Archive for the ‘Drama’ Category

Far From Heaven

January 24, 2012

Todd Haynes’ latest film takes place in dreamy 1950s Connecticut, a world of well-tended lawns and spacious, leaf-dappled avenues. In terms of production design, Far From Heaven is all-out perfection, with its Rockwellian portrait of postwar America, flush with the hues of New England’s seasons and the proud veneer of American prosperity.

Haynes styles Far From Heaven after the campy, high-gloss tearjerkers of Douglas Sirk. With its striking color tones, canted close-ups and beautifully lush score, he craftily pays tribute to that master of 50s-era melodrama.

Cathy Whittaker (Julianne Moore) is, by all appearances, a perfect wife to Frank (Dennis Quaid), her successful, charming husband and a perfect mother to two well-bred children. Living in their tidy, well-burnished home, the Whitakers are emblematic of pure “Ozzie & Harriet” Americana.

Once Haynes shatters that veneer, however, hidden truths and desires come pouring out. After a late-night contretemps in Frank’s office, he admits to Cathy his homosexuality and plods off to a psychiatrist to “cure” himself. With her marriage now adrift, Cathy finds herself emotionally drawn to Raymond (Dennis Haysbert), a black gardener.

Cathy’s indiscrete friendship with Raymond arouses outrage among her town’s self-righteous gossip-mongers, while Frank struggles to come to terms with his sexual crisis. In effect, Haynes gives conservative America a double dose of anathema: interracial love and homosexuality. Fortunately, he explores his themes with enough humor and visual flair to keep from descending into heavygoing drama.

The heart of this film is Julianne Moore, marvelously scaling that range from silly, Sirkian camp to nuanced, genuinely-earned pathos. Moore perfectly pitches her performance, seamlessly going from gently satiric to deeply affecting, as Cathy transitions from the carefree homemaker and society darling to the abandoned woman and society cast-off.

Moore is well-matched with Dennis Haysbert whose Raymond projects an easy, composed charm and the dignity of a man trying to make a decent living while hemmed in by the expectations of not just whites but the blacks in his own community. Their scenes have a quiet, revealing eloquence.

The one false note comes from Dennis Quaid. One senses a tentative, halting quality in his performance, and, in conveying his inner pain, Quaid settles for a glowering, grunting presence, constipated with shame, lust or too much whiskey.

To be fair, Haynes’ script underdevelops Frank’s character. Indeed, every opportunity for Quaid to mine his character for deeper layers falters simply for lack of material. A scene in which Frank makes a startling confession to Cathy begins brilliantly, but eventually peters out with Quaid sobbing and yammering, and the scene dies in his hands soon afterwards.

Far From Heaven’s campy stylistic framework can’t accommodate the weighty, poignant truths that must be expressed between the estranged and the heartbroken to allow for a satisfying resolution. Instead, we conclude with a series of half-baked scenes that dramatically fall apart and a style that clashes with the richness and sincerity of Moore’s performance. Still, Haynes’ revisionist melodrama is a barbed and funny enough social satire, so visually ripe and with such a commanding showcase for Moore, that it manages to be an affecting experience.

Grade: B

Written/Directed by: Todd Haynes
Cast: Julianne Moore, Dennis Quaid, Dennis Haysbert, Patricia Clarkson, Viola Davis, Celia Weston, Michael Gaston

Elephant

January 23, 2012

Gus Van Sant’s “Elephant” won the Palm d’Or and Best Director prizes at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, marking the resurgence of a gifted filmmaker whose talents seemed tamed recently in service of more traditional dramas. If “Drugstore Cowboy” (1989) and “My Own Private Idaho” (1991), were dazzlingly wrought portraits of lives on the fringes of society, “Elephant” meanders through the more recognizable territory of high school. More importantly, it’s bravura filmmaking, subtler in approach than either “Cowboy” or “Idaho,” but just as exhilarating.

