moving

Review: ‘The Great Escaper’ is a moving story about remembrance featuring the late Glenda Jackson

The final film of the late Glenda Jackson and, if he remains true to his word, of Michael Caine, “The Great Escaper” has made its way to America two years after its U.K. release. Premiering Sunday under the umbrella of the PBS series “Masterpiece Theatre,” the film tells the true-life story of Bernie Jordan, who, at 89, set off unaccompanied and unannounced from an English retirement home to attend celebrations marking the 70th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy, France. (This event also inspired a Pierce Brosnan film, “The Last Rifleman,” which came out about the same time.) Love and time and duty are its themes. Written by William Ivory and directed by Oliver Parker, it’s a simple story, simply told — sweet, but not saccharine, and moving even when you know what’s coming.

Bernie (Caine) lives with his wife, Rene (Jackson), in a care home by the sea in the town of Hove. She needs more medical attention than he, but both have their wits about them. Having missed securing a spot among the groups traveling to Normandy, Bernie, a Royal Navy veteran, with Rene’s encouragement, decides to go it alone. Though he uses a walker and can seem tired or abstracted at times — he has much on his mind, and a specific mission to fulfill — the trip itself is not especially hard on him. It becomes all the easier once he meets, on the ferry across the English Channel, Arthur Howard-Johnson (John Standing, very fine), an RAF veteran who offers him a place with his group and a bed in his hotel room. As the film goes on, he becomes more and more focused, growing alert and lively and taking charge of Arthur, who had earlier taken charge of him. Each, it will transpire, carries a burden of guilt dating from the invasion.

An elderly man in a hat and coat pushes a woman with a surprised expression in a wheelchair.

Michael Caine and Glenda Jackson in “The Great Escaper.”

(Rob Youngson / Masterpiece, Pathé, BBC Films)

Back in Hove, the staff, represented by aide Adele (Danielle Vitalis) and manager Judith (Jackie Clune), is not immediately aware of Bernie’s absence — he’s allowed to come and go — and Rene, who has a tendency to fence with them anyway, is keeping quiet in order to give him time to get away. When they learn he’s missing, a search begins; eventually, Rene lets the truth slip, the exploit hits the press and Bernie, unaware of any of this, is given the nickname “The Great Escaper.” He’ll return home an annoyed celebrity.

Flashbacks, with Will Fletcher as young Bernie and Laura Marcus as young Rene, recall the couple’s wartime meeting and Bernie’s interactions with a young soldier on D-Day. Integrated as memories, they enrich the present action without overexplaining it.

Jackson and Caine, you may know or should learn, were icons of British thespian glamour in the 1960s and ’70s, she in “Marat/Sade,” “Women in Love” and “Elizabeth R,” he in “Alfie” and the Harry Palmer films (“The Ipcress File,” et al.); in 1975, they starred together in Joseph Losey’s “The Romantic Englishwoman,” co-written by Tom Stoppard. Always politically active, Jackson took off 23 years from acting, from 1992 to 2015, to serve as a member of Parliament, and returned to play “King Lear” in London and on Broadway and win a Tony for a revival of Edward Albee’s “Three Tall Women.” Caine, notwithstanding some slow times, made movies all along, all sorts of them, playing Scrooge in “The Muppet Christmas Carol,” Mike Myers’ father in “Austin Powers in Goldmember” and Alfred in the Christopher Nolan’s “Batman” trilogy and parts in five other Nolan films. Watching “The Great Escaper,” you’re seeing history.

Neither has lost a step. (I find it pleasant to remember that, however frail or confused an older character may be, the person playing them is doing a job that requires strength and thought.) Given both the eminence of the actors and their age — Caine was 90 when “The Great Escaper” premiered, while Jackson, 87, died shortly before — it’s hard not to watch with a double consciousness of the players and the parts. But rather than a distraction, it redoubles the impact. Jackson and Caine wear their years proudly; there’s no vanity in their performance or their appearance. The couple’s eventual reunion is deep and real and, like their whole relationship, gorgeously ordinary.

Source link

Inside Isla Fisher’s new London mansion after moving out of home she shared with Sacha Baron Cohen

ISLA Fisher is starting afresh with a stunning new London home after her divorce from ex-husband Sacha Baran Cohen.

The Hollywood couple quietly separated in 2023 after 13 years of marriage, before announcing their divorce in April 2024.

Isla Fisher has relocated to London and has a brand new homeCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders
The actress has opened up about her pad to Elle Decoration in their December/January issueCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders

Isla, 49, Sacha, 54 and their three children Olive, Elula and Montgomery had previously split their time between her native Australia, London and Los Angeles.

However, she’s now relocated to London and is embarking on a new chapter with a swanky new mansion.

The actress opened up to ELLE Decoration about her new abode and revealed why she chose to relocate to England’s capital.

She enthused: “It’s such a fabulous city. It’s a place where you can tell stories and I guess I’m writing my own one now.”

