TBT: Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

22

This is a movie I wanted to like. Such a clever concept — who is the woman behind a famous painting and what is the story behind the image’s creation? I didn’t read the novel this fictional story is based on but it seemed solid enough. Big-name actors, big-budget production, and a time period I’m always fascinated by! But so much in Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003) rests on the central figure of Griet, played by Scarlett Johansson, and I don’t think she measures up. Maybe it’s not just her — Colin Firth as the painter Vermeer is doesn’t really gel either. Or perhaps they don’t work well together and that’s my issue with this film. Or maybe it’s the very male-gaze-y-ness of the director. Hard to say.

However, the whole thing looks really excellent, so there’s that. The movie is an homage to 17th-century art in the way the scenes are staged and lit, so even if the screenplay doesn’t move you, the cinematography and art direction might blow you away. And the costumes by Dutch designer Dien van Straalen received an Oscar nomination for recreating solid middle- and upper-class clothing of 1665 Netherlands.

Previously, she’d shared designer credits with Sandy Powell on Orlando (1992), so van Straalen is no slouch, even if she’s not a big name in Hollywood. According to Variety, the costume designer made extensive use of second-hand fabrics, including curtains, saris, and slipcovers, to get a more period aesthetic. Her team also aged some of these materials with sandpaper.

The costumes combined with the overall production design to create a very appealing period look. Tracy Chevalier, author of the novel the film is based on, visited the film set and described her experience in The Guardian. Inside the rooms she saw:

… all of the opulent details — the paintings hanging everywhere, the dishes, the furniture, the food — blend into the background. When watching the film we focus on Scarlett Johansson’s face, not the authentic blue-and-white delftware stacked on the table that some assistant worked so hard to locate. Production designer Ben van Os had designed a spectacular room full of pornography for the house of Vermeer’s patron van Ruijven, played by Tom Wilkinson; yet it doesn’t even get a look-in on screen, but ended up on the cutting-room floor.

 

 

Griet’s Costumes in Girl With a Pearl Earring

Though she’s the title character, Griet basically wears just one thing throughout the whole movie. But that makes sense because she’s just a simple maid, not a fashionable lady. From head to toe, her outfit looks right out of a period painting.

Costume designer Dien van Straalen said: “We used pale colors for Scarlett Johansson to give her the drab look of a poor servant girl,” and the makeup and hair designer Jenny Shircore commented:

“We just had to keep her skin looking milky, thick and creamy. This required some makeup because Scarlett has spots and things that happen to a 17-year-old. We wanted to present her as if she had no makeup on. We gave her a little bit of help by bleaching her eyebrows, because in the Vermeer paintings it’s all about skin and face, nothing else gets in the way, so you eliminate those other features.” (Variety).

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Simple front-lacing bodice.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

However, this promo shot makes me wonder if those are metal grommets. It wasn’t apparent on film.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Accurate cartridge-pleating at the back of the bodice’s sleeve heads. Also, note the caps, even on the little girls in the background.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

One of the standard caps Griet wears — properly tied in the back.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Griet cleans Vermeer’s studio, where he has a mannequin dressed & posed for a painting (this yellow gown will be seen again).

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

The fur-edged yellow gown shows up in a series of Vermeer’s paintings.

Woman With a Pearl Necklace, 1660-1665, by Johannes Vermeer

Woman With a Pearl Necklace, 1660-1665, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

The main housemaid, Tanneke, is also wearing an outfit resembling maids that Vermeer painted.

The Milkmaid, 1660, by Johannes Vermeer

The Milkmaid, 1660, by Johannes Vermeer

Lady Writing a Letter With Her Maid (detail), 1670-1671, by Johannes Vermeer

Lady Writing a Letter With Her Maid (detail), 1670-1671, by Johannes Vermeer

 

Catharina’s Costumes in Girl With a Pearl Earring

Vermeer’s much put-upon wife, Catharina, wears the most interesting outfits in this film, as fits her social status. She’s played by Essie Davis, later known for Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries. Several of these outfits are right from Vermeer paintings.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

The first time we see her, Catharina is pregnant & wearing a loose blue gown.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

The gown is trimmed with bows.

