The most powerful paintings and pieces of art evoke emotions, thoughts and show technical prowess. But what keeps us coming back to our favorite pieces of art? The 2001 novel by Tracy Chevalier and the 2003 feature film of the same name delve into these very mysteries of a famous piece of art.

The painting in question is Johannes Vermeer’s 1665 “The Girl with a Pearl Earring.” Very little has been documented about Vermeer’s life and the subjects of his works. The book and the film take what little is known, elaborate on it and fill in some gaps. In the painting, a woman wearing a wrap around her hair looks over her shoulder with slightly open lips. The woman wears a pearl earring.

Art followers have asked the same questions over the years about this painting, much as they have with the Mona Lisa. What is she thinking? Who is she? What is the relationship between her and Vermeer?

The film, starring Scarlett Johansson and Colin Firth, is not about answering questions about the painting because that information will never be known. “The Girl with a Pearl Earring” is about class, beauty and most of all, art.

Griet (Johansson) is an unsuccessful maid deemed not even good enough for Christianity in 17th-century Holland. Her father used to be a painter, but blindness and leprosy have recently overcome him. The only thing Griet has of her father’s is a small tile painting he made for her. This small visual token is the only bright aspect of her listless and tedious days.

After being fired from her last job, Griet must move to Vermeer’s home. With countless children and maids running around, Griet and the women of the house live in chaos. That is, until Vermeer discovers his new maid as his inspiration.

This film is not about the hidden love between Vermeer and Griet. This silent but ill-tempered couple speaks to each other through facial expressions and a canvas.

Plus, they are two completely different classes. The wealthy Van Ruijven (Tom Wilkinson) artistically funds Vermeer, giving him the perks of the upper crust, while Griet receives cold stares from even children.

The film leaves many stones unturned (as does the painting) in terms of Vermeer and Griet’s relationship. How much sexual tension is there really? Any individual can come away from this film with a different take on their physical relationship and what “could have been.”

The gender roles in this period are defined but are not a centerpiece of the film. The women often have their place as subservient sexual objects. Wilkinson gives the best performance in this film as the womanizing, alcoholic, sex-crazed lunatic we love to hate.

After Vermeer does a portrait of Van Ruijven’s wife, Van Ruijven suggests she looks “glazed in dry piss” and as if “she were actually thinking.” He’s a classy guy that stereotypes the era in terms of gender ideology.

At somewhat random points in the film, a butcher’s assistant (Cillian Murphy) enters as a side love interest for Griet. This side plot is handled sloppily and doesn’t seem to fit. At other points, this film moves slowly or comes off as an educational video on how to paint step by step.

Unlike recent painting films such as “Frida” or “Pollack,” this film takes a distinct stance on the subject of the film. It isn’t the painter, his work or the model – it’s art itself.

— Trevor Kupfer