The Scarlet Pimpernel Pt. 2

 While I do not usually enjoy movies that depart a significant amount from the book, the 1982 version of The Scarlet Pimpernel, directed by Clive Donner, was an exception. Starring Anthony Andrews, Ian McKellen, and Jane Seymour, this movie has quickly become one of my favorite fictitious adventure movies.

 Though changes were made to the characters and plot of Orczy’s original work, I think they were skillfully done, and upheld the same vibe that one gets from reading the book.

Characters

 First of all, the characters were well done even though they were tweaked a little.

 Sir Percy Blakeney (Baronet, as he would like you to remember), played by Anthony Andrews, is, however, exactly the same in the movie as he is in the book. A dull-witted, lazy, amusing fop, he is by far the best character on screen. 

 He is well-written, well-cast, and extremely amusing. Almost every time he appears, he sets one laughing, from his peculiar faces while peering through his monocle, to his droll rhymes— "You see, I was a bit of a poet, and you did not know it,” and “Bonjour…Monsieur,”—of course, these are not as funny reading as they are listening to him say them.

 Another great thing about him is that he is a very deep character, though he pretends not to be. (Spoilers ahead!!) He is actually the Scarlet Pimpernel, the man who leads the English lords to strike blows against the French Republic and rescue the unfortunate victims of Robespierre. After being tipped off that his recently wed wife sent a whole family to their deaths, he is forced to conceal his true identity, building up a deeper and deeper web of false identities—thus emerges the foppish Sir Percy, the one who loves clothes and trying to be witty. I would recommend watching the movie, even if it were just to laugh over the man.

 The second great character is Agent Chauvelin, played by Ian McKellen (The Lord of the Rings) and he has been tweaked, minorly—for the best, I think. He, of course, as an agent of the French Republic is the Scarlet Pimpernel’s nemesis. He also used to be a great friend of Sir Percy’s new French wife (until she realized what a bloodthirsty man he is) and so seems to be hanging around quite a bit. However, whether or not he suspects Sir Percy as being the Scarlet Pimpernel is key to creating the suspense. It doesn’t seem like even the foxiest of persons could suspect that odd man. 

 Chauvelin is also a great character because he is constantly aware of correctly representing the “greatness” of the French Republic. Even though he scorns the shallowness of Sir Percy, he is quite susceptible to trying to get his good opinion. At one point, he receives a hearty mocking on the state of his clothes from Sir Percy and ever afterward, when the critical Percy is in the room, Chauvelin can be seen straightening his suit and cravat, making sure they are “English-approved.” At one point, Chauvelin even spots Sir Percy asleep on a couch during a party, and, as if on cue, his hands go to his cravat to see that it is properly in place. This aspect of the cruel French agent is a wonderful touch that isn't found nearly as much in the book. It lends fullness to the man’s character, proving that he isn’t just a bloodthirsty lunatic who cares for nothing else at all.

 The third great character in the movie who underwent the most alteration, is Lady Marguerite Blakeney (played by Jane Seymour) once in love with Chauvelin, now married to Sir Percy Blakeney. 

 Because the movie, unlike the book, starts before the Blakeneys are married, we get a bit more of a glimpse as to why she married him in the first place. It becomes more apparent right away that she isn’t as shallow as the book makes her first appear. 

 At the beginning of the movie, in many scenes that are discussed in the book but never lived, Marguerite is a young French actress in the very heart of Paris’ social circle. She is beautiful and famous but, secretly, growing more worried about the Reign of Terror. 

 In the middle of all this chaos, she stumbles into the company of Sir Percy, the seemingly sincere young man from England. She falls in love with his kind thoughtfulness and honest, open attachment to her. However, after her wedding day, he seems to grow aloof and cold, though she struggles to keep her relationship with him. What she doesn’t realize is that several people were turned into the government with her name as the accusing party, that her husband knows about it and thinks that she is working for the French Republic. Imagine the tension in the Blakeney household!

 Overall, I think the movie did a better job than the book explaining why she fell in love with him to begin with and, because we get both the “before and after” of the wedding, we can see more clearly the change that took place in Sir Percy and Marguerite’s relationship.

Plot

 Another thing that was well done, though altered, in the movie was the plot. Albeit, most of it is the same, but there is one central point in the movie that was made up: rescuing the recently executed king’s son, the Dauphin, from  French hands. The latter half of the movie revolves around it, giving the movie a great goal that is not found in the book. Orczy did err, in not including this idea in her book. Indeed, I find nothing wrong with her book at all, but it is a great addition to the movie. It increases conflict and suspense and gives the characters a great chance to grow and stretch their abilities in their most daring rescue yet.

 Another way in which the plot differentiates from the movie is the fact that when Marguerite is separated from the captured Sir Percy (after she learns that he is the Scarlet Pimpernel), she finds him again, and helps to arrange a rescue for him. In the book, she follows Sir Percy all the way from England to France and tries to help rescue him, though he doesn’t even know she is there. 

 In this aspect, I feel the movie could have done better. Though Sir Percy pretends to be foolish and foppish, Marguerite is very dear to his heart, as she sensed before they got married, and it seems illogical that he would have knowingly allowed her to put herself in danger for him. Nevertheless, I did find the daring rescue at the end of the book of Sir Percy and the young Dauphin to be thrilling and suspenseful.

 As I mentioned before, when it comes to making a movie like the book, I usually approach the movie with a do-or-die attitude. (The Lord of the Rings is definitely a good example of that.) However, thankfully for this blog post, this was not so in The Scarlet Pimpernel. As I realized, it’s not just about sticking with the book, it’s about respecting the book. So, if a director decides to change the book up a bit, it will be noticeable if he respects it or not. Clive Donner, the director of The Scarlet Pimpernel, obviously respected the book and so we get a movie that feels as if it were written by Orczy herself. To anyone skeptical of the movie I would say, yes, it does change the book, but it does so in a very smart way. You may even find yourself enjoying the book more after you have watched the movie. A word of warning, though. 

 Once you have watched the movie, you will hear Anthony Andrews’ Sir Percy in every word of dialogue that you read. Enjoy!