Woman Reading a Letter, 1662-1663, by Johannes Vermeer

Woman Reading a Letter, 1662-1663, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

At the dinner celebrating their child’s birth, she wears an elegant orange gown edged in green.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

This is the first of several elaborate hairstyles.

Makeup and hair designer Jenny Shircore noted that almost all of the cast wore wigs:

“For Vermeer’s wife, Catharina (Essie Davis), I used a very simple Dutch hairstyle. The women wound their hair round the back of their heads. There comes a point when you’ve finished the hair, it can’t be wound anymore because the length is used up. Instead of neatly pinning it away, we let the ends splay out, because in looking at references, little drawings and prints, we found that that’s what they did. Once you’re actually working within a period, the hairstyles evolve very naturally.” (Variety)

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Another green & orange/red outfit, here with her mother (who always wears black).

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

A little detail of the pale green bodice with fine cartridge-pleats as the back of the sleeve head.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

In another scene, Catharina wears a green velvet loose gown, similar shape as the blue one.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Going through her jewelry, she wears a pleated collar over that yellow robe trimmed with fur (seen previously on the mannequin). Also, her hair is very elaborately styled with pearls.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

In Vermeer’s studio, this in-progress version of Young Woman With a Water Pitcher shows her wearing a pleated collar similar to Catharina’s.

Young Woman With a Water Pitcher, 1662, by Johannes Vermeer

Young Woman With a Water Pitcher, 1662, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Griet watches as Vermeer & Catharina make-out. Catharina wears a gown in a similar style as her first dinner dress . Also note that the virginal she’s playing is right out of a Vermeer painting.

The Concert (detail), 1663-1666, by Johannes Vermeer

The Concert (detail), 1663-1666, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Promo shot of the same dress.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Catharina’s mother in black (as usual), & Catharina probably in the same outfit as earlier, but easier to see here, plus details like the keys at her waist.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Can see the ridge lines of a boning through the satin of the bodice.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Back-lacing is accurate for this period, although spiral is typical.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Another dinner party — & another fancy hairstyle on Catharina.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Here she is in the yellow fur-edged gown, worn over her corset.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Nice mid-17th-c. stays! Looks like reed boning, though spiral lacing would be more accurate.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Back view of corset.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Another promo shot that kinda looks like metal eyelets (the tiny version of grommets), not hand-worked eyelets. Hard to say…

 

Maria Thins’ Costumes in Girl With a Pearl Earring

Vermeer’s mother-in-law (played by Judy Parfitt) is/was a bit higher status than him, and her clothes are quite elaborate. However, in keeping with the ‘older women wear out-of-date fashions’ trope, much of her wardrobe is 10-20 years behind the times.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

In her first scenes, Maria wears a full ruff & a patterned doublet-style gown. She always wears a black coif.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Ruffs continued to be fashionable in the Netherlands through the 1640s-1650s, but this film is set in 1665. She’s the only character to wear one.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

After the first few scenes, Maria wears plain collars. In this final scene, her full outfit can be seen as much more of the current style than what she wore at the start of the film.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

This is when she gives Vermeer & Griet the pearl earrings for the painting. Maria’s clothing changes along with her mindset.

 

 

Men’s Costumes in Girl With a Pearl Earring

The least historically accurate ones in the film, alas, and that’s on purpose due do the director’s “vision” … in Variety, director Peter Webber said of the costume design:

“I wanted a stripped-down look. If I dressed all the actors in the real costumes of that era, they would be wearing ruffles and baggy outfits. I didn’t want to put Colin Firth in that. For a modern audience he’s going to look too costumey. So we came up with a look we jokingly called period Prada, to give the clothes sleek lines. I called it my Vermeer filter: take the real clothes from the period and reduce them to their essence.”

headdesk  That’s why the men’s clothes, in particular, look so blah. They don’t look historical, nor do they look modern, they just look weird.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Vermeer & his patron Van Ruijven — the cut looks really straight-up-&-down, when 1660s would have more volume.

Even if Vermeer’s costumes weren’t super accurate, Colin Firth seemed to really get into the character’s head, even though few historical facts are known about Vermeer. In the LA Times, director Peter Webber said:

“We talked about everything from his walk to how we would wear his hat, stand, hold paintbrushes, and then to how enigmatic did we want him, how mysterious? You want to have a lot of those discussions before you start …. It’s very expensive, talking on the set.”

