-
.CITAZIONEThe involvement of director Reed Morano (who’s indie debut “Meadowland” was one of last year’s overlooked gems) and “Mad Men” star Elisabeth Moss is a collaboration that’s impossible to ignore, and a quartet of first look photos have arrived that are simply gorgeous.
“The Handmaid’s Tale” is based on the Margaret Atwood novel of the same name. Moss stars as a handmaid named Offred who is trying to survive in a male-dominated totalitarian regime. She is one of the few remaining fertile women who is forced into sexual servitude as a last desperate attempt to repopulate the world. Offred will go from one miserable situation to the next in hopes of surviving and finding the daughter that was taken from her.
The supporting cast includes Joseph Fiennes, Yvonne Strahovski, Samira Wiley, Max Minghella, Madeline Brewer, Ann Dowd and O-T Fagbenle. The 10-episode first season will premiere in April 2017.
srcCITAZIONEHulu’s The Handmaid’s Tale will premiere on April 26th, 2017
x
Edited by ‚dafne - 30/6/2017, 23:13. -
.CITAZIONEMoss stars as a handmaid named Offred who is trying to survive in a male-dominated totalitarian regime. She is one of the few remaining fertile women who is forced into sexual servitude as a last desperate attempt to repopulate the world.
Oddio che angoscia!. -
.
Sembra interessante, ed i lavori della Atwood mi interessano, però ho già l'ansia D: . -
.
Trailer:
+ sono stati aggiunti Joseph Fiennes e Alexis Bledel
Edited by ‚dafne - 30/6/2017, 23:18. -
.
Video
Edited by ‚dafne - 30/6/2017, 23:20. -
.CITAZIONEWhy Won’t the Handmaid’s Tale Cast Call It Feminist?
The “f” word becomes lightning rod for the Hulu series cast at a Tribeca Film Festival event.
On Friday evening, eager TV fans packed the BMCC Tribeca Performing Arts Center to watch The first episode of Hulu’s highly anticipated adaptation of Margaret Atwood’s novel, The Handmaid’s Tale, screened for a packed crowd at the Tribeca Film Festival on Friday night. Given the reactions, it appears the palpably ominous first episode (debuting April 26 on the streaming service) hit all the right beats: people laughed at the quiet, acidic punchlines just as much as they winced at the tense moments. But when the cast sat down for a panel discussion and were asked whether they consider the series a “feminist” work, and whether they wanted that to be a part of the discussion when they signed on, their answers were much less in tune with the audience than the episode itself had been.
Madeline Brewer, formerly of Orange Is the New Black and now Janine in the world of Gilead, took a stab first: “That’s not the reason I got involved,” she said. “I personally heard about all the other people involved in this show, and I thought, ‘Oh my God, I need to be there.’ . . . I think that any story, if it is a story being told by a strong, powerful woman. . . any story that’s just a powerful woman owning herself in any way is automatically deemed ‘feminist.’ But it’s just a story about a woman. I don’t think that this is any sort of feminist propaganda. I think that it’s a story about women and about humans. . . This story affects all people.”
Ann Dowd shrewdly sidestepped the “feminist” question altogether, stressing the story’s political resonance instead. “What I love about this, among other things, is the notion ‘stay awake.’ Stay. awake. And don’t for a minute think [that] if you say, ‘Well, I’ll get involved some other time. I won’t worry about this midterm election . I’ll just—’ No, no, no. Don’t wait. Just stay awake.”
Dowd later got even bolder; when asked what the cast hopes viewers will take away from the series, she said, “I hope it has a massive effect on people. I hope they picket the White House, and I hope they’re wearing these costumes. . . I hope it’s all over the place, and it doesn’t end. And that we never, ever underestimate the power of morons.”
When Elisabeth Moss was asked how many similarities she sees between The Handmaid’s Tale’s Offred and her old Mad Men heroine, Peggy Olson, she veered back to the previous question.
“Well, they’re both human beings. They’re the same height,” she quipped, adding later, “For me, [The Handmaid’s Tale is] not a feminist story. It’s a human story because women’s rights are human rights. So, for me it’s, I never intended to play Peggy as a feminist. I never intended to play Offred as a feminist. They’re women, and they’re humans. Offred’s a wife, a mother, a best friend. You know, she has a job. And she is a person who’s not supposed to be a hero, and she falls into it. And she kind of does what she has to do to survive, to find her daughter. It’s about love, honestly, so much of this story. So for me, you know, I never approach anything with any sort of, like, political agenda. I approach it from a very human place, I hope.”
