest regards.

This movie presents a brilliant stage worthy level of acting to the screen. I was stunned by the quality and subtlety of the performances especially the lead and Kristin Thomas. The story is almost painfully slow but that helps create a mood and sexual tension that works perfectly. I was literally on the edge of my seat both with the drama of the characters and just wanting to be closer to their nuanced performances. Jeremy Kemp as the elder Lord of the manor Sir Harald Alabaster displays aristocratic intelligence rarely found in films. The dinner table discussions of the emergence of the radical new approaches to evolution and culture surrounding Darwin's revelations are compelling. Also the role of Edgar, representing the boorish son who clings to the old ways of class hierarchy is finely wrought. Highly recommended. A thoughtful film.