The title of Van Sant’s movie refers, among other things, to the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. The conspicuous pachyderm, in this case, is the issue of gun violence in American schools, something that stampeded through our collective consciousness in the late-90s, brought most vividly to mind by the Columbine incident. In “Elephant,” Van Sant sets out to talk about it. Just how incisively or effectively he manages to do so, though, is frustratingly questionable.

The movie offers a portrait of an American high school. Van Sant’s characters are students whose paths intersect in the course of a routine day. There’s nothing routine, though, in Van Sant’s approach as he weaves together a mosaic of delicately interlaced storylines. “Elephant’s” most bustling scenes in hallways, offices and classrooms are so assuredly choreographed that they recall the most adroit Altman movies. The movie builds on a cyclical structure, following one storyline before flashing back to pick up another. In this way, Van Sant fleshes out vividly believable characters, bringing them, one storyline at a time, to the edge of his narrative, while allowing a hypnotic, unsettling tension to hang over the movie as we anticipate its inevitable outburst of violence.

Harris Savides’ camera glides along in step with “Elephant’s” largely non-professional, teenage cast. The movie’s immaculate visuals are matched by Leslie Shatz’s expressive sound design, intermingling Beethoven’s classical piano with ambient noise and wild sound to arrive at a disconcerting blend of disparate elements that perfectly serves the movie’s tone.

Van Sant shrewdly withholds judgment and steers clear of moralizing his subject. But, after it’s finished, you’re still wondering what it all adds up to. “Elephant” may be pointing to the insidiousness of violence, lurking in the woodwork of our society, no more unusual than the rest of the banalities of high school life. But Van Sant ends his movie so abruptly, glibly cutting away from his final scenes, that he left me to trip all over myself to come up with the movie’s justification or even any sense of its message. “Elephant” is one of this year’s boldest movies, technically, but, in refusing to assert any point-of-view about what troubles modern American youth, Van Sant’s loses heart and flees the scene of the crime.

Grade: C+

Written/Directed by: Gus Van Sant
Cast: Elias McConnell, Alex Frost, Eric Deulen, John Robinson, Carrie Finklea

Edmond

January 23, 2012

Whether it’s a white-collar noir (“Glengarry Glen Ross”), a courtroom drama (“The Verdict”), a gangster saga (“The Untouchables”), a brainy thriller (“The Spanish Prisoner,” “Ronin”), or even a monster movie (“The Edge”), it seems that David Mamet’s particularly cerebral, male-centric dramaturgy needs the rigors of a plot-driven narrative in which to subdue and shape itself. Otherwise, we get something like “Oleanna”–the playwright/filmmaker’s fatally stilted screed about sexual harassment. With its clipped, oblique dialogue (that old Mamet trademark), and characters that act and talk like they’ve come out of a factory box, molded out of stereotypes of, respectively, the finger-wagging feminist female and the pussy-whipped, white-collar male, Oleanna elicits anger and befuddlement (at least in this viewer), but for all the wrong reasons.

Here comes “Edmond,” originally penned for the Chicago stage in the early ’80s, adapted for the screen by Mamet and directed by Stuart Gordon (whose “Re-Animator” taught us that even disembodied heads have feelings). “Edmond” is another of Mamet’s white, urban, misogynistic male nightmares, but, unlike “Oleanna” (which Mamet himself directed), it is saved from itself thanks to Gordon’s appropriately playful direction and William H. Macy’s lead performance. Instead of sales offices and academic chambers, we’re now trolling through a nighttime labyrinth of crime-ridden streets, alleyways, and strip clubs–it’s “After Hours,” Mamet style.

