I just watched the movie Topsy Turvy for the first time and I loved it. In fact, I instantly bought it because it’s a keeper for the brown family DVD library.
I’ve Googled up a bit of info about Gilbert & Sullivan on the net, but it’s just general info. Is there any evidence that George Grossmith was a morphine addict, as depicted in the movie? Or that Mr. Gilbert hated and was estranged from his mother? There were lots of these great gossipy details in the movie, and I’m curious to know if they were based on facts or if they were an invention of the writers to flesh out the players.
Favorite scenes: Any scene with Jim Broadbent; the oyster-eating scene and its outcome; the two star male actors gossiping in their little dressing room; and of course the “Three Little Maids” number. I’m watching this one again soon!
I can’t speak directly to your questions, but I do know that every one of the actors was assigned months worth of research “homework” to prepare for their parts. It is writer/director Mike Leigh’s m.o. to have his actors immerse themselves into historical research about the period, the roles, the culture, the behaviors, the stylings, and all the minutae (external and internal) that may even be peripherally relevant. From there, whole scenes are improvised based on a pre-existing story/structure/framework for a particular scene or piece of action.
Given that the characters are mostly real people (unlike, say, Leigh’s recent Vera Drake), I imagine they took fewer liberties with the truth than most standard biopics. Still, they may have distributed character traits (single motherhood, childless marriage, abortions, drug abuse) to give a broader sense of the period and to flesh out the characters more. Can’t say for certain, though I too adore the movie immensely.
I’ve only done a little reading on G&S, but the answer to both your questions is yes.
Great movie.
Another movie, set in Victorian times, which isn’t afraid to look at the darker aspects of Victorian life, is The Great Train Robbery, starring Sean Connery and Donald Sutherland.
Great fun. The DVD commentary by Michael Crichton (who wrote the original novel as well as directed the film adaptation) goes into extensive detail about the period nuances that you might not suspect.
1. Is there any evidence that George Grossmith was a morphine addict?
There is and he was. Grossmith suffered from stage fright (who’d believe it?) and used morphine to calm his nerves.
2. Or that Mr. Gilbert hated and was estranged from his mother?
Dr. and Mrs. Gilbert certainly had a nasty breakup, and neither one of them was gifted with a warm personality. “Schwenck” (as he was called) seems to have sided more with his father, but there’s not really enough evidence to clarify his relationship with either of his parents in their dotage.
**3. There were lots of these great gossipy details in the movie, and I’m curious to know if they were based on facts or if they were an invention of the writers to flesh out the players. **
A little bit of both. Some issues, such as Grossmith’s addition, are established facts. Others are less certain, such as Sullivan’s relationship with Fanny Ronalds – many (though not during his lifetime) have contended that Sullivan was gay, though there’s no real evidence to support it. The story of the kitana falling from the wall (as a spark of inspiration for The Mikado) has had its detractors as well, even though Gilbert himself was the source of the tale. So while the actors, in researching and preparing their roles, went far above and beyond the call of duty, not everything in the film should be regarded as gospel truth.
Favorite Scenes (other than the whole damned movie): The performances. I’m in a G&S company and find myself singing along with the Sorcerer and Mikado scenes. I also love the backstage and rehearsal parts, because I’ve never seen any other movie that so accurately captures what the theater life is like.
What always astounds me about this movie is how the filmmakers managed to cast people who a) were able to portray the real members of the D’Oyly Carte Opera Company with perfect believability, b) were talented enough to put in extremely good performances of the stage works; and c) bore almost frightening resemblances to the actual historical figures they played.
I think it’s there. But it’s British whimsey, so it’s not so earnest, if you follow me. I think that if they could go for a play on words etc, they did so, and the cumulative effect is one of farce with commmentary.
but then, aside from the political commentary present in many (don’t ask me, I am quoting my Dad–a G&S nut), I see them as farce. We see at least one every summer in summer stock and it’s fun when they slide contemporary political satire into the lyrics (“I’ve Got a Little List” comes to mind from Mikado).
I can hear D’yolyCarte people screaming now…
They are simple stories with either hopelessly convaluted plots or the thinnest of premises–but the music and lyrics hold up, and always will, IMO.
I am be no means a G&S “nut” (meant affectionately)–so I will be quiet now.
When I was in London on business, I had a day to myself and walked by the D’Oyly Carte theater (or theatre, if you prefer). There’s a bust of Sullivan by the river…and a bronze of a young lady who has thrown herself at the feet of the pedestal. It was so beautiful, I almost died laughing.
I love G & S, I loved the movie. I hope those with more intimate knowledge will continue to post additional detail.
Yes, that’s the Sullivan Memorial. A mite on the melodramatic side, perhaps, but not altogether innapprorpiate for an artist greatly beloved by his public.
And eleanorigby is quite correct. There’s quite a bit of social and political satire in Gilbert’s librettos. Much of it passes over the heads of modern audiences or requires some explanation. For example, The Gondoliers pokes great fun at the political philosophy known at the times as Republicanism, but which has its modern equivalent in libertarianism. On the other hand, Iolanthe ridicules Parliament, a form of entertainment whose popularity will never die. Even The Mikado, which seems on the surface to be lampooning Japan, sets its sites much closer to home, skewering English society with tremendous wit and skill.
Well, absolutely; the Pre-Rapaelite movement get the gears in Patience (1881):
This was something of a swipe at Oscar Wilde and the Aesthetics.
And by the way, the summer of 1878 saw a terrible heatwave in London, which made bad box office for the debut of HMS Pinafore.
I loved the way that the film worked in the Victorian’s triumphant love affair with technology; telephones, reservoir pens, flush toilets (" ‘oos goin’ to be stayin’ there? Amphibians?")
The entire opera was a merciless sendup of the Aesthetics. D’Oyly Carte, knowing that the satire in Patience would be lost on non-English audiences, arranged Oscar Wilde’s famous tour of “the colonies” shortly before the opera had its American premiere. Wilde was fully aware of this, but willingly participated as he adored the publicity.
Throughout most of their partnership Gilbert & Sullivan maintained a cordial, though distant, business relationship. As admirably portrayed in Topsy-Turvy, the two could hardly have been more different in terms of temperment and personality. Sullivan was fond of high society, and possessed a charming character that won him friends everywhere he went. Gilbert, on the other hand, had a cold and prickly demeanor that was very much at odds with what one might expect from an author fond of such high flights of whimsy.
It is true that they preferred to collaborate “through the mail,” but this was not seen at the time as evidence of any great hostility – merely a preference on the part of both to work independently. Gilbert sent his completed librettos to Sullivan, who communicated back only as necessary to iron out trouble spots. The two men did come together to oversee the productions, but always in the capacity of business partners.
As one might expect, their ability to work together, even through the mail, eventually soured. For the premiere of The Gondoliers, D’Oyly Carte had a new carpet installed in the foyer of the Savoy Theatre, and charged portions of the expense to Gilbert and Sullivan. Gilbert loudly objected and did not take at all to the fact that Sullivan sided with D’Oyly Carte. The matter even ended up in court (Gilbert won). The so-called “carpet quarrel” was the beginning of the end. The librettist and composer managed to set aside their animosity sufficiently to produce two more operas, but the magic was gone. The Grand Duke and Utopia, Limited were regarded as failures.