GLAM BASH

Kate Moss looks all partied out as she leaves Kim Kardashian’s 45th birthday


FINAL SERVE

Hidden meaning in Sacha’s bizarre split post reveals Isla troubles, says expert

On the non-negotiables for her new home, Isla admitted: “I’ve been obsessed with weeping willows since I was a kid and there’s one in the backyard, so it felt like kismet.

“I wanted the kids’ bedrooms on my floor so that I can monitor smartphone use; there needed to be space for my family who live in Greece and visit me a lot and, lastly, outdoor space.

“With the Australian upbringing I was lucky enough to have, I’ve always been barefoot in the garden or on the beach, so this is as close as I can get to feeling like I’m home.”

The mum-of-three turned to interiors brand Soho Home to help deck her home out with furniture and gave an insight into her bold choices.

She continued: “I was always in [Soho Home’s] showroom trying to buy everything, and they said ‘We can help you!’

“It’s all very warm and casual, but glamorous. It’s theatrical, which is a bit like me as a person I suppose.

“I’m Agatha Christie-obsessed; I think that’s why I love Soho Home. It reminds me of Murder on the Orient Express – the craftsmanship and the glamour.

“It feels as if someone should be playing jazz in a corner, or smoking a cigar.”

Since embarking on her new chapter, Isla has now swapped out house parties for relaxation and unwinding.

The Confessions of a Shopaholic star said: “Trying to create a new life from a grassroots level, at least emotionally, has been challenging, but deeply rewarding.

Her stunning new home boasts chic interiors from Soho HomeCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders
Isla has given a peek into her London mansionCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders
Her home is a safe haven for her to relax and unwindCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders
Isla’s new home reflects her new quieter lifestyleCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders
The cosy bedroom is decked out in warm orange and earth coloursCredit: ELLE Decoration/Ben Anders

“I’m enjoying this new version of my life. I don’t need to party in my house anymore. I love to get in the bath.

“I’ll light some candles, bring in my laptop and put on something on Netflix. That’s as exciting as it gets.”

Isla and Sacha first met in 2001 and married in 2010. They were believed to have been one of the strongest marriages in showbusiness – before quietly separating in 2023.

In June this year, they announced the finalisation of their £120 million pound divorce, 14 months after publicly announcing their separation.

In a message, posted simultaneously on both their Instagram pages, the pair said: “Our divorce has now been finalised.

“We are proud of all we’ve achieved together and, continuing our great respect for each other, we remain friends and committed to co-parenting our wonderful children.

moving fast

MAFS couple PREGNANT days after they get married as strangers on show


WEDDING RIFT

Adam Peaty’s family feud escalates as he BANS mum from wedding to Holly Ramsay

“We ask for the media to continue to respect our children’s privacy.”

The full feature can be found in the December/January issue of ELLE Decoration on sale from 13 November.

The actress is best known for her leading role in Confessions of a ShopaholicCredit: Getty
She and Sacha Baran Cohen finalised their divorce earlier this yearCredit: EPA

Source link

Candidates Shrug Off State’s Early Primary : Politics: Moving California’s election to March was supposed to make it a player in presidential race. But other regions had the same idea, leaving it in 32nd place.

It was going to make California count, make it a contender after decades spent watching all those other pipsqueak states decide who among the legions of presidential candidates got to move into the Oval Office.

When California legislators–and Gov. Pete Wilson–agreed two years ago to move the state’s 1996 presidential primary forward from June to March, you could almost hear the silent chortles: Take that, New Hampshire! Back to the farm, Iowa!

And now that the state’s early presidential primary is a mere six months away, the nation’s most delegate-rich state can witness the result:

Nothing.

Sure, the candidates still plumb the state for money, just as they did in the old days. But apart from President Clinton’s trips, there are precious few actual campaign visits and little attention given to the issues peculiar to California. Even Wilson spent more than twice as much time out of state last month than he did tending to matters in Sacramento.

Some candidates still believe that California could ultimately play a big role in selecting the Republican nominee, even given the current dearth of activity. The state, after all, controls about 16%–or 163 of the 991–delegates needed to win the Republican nomination.

Scenarios abound, with California either putting a runaway victor over the top or deciding between two strong candidates. Then again, it could also add to a muddle of results that would force the nomination to be decided weeks later.

“California is going to play a significant role,” said Mark Helmke, communications director for Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, who announced his candidacy in April. “It’s just that none of us could speculate on what that role is.”

Others in the perennially optimistic corps of campaign activists insist that California won’t matter because the front-runner (their candidate, of course) will have it all sewn up beforehand.

“The problem is that California is too late. This thing is going to end in the industrial Midwest,” said Mike Murphy, a senior aide in the campaign of former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander. Murphy was referring to a ring of primaries to be held the week before California’s.

This underwhelming outcome was utterly predictable, according to campaign seers. And there are both logical and logistic reasons.

California moved its primary up, but only to March 26, six weeks after the campaign-opening Iowa caucuses. Not eager to be left in the dust, a host of other states began to clamor.