Deeply frustrated city mouse, Edmond Burke (Macy), hates his wife, his job, and desperately wants to get laid. One night, after a fortuneteller tells him his life has gone way off track, he bolts from his marriage. At a local drinking hole, a fellow boozer (Joe Mantegna), sympathizing with Edmond, directs to him a gentleman’s club where he might relieve himself. In Edmond, the real victims of sexual predation aren’t the whores and strippers so much as their decent, frugal-minded johns. Edmond is constantly overcharged for sexual services–a running (and very funny) joke in the film. If that weren’t bad enough, he also finds himself an easy target for pimps and scam artists–you know, Black People. After a night of getting mugged and ripped off, Edmond snaps. In a scene that demonstrates the best and worst of Mamet’s style, Edmond and Glenna (Julia Stiles), a waitress he’s just slept with, unleash a rant against “niggers” and “faggots”–the former because they’re lazy and criminal, and the latter because they hate women. Theirs is a crude, naked rant, and Mamet sees it through boldly. But just how bold is open to question, for this is a rather generic sort of hate, taking shallow urban stereotypes to task as if they had any real currency with an intelligent audience. This is “Oleanna” territory, and we’re happy to see the noisy, clattery scene end–and in a shower of blood, no less.

Edmond’s odyssey takes him from the urban jungle, where his fears ran rampant, to a penitentiary where he must butt up, so to speak, against all that drove him into his mad delirium. The outside world is wild, immoral, and untrustworthy, even as it shrouds itself in the hypocrisy of law and order. Prison’s bad too, but at least it’s honest about it. “It’s simple,” says Edmond, now shaven-headed, tattooed and mustachioed, the desperate fear in his eyes now replaced by the calm of moral nihilism. The world-class Macy is reason enough to check out “Edmond.” Mamet’s script may not convince as either satire or social commentary, but, in Macy’s hands, poor, pathetic Edmond’s story finds its shocking, darkly funny resonance.

Grade: B-

Directed by: Stuart Gordon
Written by: David Mamet
Cast: William H. Macy, Julia Stiles, Mena Suvari, Joe Mantegna, Denise Richards

Confessions of a Dangerous Mind

January 22, 2012

Confessions of a Dangerous Mind is George Clooney’s directorial debut, but, if you didn’t know it, you’d swear it was the concoction of a seasoned filmmaker. While the erstwhile lions of film culture seem to be fumbling with misbegotten, less-than-successful ventures like Autofocus and Gangs of New York, Clooney and his team have fashioned a rip-roaring jolt of a movie, two hours that remind us that story and style can co-exist in a fierce, exhilarating embrace.

The film is based on the autobiography of TV legend Chuck Barris, in which he recounts his rise in the ’60s and ’70s as producer of such rowdy, culture-defining fare as The Dating Game and The Gong Show. Barris goes on to detail his adventures in the thick of the Cold War when, he alleges, he served as a hitman for the CIA. Whether you buy Barris’ dubious claim or not, the sheer zest and energy on display here render any misgivings unimportant.

While scraping by as an underling at ABC, Barris, played to the hilt by Sam Rockwell, hits on the idea of The Dating Game. Downtrodden during his initial struggles to sell the show, Barris is approached by a CIA recruiter (Clooney) who entices him to sign on for a life—albeit a covert and dangerous one—of heroic espionage. As Barris embarks on his double life, Confessions branches out into parallel stories which take on their own complications, eventually overlapping and blurring.

Among these complications are Penny (Drew Barrymore), Barris’ girlfriend, and Patricia Watson (Julia Roberts), a CIA operative who seduces Barris. While Watson’s wiles are easy for Barris to succumb to, it’s his love for Penny that forces him confront his own fears of commitment. That sounds a bit clichéd, but Clooney’s film goes further as it delves into Barris’ tortured past, dredging up some disturbing, though fascinating, explanations for what drives those fears, as well as his deep desire for approval and the appeasement of his male ego.

Over the years, a gamut of writers worked on Confessions until Charlie Kaufman (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich) hammered it into its final shape. While not a particularly in-depth character study—what really drives Barris’ zeal for fame remains shadowy—Kaufman’s script appeals by virtue of its ambitions. Equal parts psychodrama, Cold War thriller, romantic comedy and an Alger-esque rags-to-riches yarn, Confessions engages on every front.

