The Chatterley Affair

This BBC film from about a decade ago mixes the true story of the "trial" of this book with an fictional account of its effects on two jurors who have an affair.  One review ironically argued that it has "a distasteful amount of nudity." Nudity it has, including that rare (not keeping up with all pay channel series to any degree etc., perhaps not totally so these days) thing for these shores full frontal male nudity.  Quite germane to the plot, surely, but yes, it has some very sexy scenes there.  Positive aspect.

As a whole, though, I was somewhat disappointed with it. The somewhat one-sided nature of the trial is -- from that article cited -- some reflection of reality. The prosecution did focus on dirty words, didn't call witnesses and the defense was in effect an overdose of experts, making the whole thing seem rather one-sided.  Still, the experts all seemed dull -- curiously given my understanding of D.H. Lawrence's point, they made the book seem too academic, too good to be true.  The jury's deliberation skipped from some for prosecution to a unanimous verdict the other way. What happened?

Anyway, as the U.S. Supreme Court reminded in a case involving a film version, free speech allows one to "alluringly portrays adultery as proper behavior" -- it is up to you to take what you might from that.  Speech is about challenging norms. This wasn't directly stated by the defense here. Also, why not include works that cover what is seen as "profane" subjects? Justice Douglas actually did something atypical in 1960s obscenity cases here and raised the question why not talk about them?  In part:

But we are not in the realm of criminal conduct, only ideas and tastes. Some like Chopin, others like "rock and roll." Some are "normal," some are masochistic, some deviant in other respects, such as the homosexual. Another group also represented here translates mundane articles into sexual symbols. This group, like those embracing masochism, are anathema to the so-called stable majority. But why is freedom of the press and expression denied them?

I do think it was overall a good library DVD find, including given its interesting subject matter. I'm of an opinion there are many legal cases that would make good films, including one where we see the various sides of the question from the parties to the deciding in the courts.  The film did a decent job covering various questions and the cast as a whole was good. The leads were as well and the sex was portrayed in a mature fashion, which is somewhat surprisingly not the norm here. Lots of sex, but perhaps it is seen as too dangerous or something to be so mature about it. Nothing fascinating about them,and we might be left wanting somewhat as regards to their characters, but overall well done.

Overall, it is somewhat incomplete, but especially for a t.v. drama, above average.  A prime marker here is that more than one supporting character was a worthwhile addition. What is around the lead material is a good sign.

[I recall trying to read the book and not getting into it but also read some of the author's own remarks as to sex and the like.  Quite "puritanical" as one expert used that word indeed -- he did have a deep concern for its value. See also, Justice Frankfurter's quotation of D.H. Lawrence's views, which I state without knowing the full context of the citation.]