Oranges are not the only fruit 3-part TV play (1990)
Novel and screenplay by Jeanette Winterson
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098032/
I had no idea what this film was about but, while browsing the DVD shelf at the library, vaguely recognised the title and noticed it had won a couple of awards. Of course Mrs A had read the book and was, let's say, not over enthusiastic about my choice.
It's about the early life of Jess from age about 6 'til she goes to Oxford Uni. On the way we discover she is adopted by evangelical, fire and brimstone parents who are most unhappy when she turns out lesbian. Through a series of events Jess learns to fight her own corner and eventually leaves home, gets a job as a mortuary attendant and passes the Oxford entrance exam.
The acting is remarkable - notably from Emily Aston who, at the age of 7, plays the young Jess and Charlotte Coleman who plays the older Jess. Geralidine McEwan won a BAFTA for her portrayal of Jess's adoptive mother. The sometimes difficult scenes are handled very well.
However, at 3 x 55 minutes, the movie is interminably long and drawn out. We discover a little of the motives of Jess and her mother but the other characters are simply cutouts. There is no depth and layering. Worst of all, many of the scenes are just unbelievable. Would a teacher, even in the early 60's, really get a child to stand up in front of the class and read her life story on her first day? Jess seems to live in a town populated almost entirely by women. And, of those, a goodly proportion were friends of Dorothy. Clearly, I inhabit a different world but these statistics seemed most improbable. And, although the two Jesses were very similar, the older Jess's eyebrows were clearly a different colour from her hair - difficult to sort but glaring in every close-up shot - of which there were many. Others seem to find it a classic of it's time (read some of the IMDB comments) but this film did little for me.
The DVD also has an interview with Jeanette Winterson. She protests that 'Oranges...' is a novel and not an autobiography yet one-by-one she reveals she experienced the basic elements of the plot. Perhaps this also revealed the cause of my reticence. She is certainly articulate, knows a good deal and can argue her point. But I'm certain she is often wrong - and will not be persuaded otherwise. I got the impression that this is a woman I would dislike intensely.
Join CF
You are here: 
