Girl with a Pearl Earring
In my student days I had a poster of this painting on my wall. It really is a beautiful image, ranking alongside the 'View of Delft', the 'Woman in Blue', and 'the Little Street' as one of Vermeer's great masterpieces. Last night I saw the film about it, based on the book by Tracy Chevalier. What a crushing disappointment. Colin 'Mr D'Arcy' Firth as Vermeer is totally miscast, the script is vacuous, and the direction is so fussy and 'clever' that it looks more like a sterile exercise in 'how to make a European art film' than anything else. Scarlett Johansson as Griet acts well, but her character is almost as two-dimensional as Firth's. There is the basis of a good film here - the photography is stunning at times, particularly when Griet poses for the painting (the likeness is really uncanny) - but this is a missed opportunity and I've no idea why it has had so much praise heaped upon it. Somehow the film manages to trivialise Vermeer the man without adding anything much to our understanding of his art, and anyone looking for an insight into the enigmatic Master of Delft would be better advised to go back to studying the paintings themselves. Compared to, say, Tarkovsky's study of the Russain icon painter Andrei Rublov, 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' is a trifle.

postscript
This is how Tarkovsky described his plans for filming 'Andrei Rublov':
' ... we are interested in the style of the epoch only to a limited degree: the costumes, the scenery, the language. Historical details should not distract the viewer's attention just in order to convince him that film's action is really taking place in the 15th century. Neutral interior decoration, neutral (although proper!) costumes, landscapes, modern language — all this will help us to talk only about what's most important.'