The irony is that Moss’s declaration that “women’s rights are human rights” has been a feminist talking point for decades. It is most strongly associated with Hillary Clinton, who uttered the words during her 1995 speech to at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. It’s impossible to fully know and understand the casts’ beliefs based on quick answers during a film festival panel. But it is striking and somewhat baffling that the cast behind a series that delivered such a strong—and yes, feminist—message was apparently reluctant to associate with the movement itself.
This position is clearly an established part of the messaging surrounding this series: in a separate interview with Time published April 12, Moss and Atwood shared an exchange espousing a similar viewpoint:
Moss: A question I get asked a lot in interviews: Do you gravitate toward feminist roles? This is a question I struggle to answer because I don’t necessarily feel like they are feminist roles. I feel like they’re interesting women. The Handmaid’s Tale is considered one of the great feminist novels. I actually consider it a human novel about human rights, not just women’s rights.
Atwood: Well, women’s rights are human rights unless you have decided that women aren’t human. So those are your choices. If women are human, then women’s rights are part of human rights.
Moss: Exactly.
Atwood: When we use that word, feminism, I always want to know: What do you mean by it? What are we talking about? If the person can describe what they mean by the word, then we can talk about whether I am one of those or not.
Moss: I find myself getting slightly tripped up because I am a feminist, and I’m not ashamed of it. But that’s not why I chose this role. I did it because it’s a complex character.
Atwood: If it were only a feminist book, you would think, in that case, all the women are over here on the low side, and all the men are over here on the high side. But it’s more like the way human societies actually arrange themselves, which means some powerful people at the top. The women connected to those people have more power than the men connected to the bottom rank.
The word “feminism” has long been a lightning rod—not just for this project, but in general. Especially in recent years, it seems to have become a P.R. stumbling block for female celebrities: some get accused of trying to take advantage of the movement for their own gain, while others have been reprimanded for failing to understand what feminism actually is. So it’s not entirely surprising that those involved with this project would get somewhat opaque when the subject arises.
Still, after last year’s election, feminists have been energized—and they’ve been eager to embrace this series, which, like the book, seems to align with their anxieties. The f-word will continue to follow The Handmaid’s Tale regardless of what the cast and Atwood say, but rather than belabor the talking points, maybe it’s time focus on the sentiment that permeates the Hulu series, the original book, and those who love them: Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
VF. -
.
Ringrazio Hulu per aver prodotto una serie così: ben fatta, attori bravissimi, mai scontata, con una scrittura bella e soprattutto molto vicina al libro e addirittura uguale in alcuni punti. Bella davvero, infatti mi scoccia dover aspettare di settimana in settimana gli episodi.
Il personaggio che mi affascina di più è quello del Comandante lo ammetto perché credo che sia uno dei più ambigui all'interno della serie, ma anche nel racconto della Atwood rimane un personaggio di difficile comprensione l'unica cosa che è certa è che il Comandante ha bisogno di sentirsi legato all'Ancella in qualche modo il che fa ancora più strano se pensiamo che lui stesso ha creato quelle regole che paiono stargli strette.
La protagonista è bravissima, già in Mad Men teneva la botta in scena con Jon Hamm, ma qui è un livello superiore, in alcune scene mi sono sentita male per lei fisicamente. Non so che dire a parte GUARDATELO.
Per non parlare di quanto poi sia attuale, mi sembrava di guardare un documentario di Netflix riguardante gli integralisti cattolici per non parlare di quanto ad un certo punto la protagonista dice una cosa tipo: Avevamo paura dei terroristi e abbiamo lasciato che sospendessero la costituzione, poi tutto ci sembrava giustificato. Glielo abbiamo lasciato fare noi, come in una basca di acqua bollita in cui la temperatura si alza un poco alla volta, non ti accorgi del dolore fino a che non è troppo tardi.
Il fatto che la citazione sia praticamente presa dal libro scritto più di trent'anni fa mi fa sempre rabbrividire, gli stessi brividi che ho quando penso a 1984.. -
.