Rockwell steals the show in a performance that plays up its comic potential without losing sight of its pathos. He’s ably supported by Barrymore in a role tailored to her sweet, quirky persona, by Clooney himself as the delightfully deadpan recruiter and, of course, Rutger Hauer as an aging hitman who relishes his job a bit too much.

Clooney and his cinematographer, Newton Thomas Sigel, create a kaleidoscope of styles, from the staid sepias of the ’40s, to the burnt ochres of Mexico and the nervy, pan-and-zooms of the ’60s, before hitting the candy-coated, soft-focus hues of the ’70s. The film’s visual dynamics, including its giddily inspired staging, blend into the fabric of its narrative, always complementing its pace and mood, never overwhelming it.

Only a first-timer, free from the trappings of an auteuristic ego and from studio expectations, could’ve told a story so passionately and efficiently at once. Confessions is an auspicious debut, and the closest the majors have come in years to fearlessly expressive moviemaking.

Grade: B+

Directed by: George Clooney
Written by: Charlie Kaufman
Cast: Sam Rockwell, Drew Barrymore, George Clooney, Michael Cera, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Julia Roberts, Matt Damon

Crimson Gold

January 22, 2012

“Crimson Gold” is the latest import from that world cinema hotspot, Iran. Scripted by Abbas Kiarostami, the movie is Jafar Panahi’s follow-up to his widely praised “The Circle” (2000) and finds him continuing to explore the theme of the individual pushing feebly against inexorable social forces. But, while “The Circle’s” power erupted from its live-wire, all-female ensemble, the cold austerity of “Crimson Gold’s” style and dramaturgy all but strangles any emotional resonance the movie might have had.

Panahi frames his movie in a jewelry store where a robbery has gone tragically wrong; in a fit of rage, Hussein (Hussein Emadeddin), a glowering bear of a man, shoots the storeowner then, as pedestrians watch in horror, turns the gun on himself. Panahi then rewinds his narrative to make the case for how a combination of demoralizing circumstances turned this low-key, working-class schlub into a violent criminal. Amid the teeming streets of Tehran, Hussein ekes out a living on his moped, delivering pizzas. We see how he endures the snobbery of a wealthy jeweler, the material indulgences of a garrulous, patronizing playboy and, on one night as he delivers pizzas, the bullying of a policeman who blocks his progress as he ambushes guests leaving a party, arresting them on charges of dancing in mixed company. Hussein’s fiancé, meanwhile, is boggled by his morose detachment and her brother, Ali, can’t seem to snap him out of his stupor.

Hussein’s urban breakdown has echoes of Travis Bickle’s but with none of the latter’s engaging, expressive fury. We sense that Bickle is essentially a moral character driven to vigilantism in the name of his own, admittedly warped, sense of pride and morality. “But what does Hussein want?” we ask ourselves. “What does he yearn for beneath all this repression?” Indeed, under the relentless drone of his moped, we sense no impetus in Hussein: no yearning, no calling. So we do not especially care what happens to him.

Even Fassbinder’s Hussein-like Hans Epp in “Merchant of Four Seasons,” a movie that hews closer in tone to Panahi’s than does “Taxi Driver,” wants something—a measure of peace and acceptance after a lifetime of grief. Indeed, several scenes in “Gold” have the unsettlingly raw feel of Fassbinder’s cinema, right down to its halting, unactorly technique. Emadeddin is a non-actor (he is, by trade, a pizza deliveryman), but, more than that, he is a paranoid schizophrenic. Panahi knew this when he cast him, and it might have been far more poignant to acknowledge Emadeddin’s mental illness within his narrative rather than to work around it, to absorb it within his story-fabric, thereby adding to, rather than stripping down, the emotional texture his characters so badly need.

The impression that Panahi did his damndest to make “Crimson Gold” as elusive and distancing as possible runs like a stake throughout this movie. Panahi may have turned his camera on a fascinating society-in-transition, but it reveals so frustratingly little and remains so stubbornly alienating as to render the whole thing an artful failure, a moped-fueled odyssey into dramatic weariness and monotony.

