In Holland of 17th century, a humble girl named Griet (Scarlett Johanson) works as a maid in the house of the famous painter Johannes Vermeer (Colin Firth) and somehow contributes into the creation of a masterpiece.
The film, just like Tracy Chevalier's book on which is based, narrates an imaginary story about who and what inspired Vermeer and led him make the "Girl With A Pearl Earring" painting. Few things are known about the personal life of Vermeer. He died at 43 after making 35 paintings and having 11 children. More than any other of the Dutch painters, he analyzed the effect natural light had on a room and on a face, something that influenced visually the film as well.
It seems inevitable that the first thing everybody notices about this film is the stunning work done by the director of photography Eduardo Serra (ASC, AFC). The colors, the lightning, the surrounding environments create a harmony and every frame of the movie cries out for you to watch it and admire it. According to the cinematographer, he didn't want the film look like a collection of Vermeer's paintings because something like that could possibly distract the viewers from the story. Well, unfortunately for him (but not for our eyes), he didn't manage it.
Although there are very few dialogues, the script achieves to be multi-leveled. Initially, it can be seen as a commentary on artistic inspiration. But there's much more in it. Griet intrudes into Vermeer's universe. She is the catalyst that makes things upside down in the household, in a very silent way - much unlike the lead character in Pier Paolo Pasolini's "THEOREM" (1968). Griet has an inner energy that captivates the painter. She doesn't end up to be just a model for him, she becomes something more. The relationship between the artist and his subject becomes deeper and deeper as Vermeer gets obsessed with his servant. Obsession plays a very important role in the story. Let's not forget that Vermeer lived in a household full of women and the only way to concentrate on his art was by having carved out his very personal space in the house. Neither his wife, nor his mother in law or his children were qualified to enter there. But Griet manages it and there are many scenes that prove her understanding of Vermeer's art.
While most films should have a tighter job in editing, this one has the exact opposite problem. Its small duration may make it watchable, but the characters seem to suffocate. They could be far more developed, but the lost ground is covered by the liaisons created among them. Griet is totally charmed by her master. She admires him as a personality, as an artist and of course as a man. But not even a moment does she forget her background and probably she ends up with Peter, the butcher's son who from the very first moments showed his feelings about her - a rather perfect match. Vermeer's thoughts are more complexed. He somehow also admires Griet, mainly because of her esteem on art. But his obsession with her is not based on erotic or sexual grounds. We can see that he's loyal to his wife, but he just does what he has to do in order to serve his art. On the other hand, Van Ruijven, who is Vermeer's family's patron is presented as a rich and lecherous old man. He knows Vermeer's desperation for money and tries to take advantage of the growing intimacy between the master and the maid that seems obvious to him. Last but not least, it must be said that in Vermeer's house, light is a character of itself. It becomes brighter and more colorful as Griet evolves from a maid to his model.
There is a strange chemistry between the lead actors, but not very successful. Firth is undoubtedly a limited actor and although he tries his best, it is not enough for such a challenging role. Johanson is surely more talented and her body language and face expressions are captivating. However, many times in the film we have the sense that she repeats her performance in "LOST IN TRANSLATION", especially in scenes where not too much is shown, but many are implied. So, the room is empty for Judy PArfitt to make another excellent performance and build in a great way her character. Peter Webber is just another director and here he's doing a better job than usually, mostly because of the materials he had in his hands. You can't distinct the director's personal touch throughout the film and that's not a good sign. My Grade: 6.5 out of 10
The film, just like Tracy Chevalier's book on which is based, narrates an imaginary story about who and what inspired Vermeer and led him make the "Girl With A Pearl Earring" painting. Few things are known about the personal life of Vermeer. He died at 43 after making 35 paintings and having 11 children. More than any other of the Dutch painters, he analyzed the effect natural light had on a room and on a face, something that influenced visually the film as well.
It seems inevitable that the first thing everybody notices about this film is the stunning work done by the director of photography Eduardo Serra (ASC, AFC). The colors, the lightning, the surrounding environments create a harmony and every frame of the movie cries out for you to watch it and admire it. According to the cinematographer, he didn't want the film look like a collection of Vermeer's paintings because something like that could possibly distract the viewers from the story. Well, unfortunately for him (but not for our eyes), he didn't manage it.
Although there are very few dialogues, the script achieves to be multi-leveled. Initially, it can be seen as a commentary on artistic inspiration. But there's much more in it. Griet intrudes into Vermeer's universe. She is the catalyst that makes things upside down in the household, in a very silent way - much unlike the lead character in Pier Paolo Pasolini's "THEOREM" (1968). Griet has an inner energy that captivates the painter. She doesn't end up to be just a model for him, she becomes something more. The relationship between the artist and his subject becomes deeper and deeper as Vermeer gets obsessed with his servant. Obsession plays a very important role in the story. Let's not forget that Vermeer lived in a household full of women and the only way to concentrate on his art was by having carved out his very personal space in the house. Neither his wife, nor his mother in law or his children were qualified to enter there. But Griet manages it and there are many scenes that prove her understanding of Vermeer's art.
While most films should have a tighter job in editing, this one has the exact opposite problem. Its small duration may make it watchable, but the characters seem to suffocate. They could be far more developed, but the lost ground is covered by the liaisons created among them. Griet is totally charmed by her master. She admires him as a personality, as an artist and of course as a man. But not even a moment does she forget her background and probably she ends up with Peter, the butcher's son who from the very first moments showed his feelings about her - a rather perfect match. Vermeer's thoughts are more complexed. He somehow also admires Griet, mainly because of her esteem on art. But his obsession with her is not based on erotic or sexual grounds. We can see that he's loyal to his wife, but he just does what he has to do in order to serve his art. On the other hand, Van Ruijven, who is Vermeer's family's patron is presented as a rich and lecherous old man. He knows Vermeer's desperation for money and tries to take advantage of the growing intimacy between the master and the maid that seems obvious to him. Last but not least, it must be said that in Vermeer's house, light is a character of itself. It becomes brighter and more colorful as Griet evolves from a maid to his model.
There is a strange chemistry between the lead actors, but not very successful. Firth is undoubtedly a limited actor and although he tries his best, it is not enough for such a challenging role. Johanson is surely more talented and her body language and face expressions are captivating. However, many times in the film we have the sense that she repeats her performance in "LOST IN TRANSLATION", especially in scenes where not too much is shown, but many are implied. So, the room is empty for Judy PArfitt to make another excellent performance and build in a great way her character. Peter Webber is just another director and here he's doing a better job than usually, mostly because of the materials he had in his hands. You can't distinct the director's personal touch throughout the film and that's not a good sign. My Grade: 6.5 out of 10