Dickens's Oliver Twist is unpretty, unsightly literature, set in a Victorian world of poverty and violence, cruel beadles, pompous magistrates and ineffectual policemen, where there are cut lips and suppurating wounds. There are no roles for Keira Knightley here.
Roman Polanski has boldly seized on this campaigning classic, famously filmed by David Lean in 1948, and made it his first picture since a return to the cinematic premier league made possible by his triumphant wartime drama The Pianist. Like that feature, it is confidently adapted for the screen by dramatist and master craftsman Ronald Harwood.
The image of little Oliver Twist victimized by poverty, almost seduced by the specious excitement of crime, and then offered the possibility of a lucrative career in authorship is always compelling; it is tempting to speculate how this story would have resonated with Polanski himself. The poor orphan escaping to London? The horrific murder of Nancy? The possibility of redemption for Fagin?
PHOTO COURTESY OF FOX MOVIES
For Polanski, who escaped the Warsaw ghetto as a child and embarked on a brilliant adult career freighted with tragedy, the themes are probably more painful than for the rest of us. It is a curious experience to watch Polanski's meticulous and rather beautiful recreations of the rural suburbs and teeming London streets, with St Paul's Cathedral prettily pixellated on the far horizon. All of it very much not filmed on location in the UK, lest the constables lay hands on the director and transport him to the New World.
What he makes of it is, however, simply a decent, watchable film. It is an adaptation with gusto and spirit, content to let the central story do the work, having had a thicket of minor characters and subplots chopped out. There are no great flourishes of cinematography, no novelties of interpretation or design other than to put Fagin closer to the center of the story and make him a little more sympathetic.
This is a commanding performance from Ben Kingsley as that notoriously corrupt and corrupting paterfamilias to a bevy of young pickpockets. Where Oliver once had to pick out oakum from old rope in the workhouse, he is now taught by Fagin's boys how to "prick out" identifying initials from stolen handkerchiefs.
Poor little Oliver, played by Barney Clark, is contin-uously dependent on the kindness of strangers, from the unspeakable Fagin to the gentle scholar Brownlow (Edward Hardwicke) who temporarily rescues Oliver from his life of crime. But Fagin is not as bad as the black-hearted Bill Sikes (Jamie Foreman), domestic-violence culprit and pit-bull fancier, and Fagin himself has pathetic quaverings of a conscience.
Kingsley's best scene is when he must lean in to Oliver and murmur into his ear, with the grotesque solicitude of a father-figure, that if the boy does not co-operate with the felonious plans in progress, he will have to frame the boy on a trumped-up capital charge. It is enough for Polanski to bring out Fagin's Shakespearian qualities by the final curtain: he gibbers in his Newgate cell like a mixture of Malvolio and Shylock. Oliver's request for more gruel is always a showstopper, and I can never see it without thinking of Harry Secombe's apoplectic reaction, mutton-chops a-quiver, as Bumble in Lionel Bart's musical version.
Despite the pain and fear, the hangings and the beatings, there is always a nagging disquiet that what Polanski thinks he is giving us is basically a much-loved children's classic. He is directing a handsome repro edition bound in celluloid calf and lightly sprinkled with the picturesque movie dust of old London town. His Oliver Twist does not flag or lose its way and it is always watchable, but the book's original power and force have not been rediscovered.
For many people, Bilingual Nation 2030 begins and ends in the classroom. Since the policy was launched in 2018, the debate has centered on students, teachers and the pressure placed on schools. Yet the policy was never solely about English education. The government’s official plan also calls for bilingualization in Taiwan’s government services, laws and regulations, and living environment. The goal is to make Taiwan more inclusive and accessible to international enterprises and talent and better prepared for global economic and trade conditions. After eight years, that grand vision is due for a pulse check. RULES THAT CAN BE READ For Harper Chen (陳虹宇), an adviser
Traditionally, indigenous people in Taiwan’s mountains practice swidden cultivation, or “slash and burn” agriculture, a practice common in human history. According to a 2016 research article in the International Journal of Environmental Sustainability, among the Atayal people, this began with a search for suitable forested slopeland. The trees are burnt for fertilizer and the land cleared of stones. The stones and wood are then piled up to make fences, while both dead and standing trees are retained on the plot. The fences are used to grow climbing crops like squash and beans. The plot itself supports farming for three years.
President William Lai (賴清德) on Nov. 25 last year announced in a Washington Post op-ed that “my government will introduce a historic US$40 billion supplementary defense budget, an investment that underscores our commitment to defending Taiwan’s democracy.” Lai promised “significant new arms acquisitions from the United States” and to “invest in cutting-edge technologies and expand Taiwan’s defense industrial base,” to “bolster deterrence by inserting greater costs and uncertainties into Beijing’s decision-making on the use of force.” Announcing it in the Washington Post was a strategic gamble, both geopolitically and domestically, with Taiwan’s international credibility at stake. But Lai’s message was exactly
May 4 to May 10 It was once said that if you hadn’t performed at the Sapphire Grand Cabaret (藍寶石大歌廳), you couldn’t truly be considered a star. Taking the stage at the legendary Kaohsiung club was more than just a concert. Performers were expected to entertain in every sense, wearing outlandish or revealing costumes and staying quick on their feet as sharp-tongued, over-the-top hosts asked questions and delivered jokes that would be seen as vulgar, even offensive, by today’s standards. Opening in May 1967 during a period of strict political and social control, Sapphire offered a rare outlet for audiences in
RSS