In the same article, Colin Firth describes getting hands-on with his Vermeer research:

“I found I loved the very tangible stuff of just mixing paints and working with brushes and canvases. I love the materials. They’re not things I work with every day. Actors always have to pretend this and pretend that. If I can love mixing an incredibly beautiful bit of paint and I’m playing someone who loved doing that, then that’s just a gift right in your hands.”

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Promo shot of Vermeer’s ‘everyday’ jerkin, which IDK, is that suede?

At least costume designer Dien van Straalen tried with the clothes. She said of Vermeer:

“Obviously he was not a wealthy man, though he was considerably better off than Griet. So I wanted to keep him as plain as I could. He sometimes had to go out to social events, so we gave him one aged black dress suit with a simple white collar and a bit of braid.” (Variety)

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

What Vermeer wears to both dinners.

And for Tom Wilkinson’s character, Dien van Straalen says:

“Vermeer’s patron, van Ruijven, wants to control Vermeer and enjoys his power over other people. For me he was a peacock strutting around with his money. I used more braids and more gold, big hats with feathers, and cloaks. We have costume makers in Holland who used to work for the opera so they know exactly how to make fancy clothing from that period.” (Variety)

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Van Ruijven’s has already bought this painting…

Girl With a Wine Glass, 1659-1660, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Wine Glass, 1659-1660, by Johannes Vermeer

 

 

 

Other Costumes in Girl With a Pearl Earring

There’s a few other women’s outfits…

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

At the first dinner party, Van Ruijven is presented with a second painting.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

He’s a big jerk to his wife, on the left, & one of Vermeer’s older daughters is snooty.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

Here’s ‘Woman With a Pearl Necklace’ (seen above) & another view of Maria’s old-fashioned outfit.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

At the second dinner, Van Ruijven’s wife (left) has a less-dumpy outfit, but Vermeer’s daughter is still snooty.

Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003)

While another daughter is Anna Popplewell, aka Lola from Reign.

The film ends with the eponymous painting, of course…

Girl With a Pearl Earring, 1665, by Johannes Vermeer

Girl With a Pearl Earring, 1665, by Johannes Vermeer

 

What do you think of Girl With a Pearl Earring?

22 Responses

  1. thedementedfairy

    I love Vermeer’s paintings, and had high hopes of this, but could only stand about fifteen minutes of it. Dull dull DULL, and I’m no fan of miss SJ. It does look fab though

    Reply
  2. susan l eiffert

    I thought this much anticipated movie was a snooze. I agree there was little chemistry between the 2 and the unspoken relationship between them wasn’t believable. Scarlett had a single moon-y, hesitant expression on her face the entire time. Firth was so bland.

    Reply
  3. Saraquill

    I am headdesking. I read the book years ago and never saw the movies, but two details from the screenshots infuriate me. One is the lack of stays on the maids an young girl. Second is the pearl jewelry. They were super valuable before culturing took off. Selling a well matched necklace of large, shiny pearls would ease a lot of the Vermeer family’s financial worries.

    Reply
  4. mmcquown

    Mixed feelings about the men’s clothes. The compromise was OK, but blah. On the other hand, this was the worst period for men’s clothes ever. The petticoat breeches in particular were the worst. Pepys reports that he went one entire day with both his legs through the same leg of the breeches and never noticed.

    Reply
    • Kersten

      That is so funny! Hammer pants, historical style. Although I personally rather like the men’s styles of the period I can see how they would be…inconvenient in that way. :-)

      Reply
    • Trystan L. Bass

      HAH. I rather enjoy the look of petticoat breeches – but I love silly clothing. I just wish the men’s doublets here had some kind of shape other than “straight”.

      Reply
    • M.E. Lawrence

      I agree about this being a godawful time for male fashion. On the other hand, I’m not sure Firth’s post-P&P reputation would/could have survived petticoat breeches. (Think of Richard Harris as Oliver Cromwell…)

      Reply
  5. Liza Jane

    I’ve never seen the film but read the book long ago. It puzzled me that someone would try to film such an “interior” narrative.

