Showing posts with label Eat/Pray/Love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eat/Pray/Love. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

2010 in Review: Marriage is hard

Blue Valentine, which I’m yet to review, offers up what is probably the most stagnant portrayal of marriages that’s potentially off-putting in its desire to capture that tedium that marriage sometime reaches. I can’t decide if it’s my favourite portrayal of marital bliss (or lack thereof) this year since it has the advantage of focusing resolutely on the marital relations between the lead characters. Chloe pretends that it’s interested in examining the stagnancy of marriage but that’s just really a smokescreen for Egoyan’s agenda (not that I’m really sure what those are). This year wasn’t one full of romance – or of marriage, expect in incidental bits. We could probably add Rabbit Hole and The Kids Are All Right to Blue Valentine as two that deal significantly with it – though it’s not the main arc in either. I still think it’ difficult to pinpoint a single theme for The Kids Are All Right, since sperm donation seems especially vague and unsatisfactory – and that moment where Jules confronts her family to give her semi-soliloquy of sorts (Julianne’s strongest moment) functions as a major plot point for the film. Rabbit Hole is about dealing with grief, but like its potentially precise tagline (the only way out is through) the only way to assess Becca and Howie’s reaction to their son’s death is to examine marriage.
In The Greatest something similar occurs. When Susan and Sarandon take in the woman that’s carrying their dead son’s child – Pierce’s Allen reaches out to her getting some sort of closure, something that Susan’s Grace is lacking. The Greatest is an imperfect flick but it has its moments and though the two seem like a very odd couple, The Greatest is more obvious (not necessarily a bad thing) in examining how grief pulls a family apart. Unlike, Rabbit Hole, they don’t start the story eight months after the death. Brosnan was no stranger to tenuous marriages this year, though, playing opposite Olivia Williams in The Ghost Writer. I’d say he was better opposite Sarandon even The Ghost Writer is a better film. The marriage between Adam and Ruth is very incidental in The Ghost Writer, and Polanski doesn’t seem interested in it for its own sake – just for plot purposes, which – to an extent – is how Cobb and Mal’s relationship emerges in Inception. True, Marion Cotillard’s wonderful actressing is responsible for creating an emotional centre of sorts for Inception, its methodical way is sorely lacking in that department. I’m not fond of Leo here, though he soars most in his scenes opposite Marion – but as interesting as the arc is, it’s still Nolan’s most unconvincing.
That potentially unconvincing marriage makes me think of the King & Queen in The King’s Speech. I’m still fascinated by that arc in the film, even if Bonham Carter’s Queen Mother and her inclinations are poorly addressed. More than Rush’s admittedly good work, the film has its strongest grasp on me in two scenes – Bertie’s disastrous first meeting with that kooky voice coach, and that story he tells his daughters with the Queen silent in the background. Helena’s face has always been an enigma, but it’s even more exasperating here because she’s not playing an ostensibly mysterious character. I’d love to see Hooper (or maybe, Seidler) revisit this marriage since I’d be more invested in that relationship – though The King’s Marriage doesn’t have much of a ring to it. A bit like Eat Pray Love – Julia does all three beautifully, and her general charisma is invaluable, but my favourite portion of the film is neither eating, praying nor loving. I’m still overly fond of that New York chapter, and though I’ve been remiss in mentioning him Billy Crudup is intriguing opposite Roberts. Instead of Gilbert’s somewhat selfserving trip around the world, I’d not have minded a simple deconstruction of that marriage relationship. As little love as I have for Hofencer’s Please Give, though, I’ll laud it for the relationship between Platt and Keener which is handled so sensitively that I’m surprised at how insincere how everything around it seems. Maybe it only seems good in perspective. 
Patricia Clarkson played two wives this year, and the marriages seemed incidental in both. It’s difficult to deny the awesomeness of her and Stanley Tucci in Easy A, but Cairo Time is a puzzle – it’s perhaps the flipside to Blue Valentine. Juliette seems to be experiencing a bit of tedium in her marriage, though even that seems like too active of a word. That gentle placidity is one of the smartest things about Cairo Time, how it just all floats around, not aimless but not assertively. And more than Blue Valentine’s almost shocking teidum Juliette's dissonance in Cairo (most of the time without her husband) is probably the strongest example of a marriage gone stale, but not a bad marriage.
         
Marriage is hard, and it’s even harder making them work cinematically. Which married couples stood out last 2010 for you?