A me sta piacendo molto, è angosciante e molto attuale e anch'io avrei preferito avere subito tutte le puntate; fortuna che è stato rinnovato per una Season 2.
In quanto al Comandante ... ma siamo sicure che il " problema " non sia lui? La protagonista sembra non essere la prima ancella ma l'ultima di una lunga serie, e siccome lei ha già avuto una bambina sotto quell'aspetto lei è ok. Invece credo che il " problema " sia lui ma in una società come quella che ha contribuito a creare al 99% non sarà mai colpa dell'uomo se la partner non rimane incinta quindi voglio sapere se lui lo sappia, se la moglie lo sappia, e se per questo lui cerca un legame così particolare con la protagonista. -
.A me sta piacendo molto, è angosciante e molto attuale e anch'io avrei preferito avere subito tutte le puntate; fortuna che è stato rinnovato per una Season 2.
In quanto al Comandante ... ma siamo sicure che il " problema " non sia lui? La protagonista sembra non essere la prima ancella ma l'ultima di una lunga serie, e siccome lei ha già avuto una bambina sotto quell'aspetto lei è ok. Invece credo che il " problema " sia lui ma in una società come quella che ha contribuito a creare al 99% non sarà mai colpa dell'uomo se la partner non rimane incinta quindi voglio sapere se lui lo sappia, se la moglie lo sappia, e se per questo lui cerca un legame così particolare con la protagonista
Credo che si lecito chiederselo sinceramente, e poi bisogna anche comprendere perché l'altra ancella ha deciso di uccidersi cioè l'ha spinta Serena Joy oppure si era solo stancata di essere un corpo ?. -
.
Questa serie è incredibile, tra questa e (anche se alla lontana) Harlots Hulu sta davvero offrendo dei prodotti di grande qualità.
Considerata l'ambientazione negli Stati Uniti, l'associazione della teocrazia di Gilead con il calvinismo e l'evangelismo mi è venuta spontanea, questo è quello che ha detto la Atwood in merito:CITAZIONEStories about the future always have a "what-if" premise, and The Handmaid's Tale has several. For instance: if you wanted to seize power in the US, abolish liberal democracy and set up a dictatorship, how would you go about it? What would be your cover story? It would not resemble any form of communism or socialism: those would be too unpopular. It might use the name of democracy as an excuse for abolishing liberal democracy: that's not out of the question, though I didn't consider it possible in 1985.
Nations never build apparently radical forms of government on foundations that aren't there already. Thus China replaced a state bureaucracy with a similar state bureaucracy under a different name, the USSR replaced the dreaded imperial secret police with an even more dreaded secret police, and so forth. The deep foundation of the US – so went my thinking – was not the comparatively recent 18th-century Enlightenment structures of the republic, with their talk of equality and their separation of church and state, but the heavy-handed theocracy of 17th-century Puritan New England, with its marked bias against women, which would need only the opportunity of a period of social chaos to reassert itself.
Like any theocracy, this one would select a few passages from the Bible to justify its actions, and it would lean heavily towards the Old Testament, not towards the New. Since ruling classes always make sure they get the best and rarest of desirable goods and services, and as it is one of the axioms of the novel that fertility in the industrialised west has come under threat, the rare and desirable would include fertile women – always on the human wish list, one way or another – and reproductive control. Who shall have babies, who shall claim and raise those babies, who shall be blamed if anything goes wrong with those babies? These are questions with which human beings have busied themselves for a long time.
Qui trovate tutto l'articolo, di cui questa è forse la parte più pregnante:CITAZIONEI made a rule for myself: I would not include anything that human beings had not already done in some other place or time, or for which the technology did not already exist. I did not wish to be accused of dark, twisted inventions, or of misrepresenting the human potential for deplorable behaviour. The group-activated hangings, the tearing apart of human beings, the clothing specific to castes and classes, the forced childbearing and the appropriation of the results, the children stolen by regimes and placed for upbringing with high-ranking officials, the forbidding of literacy, the denial of property rights: all had precedents, and many were to be found not in other cultures and religions, but within western society, and within the "Christian" tradition, itself. (I enclose "Christian" in quotation marks, since I believe that much of the church's behaviour and doctrine during its two-millennia-long existence as a social and political organisation would have been abhorrent to the person after whom it is named.)