Grade: C-

Directed by: Jafar Panahi
Written by: Abbas Kiarostami
Cast: Hossain Emadeddin, Kamyar Sheisi, Azita Rayeji

Before Sunset

January 21, 2012

Upon completing “Before Sunrise” in 1995, the movie’s director Richard Linklater and its actors, Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy, fell to task on a follow-up. After all, the conclusion of that movie—when the fevered lovers, Jesse and Celine, promise to meet again after six months—begged for it. The result, “Before Sunset,” flashes us forward nine years.

Jesse is now a successful author touring Europe to promote his latest book. But he’s never gotten over Celine, with whom he never re-connected. And, in the manner of all broken-hearted writers, he’s spilled his guts in a novel based on their one-night encounter. At his Paris stopover, Celine, who lives in the city and works for an activist organization, seeks him out at his book signing. The two are understandably thrilled to see each other, and, however flushed and flustered, eager to catch up. But Jesse has precious little time—only 80 minutes, in fact—before he must rush off to the airport en route to his none-too-happy life back in New York.

This real-time compression is a shrewd device because it gives the movie its emotional urgency and, as the minutes lapse, we feel the characters closing in on the brink of their mutual fate. Dramatically, “Before Sunset” works on us like slowly tightening spirals. It begins with wide, slow spirals as the lovers banter over the general state of things, over topics as disparate as religion, gun violence and the environment. But what Jesse and Celine mean by this innocuous back-and-forth is to glean the state of each other’s souls, how their once-youthful chemistry might be affected by nine years’ worth of aging and experience. As their moments tick away, the spirals tighten as the two press each other on more immediate matters—relationships and marriage, especially– while trying to come to grips with a long-ago night in Vienna that haunts them both.

Where “Before Sunset” falters at all is when it overloads itself with words. The dialogue can get overwrought and prosaic—an unfortunate Linklater trademark—and the scenes feel like hurried line readings, like a pressurized can of energy that the actors have shaken a bit too excitedly. But, as the movie’s closing passages prove, you can reveal so much more with almost no dialogue at all; with the merest glance, a song and a dance, worlds of yearning can pour forth.

Linklater has time and again demonstrated his gift for opening up space, for allowing his story-worlds to breathe and become an organic part of the action. Like much of his earlier work, “Before Sunset” takes place mostly outdoors and unfolds predominantly in long takes and with a moving camera. Cinematographer Lee Daniel takes up the challenge gracefully; as Jesse and Celine stroll through a Parisian evening, Daniel creates a lovely canvas of ever-shifting light and shade. Of course, he and Linklater are aided immeasurably by Paris itself. With its old-world waterways, cobbled streets and cafes, the city exudes the values of freedom, romance, and a love of the past—everything that Jesse and Celine pine for and struggle to articulate in the course of the movie.

“Before Sunset” slows to a delicate, heart-rending conclusion in Celine’s apartment, one fully earned by this trio of devoted filmmakers. Jesse’s moment of departure is also his moment of reckoning, for he must answer for himself a question he nudged aside at the movie’s beginning—of whether he’s a romantic or a cynic, and, for that matter, what is it he truly values in life. These are questions that this charming, intelligent romance also encourages us to ask of ourselves.

Grade: A-

Written by: Richard Linklater, Julie Delpy, Ethan Hawke
Directed by: Richard Linklater
Cast: Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy

American Splendor

January 21, 2012

“Ordinary life is pretty complex stuff,” says the flinty, long-suffering Harvey Pekar in “American Splendor,” based on the writer’s autobiographical comic book series. For 27 years now, Pekar has been picking apart the complexities of his own ordinary life—his neurotic struggles with home, marriage and work—and committing them to comic book form.