    Reply
    • Kersten

      Yeah it is weird when they try to do that (as with so many novel adaptations), and it’s really, really difficult. I don’t mind ScarJo but aside from her look being appropriate she isn’t up to the task of portraying such a quiet character.

      There are actors who can do that “watch the cogwheels of thought turning in my mind” thing, but they’re pretty rare. (1995 “Persuasion”’s leads come to mind, Idris Elba’s really good at it in lots of roles.) It’s a skill she just doesn’t have at this point in her career (I haven’t seen “Under the Skin” so idk if she’s developed it).

      Reply
  6. Kersten

    I had forgotten how painterly and lush the cinematography was in this movie! I agree that the story itself is kind of boring, but I love movies about artists and they got the imagery so right (obvs aside from the men’s costuming as you noted).
    Think I’ll give this a rewatch, especially for Essie Davis. And talk about casting people who look like people from that era! Essie Davis is the best with her heart-shaped face, but the actress who plays Wilkinson’s trophy wife has that little double chin/weak chin that is so, so, of the period.

    Reply
  7. Charity

    I think the movie is beautiful, but the lack of chemistry between Firth and Scarlett doesn’t help sell their whole “sexual attraction underneath casual interactions” approach. I’m also starting to think she doesn’t do costume dramas well; she comes across as bland. Also, I forgot that was Esse Davis. She looks amazing in 20’s stuff. This? Not so much.

    Reply
  8. Susan Pola Staples

    I love Vermeer paintings as well and enjoyed the book immensely. Therefore, I had high hopes for the film. This is one time I believe having an actress in her 20s play Griet, as Miss Johansson (who I enjoy watching in later films)was a bit unfinished in her Griet.
    I enjoyed the women’s costumes and they did look like they stepped out of a Vermeer.

    Reply
  9. Sam Marchiony

    ScarJo seems a wee bit due for a Woeful Woman Wednesday, doesn’t she? Same sort of deal as Carey Mulligan, just blah even when she’s wearing things that are pretty, accurate, or both. Or maybe Keira Knightley, in that she’s best suited to 20th century frock flicks, and even then, she can be clompy.

    Reply
  10. Justme

    I agree—very pretty movie, but i couldn’t get into the story. I felt like they were trying to cash in on Johanssen’s and Firth’s popularity at the time, and while i do like both actors, neither of them really fit this movie. Also: why tf do we always have to have boring-as-hell men’s clothes?? Just because current men’s fashions are boring af doesn’t mean they always were. Men’s clothes used to be just as fun and OTT as women’s clothes!

    Reply
  11. Ayla

    Granted, it was a few years since I last watched this movie, but I like it! I’m not an expert on historical dress by any means but even as a teen I remember watching it and appreciating that they had obviously put some effort into the costumes and hair (on the ladies, at least). Small details like the women wearing caps and the fabrics looking actually worn really butters my croissant. I even remember liking how bleak and “realistic” it was! I might be biased though because I had huge crushes on Scarlett Johansson and Cillian Murphy both, and because I developed an interest in 1600s art after watching this movie in film class.

    Reply
  12. Gerdien B

    The story was so dull, but the look was luscious enough to keep watching. The promo shots with metal grommets showing are not the same as the ones in the movie. You can see the differences if you look close. Coincidentally, I used to work at one of Amsterdam’s most established costume rental shops, and the bodice Scarlet J wears in the promo shot could have come from that collection. We had tonnes of good to great Dutch golden age pieces.

    Reply
  13. Damnitz

    We saw it in the Cinema, when it came out.
    I liked the way Colin Firth played a disenchanted painter, who is the prisoner of his marriage.
    Scarlett Johansson was perfect for the role. Young (OK looking a bit too old for the role) and shy. I was especially pleased with the treating of the social barriers.
    The costumes were OK, although I share your impression about the man’s costumes. These decissions made them just looking boring.
    I think that it is easier to enjoy the film from the point of view of an reenactor, who is happy, when he see a nice kitchen, the expenditure for a dinner party etc..

    Why did you ignored Griet’s boyfriend? I liked his dress and thought that he was a interesting character.

    Reply

Feel the love

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.