Quello che è veramente terrificante in THM è che tutto quello che vediamo accadere è già successo, o sta accadendo ancora oggi. Quello che fa veramente paura della serie è pensare che, anche nella storia recente, Stati in cui i diritti delle donne erano ormai considerati sicuri sono stati spazzati via, per cui per essere un racconto distopico è estremamente realistico.
Devo ancora cominciare a leggere il libro come si deve, ma ho colto un paio di elementi che al momento mancano nella serie e mi piacerebbe tantissimo vedere: uno è il divieto di leggere, non mi sembra sia stato esplicitato, il secondo è il fatto che Serena Joy era una predicatrice televisiva che promuoveva il ritorno ai valori tradizionali, soprattutto per le donne, ma ora che ha ottenuto la società che voleva e il suo unico ruolo possibile è quello di donna di casa è frustrata e passa il tempo ad ascoltare le registrazioni dei suoi vecchi discorsi. È una dinamica che trovo affascinante e renderebbe il personaggio ancora più complesso, del resto già ora Serena mi intriga parecchio.. -
.
Grazie Graceless per l'articolo ! Come hai notato anche tu quello che fa veramente paura nel racconto della Atwood è proprio il fatto che l'universo che lei racconta noi possiamo riconoscerlo nel passato e si pure oggi ci sono delle realtà molto vicine. Nella stessa America credo che le donne che abbiano paura di ritrovarsi catapultate in quel mondo.
Per quanto riguarda il libro non ricordo se nella serie fosse spiegato della lettura, io ho iniziato a leggere il racconto e a vedere la serie in contemporanea perciò forse l'ho dato per assunto. A questo proposito la scena che sta in questo ultimo episodio con lei che accarezza i libri nello studio del comandante mi ha spezzato il cuore. Anche su Serena Joy ti confermo che nel racconto ne viene fatto un ritratto ancora più misero e frustrato. Ad un certo punto June racconta di aver visto Serena alla TV mentre predicava e di questo pianto che le rigava le guance presa com'era nell'estasi di cristo. Terribile. Anche sul comandante la serie pur mantenendo il personaggio del libro si discosta un po' e ti dirò mi incuriosisce molto comprendere dove vogliamo andare a parare con questo rapporto perché nel racconto è molto più chiaro quello che il Comandante desidera da June.. -
.
Intervista a Yvonne Strahovski sull'episodio Serena-centrico di ieri: CITAZIONEAfter 20 minutes of chatting about the dystopian society of The Handmaid’s Tale—and all of the ways her character, Serena Joy, might have caused it—Australian actress Yvonne Strahovski laughs at a slightly less heavy question: how does she think that her character met her husband, Commander Waterford (Joseph Fiennes)?
“Joe and I talked about that,” she says. “We kind of speculated that it might have been a set-up. Like, Serena’s dad knew the Commander’s father, or knew them from church. . . That was the one guess that made the most sense to me.”
Indeed, as Serena and Commander Waterford breathlessly murmur Bible verses to one another as foreplay in a flashback from Hulu’s latest Handmaid’s Tale episode, “A Woman’s Place,” it’s pretty easy to imagine their fathers attended the same fundamentalist church. But as viewers will see from the episode, Serena and Waterford’s union changed a lot more than their own lives. Together, these two apparently dreamed up the nightmarish societal structure we’ve seen play out throughout the series, one that has made women second-class citizens defined entirely by their ability or inability to give birth. In fact, reproduction as a societal imperative was Serena’s own idea.
As this installment unfolds, viewers see just how big a role Serena played in shaping a society that has stripped her—and all women—of even basic dignities, like the right to read and work. But somehow, the episode also builds sympathy—albeit fraught and fleeting—for the architect of all that pain.
