A young artist is commissioned by the wife of a wealthy landowner to make a series of drawings of the estate while her husband is away.A young artist is commissioned by the wife of a wealthy landowner to make a series of drawings of the estate while her husband is away.A young artist is commissioned by the wife of a wealthy landowner to make a series of drawings of the estate while her husband is away.
- Awards
- 1 win & 4 nominations
Anne-Louise Lambert
- Mrs. Talmann
- (as Anne Louise Lambert)
- …
Nicholas Amer
- Mr. Parkes
- (as Nicolas Amer)
Lynda La Plante
- Mrs. Clement
- (as Lynda Marchal)
Alastair G. Cumming
- Philip
- (as Alastair Cumming)
- …
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaDirector Peter Greenaway, a former art student, created the sketches that feature in the film. In fact the close-up shots of the draughtsman drawing are of his hands.
- GoofsThe cooing of a collared dove is not a sound that would have fallen on Jacobean ears, as the species was unknown in Britain until 1955.
- Quotes
Mr. Neville: You must forgive my curiosity, madam, and open your knees.
- Alternate versionsWhen Peter Greenaway screened the movie at festivals in 1982, it ran a full three hours. Included in this footage is a full and further explained rationale for the moving statue.
Featured review
Is Greenaway our most intelligent filmmaker? One of them at least. He is master of lush self-referential allegory. Here this is hung on a mystery masquerading as restoration comedy. Just maintaining the period and manner is quite a feat.
Self-reference. The film is about an artist who creates rich images that include incongruous elements. The arrogance of the artist is balanced by his blindness as to the meaning, the context of what the images reveal. Both the artist and the viewers are confused by the meaning and flummoxed by the events that the meaning triggers. Greenaway clearly means this to extend to himself, his film and the incompleteness of what we the viewers see. The drawings and the drawer's hands are in fact his.
Fantasy-allegory. This is a film richer in symbology than Drowning and Cook, but probably less so than the later `book' movies. Great attention has been spent on recondite supplementary images, including a central painting in the house being itself painted by the draftsman and filmmaker. I viewed it (the whole film) once just for details. The living statue is only the most obvious illogical element, and in fact draws attention away from other smaller visual diversions.
Mystery artifice. The whole environment is one of genteel artifice, hiding cruel mechanics of conspiracy. The cleverness of the construction is that Greenaway and us are full conspirators. No one, not us, him or the characters shown fully understand what is going on. The mystery form has always been a dialog between artist and consumer, a contest to see who can outwit whom. Very clever use of the mystery form here to include us in the artifice by not ever `playing fair.'
Restoration comedy. Past the visual allegory and the fantasy mystery and the self-reference is a restoration comedy which taken straight is hilarious. The statue is from this form.
My only criticisms are minor. This film contains a restrained story, and incidentally all sex takes place offscreen. Why be so conservative in these areas? Also, Lady Herbert required a more powerful actress I think.
Self-reference. The film is about an artist who creates rich images that include incongruous elements. The arrogance of the artist is balanced by his blindness as to the meaning, the context of what the images reveal. Both the artist and the viewers are confused by the meaning and flummoxed by the events that the meaning triggers. Greenaway clearly means this to extend to himself, his film and the incompleteness of what we the viewers see. The drawings and the drawer's hands are in fact his.
Fantasy-allegory. This is a film richer in symbology than Drowning and Cook, but probably less so than the later `book' movies. Great attention has been spent on recondite supplementary images, including a central painting in the house being itself painted by the draftsman and filmmaker. I viewed it (the whole film) once just for details. The living statue is only the most obvious illogical element, and in fact draws attention away from other smaller visual diversions.
Mystery artifice. The whole environment is one of genteel artifice, hiding cruel mechanics of conspiracy. The cleverness of the construction is that Greenaway and us are full conspirators. No one, not us, him or the characters shown fully understand what is going on. The mystery form has always been a dialog between artist and consumer, a contest to see who can outwit whom. Very clever use of the mystery form here to include us in the artifice by not ever `playing fair.'
Restoration comedy. Past the visual allegory and the fantasy mystery and the self-reference is a restoration comedy which taken straight is hilarious. The statue is from this form.
My only criticisms are minor. This film contains a restrained story, and incidentally all sex takes place offscreen. Why be so conservative in these areas? Also, Lady Herbert required a more powerful actress I think.
- How long is The Draughtsman's Contract?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Der Kontrakt des Zeichners
- Filming locations
- Groombridge Place, Groombridge, Kent, England, UK(country house)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- £320,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $2,256,246
- Gross worldwide
- $2,283,233
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was The Draughtsman's Contract (1982) officially released in Canada in French?
Answer