Monday, January 17, 2011

Forgotten Characters 3:5 (2010 in Review)

We all know those types of movies, the one where the one actor mugs the camera for 120 minutes and no one gets a chance to get a significant scene in edgewise. Sometimes it works because some actors can actually make than 120 minutes splendid – Julia Roberts, case in point. The thing about Julia, though, is that it doesn’t really seem like she’s mugging. She’s just doing what she does best, being luminous for the camera. Even when the film seems made for her only she’s always bound to have that important connection with her scene partners which is a reason I feel the need to remember a performance like this:
                   
Viola Davis in Eat Pray Love
 as Delia Shiraz

Eat – Pray – Love, those are the three parts of the story that we’re told about, but what about the part before in New York? Which incidentally happens to be the strongest arc of the film? It’s weird – well not really, Gilbert’s “plight” is not really that. She just seems like an unsatisfied woman, and there’s no shame in that. And that chemistry that Viola and Julia create early in the film is the sort of thing you wish we could have an entire film on, my review. Viola has a bulk of scenes opposite Mike O’Malley (charming as ever) and the two manage to create that sort of off-kilter New York relationship that’s both traditional and unusual. The thing about Viola is that she’s so naturally charismatic, that her sometimes effusive charm is often used for the niche roles in films – the austere government official, the intrusive wife, the secretly evil agent, etc. So, it’s nice to just see her relax and not play anything particularly overwhelming. She doesn’t have to carry the brunt of any exposition on her shoulder, just exist in conjunction with Julia – and she does.
                                                         
It’s like that fairly funny moment when she takes out the “box” from under her bed to show how much she’s been waiting for marriage and motherhood. What’s always struck me for Viola – and the way she’s managed to grow on me after all these years, is how full of her characters she seems. Not in an annoying way, but she always seems so in touch with them and what I love about her relationship with Delia is how she doesn’t decide to trivialise her and her estimations. A lesser actress might have tried to amplify the tension by turning her into a best friend with vaguely jealous inclinations – but Viola doesn’t even care to do that. But she doesn’t care to turn her into that crazy carefree stereotype either – you know the type I’m talking of. True, the New York chapter works because there are SO many actors doing good work in small bits – O’Malley, Crudup, Franco all work better with Julia than most of the cast. But it’s Viola I single out because she’s so good with her protagonist. I’d love to see her and Julia team up again, but done right this time with her actually having a real role to play.
                       
Eat Pray Love was undoubtedly the Julia show, but could you spare any love for Viola’s Delia?
                    
Previously Forgotten in 2010

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Ruminations on Eat, Pray Love (Film, Literature, Julia Roberts and Ryan Murphy)

Because I’m an uninhibited fan of literature I have a slight affinity for adaptations. The thing is, some books just shouldn’t be adapted to film. It’s not the case of a Doctor Zhivago or The English Patient where adapting is a chore. Film is a visual medium, literature is not –Eat, Pray, Love, from what I’ve gleaned from it, is a vaguely nonfictional work about a woman’s journey to self-fulfilment. It sounds woefully tawdry, and not to knock at Elizabeth Gilbert’s journey (who me? never) it probably is. I’ll take a wild guess and assume that Ryan Murphy’s adaptation is mostly meticulous – and that’s the essential problem of Eat, Pray, Love. Elizabeth’s journey is itself a bildungsroman (of sorts), and try as Murphy might there’s little connectivity from New York to Rome to India to Bali. The only connection we have is Julia’s Elizabeth and truth be told, Julia Robert is kind of brilliant. She wouldn’t make my list of 25 favourite actresses, although I do enjoy her acting. I didn’t realise that I’d been missing a good Julia Roberts romp until earlier this year at the Golden Globes when she was just so delightfully caustic all the while being so well-meant when some ridiculous EW reporter asked her if she passed over the lead role in The Blind Side. I sort of loathed The Blind Side, but even if her talents are doubted more often than not Julia has the power to turn muck into some feasible. Granted, Eat, Pray, Love but the four divergent stories only get a semblance of fluidity because Julia’s general resplendence makes it one.
Ryan Murphy has a knack for episodic writing (Nip/Tuck first season is still excellent in retrospect) and that becomes an issue with these four divergent storylines. He’s smart enough to weave masses of exposition in interesting (mildly at least) dialogue but that’s a problem. We keep meeting these characters, we get interested and it’s as if we’re waiting for the second episode of the pilot – and it never comes. True to form, Murphy loves to wow us in the beginning, the New York chapter of the tale opens organically and the fact that’s gifted with the likes of Viola Davis, Mike O’Malley, Billy Crudup and James Franco makes it all the better. No matter how interesting Italy is, a follow-up to that can’t help but be disappointing. It’s easy to feel that Liz is just a rich woman with too much that she doesn’t know what to do. There’s just that slight feeling that her journey’s just a bit too self-centred to make an entire film about – film doesn’t get the chance to be as personal as literature. But Julia has a knack for turning harsh characters into softer hues (re Closer, My Best Friend’s Wedding) and she manages to accomplish the same for the most part – but the entire film can’t help but feel a little limp, because at the end of the day we’re left there wondering “what’s the point?”. Why are we supposed to care about this woman’s journey when everyone around her seems more interesting than she does? At the end of the day, Julia’s the reason we care. Elizabeth’s experiences seem decidedly ephemeral; Julia’s performance is a little more worthwhile.
        
C+/B- (Julia: B+)
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...