“This definitely was a chance to explore her backstory a lot more,” Strahovski says of the episode, which fleshes out Serena and the Commander via material that does not appear in Margaret Atwood’s original novel. The episode gave the actress “an opportunity to expand more on her humanity, which is something that was initially important to me anyway. Because she is so harsh on paper, and I wanted to find her inner emotional struggle within that. . . It was important to me to really try and put her heart in there somewhere.” Still, Strahovski adds that it’s hard to play a character who is so cold-hearted and self-centered. “There are scenes in future episodes that have not aired yet. . . where Serena is just so horrible,” Strahovski says. “And causing pain to another person, and the other person is crumbling, and Serena is just so stuck in her own mindset and her own personal motivation that she isn’t going to crack or budge.” So maybe don’t feel too sorry for her.
This episode is filled with pointed scenes, including one in which Mexico’s female president asks Serena if she ever envisioned a society in which women were not allowed to read books like the one Serena herself wrote just a few years ago. At some point, Strahovski notes, it’s clear that Serena has lost her voice. She points particularly to a scene in which Serena wants to deliver a speech, but gets shot down by the Commander—that’s the moment “when she starts her own journey of survival in something that she created herself.”
“She’s desperately sad and unhappy,” Strahovski adds. “In my mind, though, I don’t think she’s ready to accept why. . . I think she still has one little hope left, and that’s the baby. I think she thinks if she can just get her hands on a baby, via Offred (Elisabeth Moss), that things will be better. And, of course, this is a Band-Aid solution, but I’m not sure that she’s seeing that just yet.”
The episode positions Serena as a sort of Ann Coulter figure within the world of Gilead. But it appears that the real-world practice of her vision is not entirely what Serena might have expected. Although Strahovski thinks Serena was prepared to live in a world in which, as the Commander puts it, “better” doesn’t mean “better for everyone,” she might not have realized all the ways she might be affected herself—like, say, having the right to sleep with her own husband getting taken away because she’s barren.
“It’s interesting, because you see how disconnected this world has made them, and you see what started it,” Strahovski says of the backstory. “Serena has a desperation to connect with anyone in this society, but especially the Commander, and you see that in this episode in its rawest form. . . I think Serena deals with a lot of rejection.” In the series’s present-day scenes, that seems to be at the core of her identity: “this desperation to connect, but not knowing how to connect anymore.”
That’s what makes the episode’s ending—when Serena and the Commander break the law and sleep together, despite being unable to bear children—so impactful. Once he has reconnected with the memory of the woman Serena once was, and how instrumental she was in building this (admittedly awful) society, the Commander reaches out to her in the way she’s been craving, seeing her once again for who she truly is. But perhaps most important to note? As they come together as man and wife, neither one of them utters a single Bible verse.. -
.
Questo episodio è stato uno dei migliori fino ad ora. Il colpo di scena su Luke non me lo sarei mai aspettata come non mi sarei aspettata che alla fine di tutto la vera artefice della società di Gilead è proprio Serena che pare soffrire degli stessi effetti che lei ha voluto creare. L'ho anche odiata un po' quando ha detto al marito che gli attentati andavano fatti per salvare la gente da quella società piena di dolore, mi viene anche il dubbio che il Comandante non sia così convinto della società che stanno portando avanti. Sarò stata molto ingenua ma non avrei mai pensato che un mondo del genere potesse essere spinto più da una donna che non da un uomo, così come l'ambasciatrice del Messico che se ne frega pur di salvare il proprio paese e anche qui l'aiuto da June arriva da un uomo. Tanto di cappello comunque ad una serie tv che non cerca di fare femminismo spicciolo mostrandoci gli uomini scemi e cattivi e le donne super eroine. . -
.
Ok, ho letteralmente divorato la stagione e sono contenta di aver aspettato che uscissero tutti gli episodi, perché posso solo immaginare la sofferenza di dover aspettare ogni settimana quello nuovo.
I personaggi sono delineati benissimo e la trama scorre apparentemente tranquilla, mentre i colpi di scena ci sono (eccome!), riuscendo a dissipare i dubbi che possono essersi creati nel corso della visione.
Ho iniziato a leggere anche il romanzo ed ho notato che sia il Comandante che la mo glie sono in realtà in là con l'età :0
Il cast è magnifico, nonostante alcuni attori come l'attrice che interpreta Serena Joy (vista in Chuck e Manhattan nights) e lo stesso J.F. non mi fossero mai parsi particolarmente dotati come attori XD si sono rivelati una piacevole sorpresa.. -
.
Scusate se rovino la serietà del discorso ma:
Video.