Okay, so I was sick this weekend. Maybe sicker than I realized, because it sounded like a good idea to get out my series 1 DVDs of Robin Hood and listen to commentaries. It wasn’t.
Remember when I talked about creator Dominic Minghella insisting Marian was “stirred” by Gisborne, over objections from the cast? And then he said it again in promotional extras? Well, there’s something I didn’t mention from the initial commentary I was discussing: he said that Lucy Griffiths’ pupils dilated in the kissing scene. I dismissed this as a joke because all the Marian/Gisborne scenes he’s allegedly observing this in are dimly lit. Surely Minghella knows what pupils do when there’s not a lot of light, yes?
This time I caught him making the same remark in an earlier episode where he’s making the same argument. He says her pupils are dilated, and “I don’t know if that’s just acting, or…”
Or what? What’s he trying to say here? We all know you can’t voluntarily dilate your pupils. Please tell me he’s not teasingly suggesting that Lucy, not Marian, was actually turned on – with the other player in the scene sitting right there for the commentary? Please?
Because you know what? Richard Armitage’s pupils are dilated in those scenes, too, and I’m sure in that lighting the whole crew had dilated pupils too – hmmm, kinky! - but this doesn’t seem to merit observation from Minghella.
I realize that some observations about appearance that might be sexual harassment in any other industry are a normal part of the job for actors – male and female. But it seems that most male directors and producers reserve all their appearance-related comments for the actresses. (Yes, SG-1 fans, Peter DeLouise was a notable exception – he probably observed how good-looking Michael Shanks and Richard Dean Anderson were almost on parity with how many times he brought up Amanda Tapping’s “doe eyes” – gah, vomit.)