Sheri Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini’s movie can’t fairly be summed up as an adaptation of Pekar’s celebrated comic books. True, there are entire vignettes that have been lifted from their pages and brought to screen. But “Splendor” is feistier than that, culling together aspects of documentary and biopic, with dashes of animation, to arrive at a truly multi-faceted portrait of its hero. It’s an inspired way for these hitherto documentary filmmakers to unravel Pekar’s knotty persona, beginning with his 60s-era days as a jazz critic and frustrated file clerk at a Cleveland veterans’ hospital (a job from which he retired two years ago) to his gradual emergence as a cult comic-folk hero.

While Pekar writes his comics, he has always handed drawing duties over to an assortment of artists over the years. Hence, his illustrated incarnations have varied from artist to artist, ranging from the harried, sinister-looking Pekar of Robert Crumb to the more realistic, clean-cut renderings by Joe Zabel and Gary Dumm. Berman and Pulcini exploit that “Hall of Mirrors” aspect of Pekar’s persona, often using these artists’ disparate styles in animated form to enliven their scenes. Indeed “Splendor’s” visual design, with its comic book flair, is a knockout alongside the moody brilliance of Terry Stacey’s cinematography.

Keeping all this spinning is a pair of performances by Paul Giamatti and Hope Davis, playing Pekar’s wife, Joyce. More than just looking their parts—Giamatti with his indignant scowl and Davis with her stoic face and owlish glasses—they inhabit them wonderfully. They dig deep into their characters, finding lonely, passionate souls yearning for companionship and purpose. Grounding “Splendor’s” fretfully funny narrative are the real-life Pekar’s narration and interviews with him and Joyce. They not only reveal the couple’s robust humor and intelligence but also give the movie a dash of self-referential whimsy—an inspired cinematic equivalent to the postmodern self-referencing of Pekar’s own material.

Berman and Pulcini’s movie briskly guides us through the terrain of Pekar’s life, but here’s where “Splendor” stumbles a bit. Wrapped up in charting the main beats and turns of Pekar’s biography, it loses the inherent melancholy of Pekar’s work, the despair and dread that fills his work’s quietest moments. It gets the mood right, but never slows enough to explore its richly existential landscape—the cynical, ultimately humanist, musings at the heart of Pekar’s comic manifestos.

Grade: B

Written/Directed by: Shari Springer Berman, Robert Pulcini
Cast: Paul Giamatti, Hope Davis, James Urbaniak, Judah Friedlander, Jesse Perez

A Love Song for Bobby Long

January 21, 2012

New Orleans, the setting of writer-director Shainee Gabel’s debut feature, “A Love for Bobby Long,” an adaptation of a Rupert Everett Capps novel, plays as powerful a role as its three principals do. Indeed, “Love Song” is awash in the lonesome, gorgeous compositions by cinematographer Elliot Davis of the city’s lush riverbank and its streets bordered by mullioned arcades. No other American city so charmingly exudes the notion of forlorn dreams as New Orleans, and in setting out to make a movie about marginal, broken-down lives, Gabel understood this perhaps better than the story she wants to tell. Apart from Davis’ painterly work and Gabel’s irresistible use of regional rock and blues, the rest of “Love Song” is told in broad strokes rather than unique shades.

We first see unschooled, creamy-legged Pursy Will (Scarlett Johansson) in hot pants flipping TV channels and licking crunchy peanut butter off a spoon in the rundown trailer that she shares with her white-trash jerk of a husband. Pursy has no memory of her mother, Lorraine, but, upon learning of her death, she escapes to New Orleans to claim the house Lorraine left to her. She finds the place already occupied by a pair of typically grizzled misfits. One of them, Bobby Long (John Travolta), a curmudgeonly drunk and erstwhile literature professor, often rhapsodizes about Lorraine, a one-time singing sensation. The other, Lawson Pines (Gabriel Macht), Bobby’s protégé and a would-be writer, is struggling to finish his first novel in his own booze-induced haze.