New York, with the third-largest delegate pool, moved from early April to early March. Pennsylvania and Ohio moved from late spring to March 19, where they will join Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin in the massive Rust Belt regional primary.

The New England states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont and Maine similarly coalesced into a Yankee primary on March 5–three weeks before California’s primary.

All the movement left California in 32nd place in the 1996 campaign chronology, only slightly better positioned than if it had left the primary in June.

“We were dead last, along with New Jersey and a few other states,” said state Sen. Jim Costa (D-Fresno), who lobbied for an early primary for 14 long years. “We’re better off than we were then. We’re just not significantly better off.”

Because the early primary is a one-year experiment, legislators will have to take up its fate after next year. Costa said that he may propose moving it up even further for the 2000 election.

The state senator initially wanted to set this year’s primary for March 5, which would have made California the first big state on the election calendar. But he compromised with others in the Legislature, who argued that the state is so big that it would swallow up all but the richest candidates. Give the poorer candidates a chance to make their mark in earlier, smaller states, the argument went, and then their momentum could offset their lack of funds in California.

The upshot is this: Candidates are still cozying up to Iowa, whose caucuses are scheduled for Feb. 12, and New Hampshire, whose first-in-the-nation primary will be held eight days later.

They are patting backs and kissing babies in South Carolina, whose primary will be held March 2, on the grounds that it will serve either as a fire wall to block a surging campaign or will redouble the momentum of an earlier winner.

They are courting voters elsewhere in the South, where the Super Tuesday primary will be held March 12 and where voters will decide the fates of at least two of their own, Texas’ Phil Gramm and Tennessee’s Alexander.

All of this makes compelling strategic sense.

“The first focus has to be the first caucus and primaries,” said Charles Robbins, a spokesman for Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter. “They come first and if you don’t perform, you’re out of the game.”

Put another way, it would be political malpractice for a candidate to hang out in California when his time is better spent in the earlier states. Compounding matters is California’s status as a winner-take-all primary. That means a candidate who put all his marbles into the state and pulled, say, 48% of the vote would walk away without a delegate. Many other states dispense their delegates proportionally.

“No candidate is going to make a serious commitment to resources in a March primary simply because there’s no guarantee you’re going to get that far,” said an adviser to one of the campaigns. “It’s a huge gamble to put up that money and risk walking away with nothing.”

Another hindrance to actively campaigning in California is the fact that the state is so far from Washington, where no less than six of the nine Republican candidates are based.

One recent Thursday, for example, Specter jetted from Washington to Boston, held two campaign events and was back in the Capitol for Senate business by lunchtime.

“You can’t do that to California,” said his aide Robbins. “Just because of the geography, all the way on the other side of the country, it’s a real project.”

While the Republican candidates have not spent much time in California, their campaigns are starting to lay the foundations of an effort here.

Wilson’s campaign is rebuilding his longstanding organization, despite prominent defections to other camps and surveys that show the governor losing the state to front-runner Bob Dole of Kansas.

Besides having the only full-fledged campaign office in the state, Wilson’s operation has staffers specifically working to buoy his standing here, said spokesman Dan Schnur.

“For all their talk, none of the other campaigns are putting any time or energy into California at all,” he said. “They file in and out for fund-raisers, but beyond that there’s no indication of any serious organizational effort on the part of any of them.”

Wilson does have a leg up, but his opponents argue that his campaign may have folded by late March or, even if he stays in the race, they may be able to build enthusiasm here from the momentum of earlier victories.

Gramm has made the biggest splash, garnering the support of Republican legislative leaders Curt Pringle and Rob Hurtt, both of Orange County, and a host of activists. U.S. Rep. Christopher Cox of Newport Beach, who is heading Gramm’s California campaign, said the effort so far is a “very well-organized, low dollar” effort.

It will remain entirely a volunteer effort through the end of the year, he said.

“When you’re running statewide in California, it’s important to have money when it counts, not lavishly throw it around months in advance,” Cox said.

Dole has been here infrequently, but has tried to make a big splash when he has come. He salted one Los Angeles fund-raising trip with a high-profile assault on the entertainment industry.

Overall, the Dole campaign said, it has raised $1.5 million in its visits to California.

“Some analysts are suggesting that it will all be over before California,” said Dole spokesman Nelson Warfield. “Our attitude is that we are contesting every state very vigorously. We’re proceeding on the assumption that it is up for grabs.”

Former television commentator Patrick J. Buchanan has made three multi-day fund-raising trips to California since March–the same time frame in which he has visited Iowa 11 times and New Hampshire eight times. His aides say they are putting together networks of volunteers who will fan out in support of Buchanan.

Lugar and Alexander have raised money in California, and Lugar aides said they had particular luck with a direct mail drive that touted his proposal to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and replace income taxes with a national sales tax. Like the latter two, Specter has had a low profile here.

At some point, the Republican nominee will begin fighting the general election war here–one that President Clinton is already waging. Mindful that he needs to win the state in order to be reelected, Clinton has visited California 19 times in less than three years, more than any other state.

Source link