The trio’s dynamic of domestic squabbling and personality conflicts feels straight out of some made-for-TV soaper, lacking in tension, never stirring up its undercurrents for palpable drama to erupt. Gabel’s script may be well-meaning but her storytelling treads familiar territory as Pursy, Bobby and Lawson learn to shuck off the guilt and shame of their conjoined pasts and, in the lovely glow of redemption, ready themselves for the next chapters in their lives. Gabel has potentially challenging material on her hands but her treatment of it feels too hygienic, mistaking tastefulness for subtlety.

Rather than bore into its characters for something truly distinctive, “Love Song” lingers on the surfaces of jokes, yarns or exchanges that hardly pass for revelation. It amounts to a character study that trades in stereotypes of Southern gothic, little more. Johansson sticks to the saturnine mugging that’s made her so popular and Travolta, while not bad in
the role, feels miscast. The effect of Travolta–one of our most recognizable movie stars–playing a low-life literary boozehound is like that proverbial bull tearing up the china shop. That leaves the lesser-known Gabriel Macht to pick up the slack, and he does a fine job. The actor never champs at the material, never fretting to wring more from Gabel’s bland material than it can provide, conveying more in the slightest shift of expression than either Travolta, in all his ham-fisted straining, or Johansson, in all her glacial preening, can manage.

Gabel aspires to poetry but lacks the storytelling chops to reap it from her milieu. Still, with its closely-felt sounds and images, “Love Song” is an evocative picture-postcard paean to its setting. That, together with its likeable–albeit shallow–characters, makes this a pleasant enough excursion into the bayou.

Grade: C+

Written/Directed by: Shainee Gabel
Cast: John Travolta, Scarlett Johansson, Gabriel Macht, Deborah Kara Unger

21 Grams

January 21, 2012

In “21 Grams,” Jack, a born-again ex-con with a die-hard Jesus obsession, reprimands his son for hitting his sister. He tells him hitting is not tolerated in their house. To drive his point home, he smacks the boy across the head. Then, just as straight-faced, he goes back to his meal, and the movie assiduously plows ahead, without pausing to breathe in the fresh air of irony. That Jack does not see the hypocrisy of his ways makes for a “ha-ha” moment, but it also points to one of the most irritating qualities about “21 Grams”—not that its characters are morally and emotionally stunted, but that it limits its scope and vision to their distorted, simplistic points-of-view.

Director Alejandro González Iñárritu and writer Guillermo Arriaga, following up their deservedly praised “Amores Perros,” portray three criss-crossing lives, each stricken with loss, guilt or grief and each drifting about in a pall of self-pity. “21 Grams” is a love story and a revenge story in one, steeped in a palette of dour, desaturated tones, courtesy of Rodrigo Prieto’s arresting cinematography. Iñárritu and Arriaga fashion their movie like a jigsaw puzzle, its events taken out of time and reconfigured from multiple perspectives, taking shape not so much organically as like a complex algebraic equation.

Paul (Sean Penn), a married, chain-smoking mathematician, is dying from a heart ailment. He receives a new heart donated by a widow whose husband died in a car accident. The widow, Christina (Naomi Watts), grieves intensely, even reverting to her old drug habit. Paul tracks Christina down, as a way to close the chapter on his illness, but the two wind up falling in love. Paul’s affair prompts him to end his ailing marriage as he becomes more deeply entangled in Christina’s grief. She wants revenge against Jack (Benecio Del Toro), the driver who caused the accident and who has plunged himself into a conundrum of guilt and religious doubt. Jack’s faith in God is founded on desperation, even bitterness, as he has struggled to clean up his act and keep his family together.

Among the leads, Del Toro, modulating the tortured Jack with his usual understated bravado, comes off best. Watts has several punchy dramatic scenes but, in Iñárritu’s hands, they come off as over-wrought, full of hellfire but lacking in grace or subtlety. Penn reduces Paul to a schtick of lugubrious mumbles and tantrums, grateful for his new lease on life but for the cigarettes he chokes on with every wheezing breath.

Bafflingly selfish and self-destructive people like this do exist, but it’s the job of a good storyteller to bring us closer to an understanding of such characters, to bridge the gap between them and an audience wishing to connect with them. But Iñárritu and Arriaga seem more swept away by their formal gimmickry, and the full power of their movie’s emotional potential is scattered in the fragmentation. Their movie thrashes about wildly, grabbing us by the collar and exhorting us to feel something. Apart from the fleeting satisfaction of its structural parlor game, I felt little else in “21 Grams” save exhausted boredom. Since when was love such a major drag?

Grade: C-

Directed by: Alejandro González Iñárritu
Written by: Guillermo Arriaga
Cast: Sean Penn, Benicio Del Toro, Naomi Watts, Danny Huston, Charlotte Gainsbourg, John Rubinstein, Eddie Marsan

Farewell (L’Affaire Farewell)

January 20, 2012

In 1981, a KGB operative named Grigoriev decided to sabotage the Soviet Union’s espionage cover in hopes of ending the Communist regime and bring about an end to the Cold War. He got in contact with Pierre, a French engineer working in Moscow, and began to pass top-secret documents over to him. The documents revealed the startling amount of information the Soviets had amassed about America’s military, industrial, and scientific R &D. Pierre frantically photographed these documents, and passed along the files which eventually found themselves in the hands of Presidents Mitterrand and Reagan.

The discovery proved to be a linchpin in Reagan’s victory over the Soviet Bloc, as he used the intelligence to bluff the already cash-strapped Soviets into a making a critical choice: either take the nuclear arms race into space (via a prohibitively costly missile-defense system) or declare an end to Cold War hostilities and democratize. If you’ve followed the news over the last 20 years, you know the choice Russian President Gorbachev made.

Director Christian Carion’s “Farewell” – which takes its name from the code name given to Grigoriev by the French Secret Service — takes a close look at these events, focusing on the private lives of Grigoriev (Emir Kusturica) and Pierre (Guillaume Canet). Co-writers Carion and Eric Raynaud, adapting Sergey Kostine’s novel, turn the themes of loyalty and emancipation into a metaphor that runs through all of “Farewell’s” dramatic layers, from the national and geopolitical to the deeply personal. The informant Grigoriev’s home life is hardly better than the political and economic life of his tottering nation. That both he and his wife Natasha (Ingeborga Dapkunaite) feel guilty about extramarital affairs doesn’t remedy the fact that their marriage is in shambles. His relationship with his teenage son, Igor (Evgenie Kharlanov) is in similarly dire straits as Igor – having no idea of his father’s top-secret activities — resents his old man’s seeming conformism, and craves to free himself of the shackles of home, finding an outlet for his rage in Western rock ‘n’ roll (Queen in particular features heavily throughout the film).

Grigoriev’s unfaithfulness towards both home and country is less a critique about his personal flaws and more an observation on the messiness and inconsistencies in our personal and political lives. And while he resents his role as a go-between, particularly because of its dangerousness, Pierre develops a genuine respect for the brusque, eccentric Grigoriev. The trust between him and his wife, Jessica (Alexandra Maria Lara), meanwhile, begins to unravel as she realizes the intensely reckless nature of her husband’s double life.

This paradox between truth and appearances is capably woven through the fabric of “Farewell’s” script. And Carion benefits from Kusturica’s masterly performance, which finds a winning balance between Grigoriev’s warmth and candor and his darker, more transgressive impulses. Performances remain strong across the film’s main roles, and it’s only in the secondary roles that troubles arise: As Reagan, Fred Ward (a generally fine actor) fumbles his way from parody to platitudes to just bad imitation. He never suits the role, and the actor never finds his footing.

For a story rich with such dramatic potential, “Farewell” is a conscientious, but surprisingly dull affair. Whether deliberately or not, Carion elides any and all opportunities for suspense, danger and paranoia, all crucial elements if any espionage drama is going to succeed. Instead of an intelligent thriller in the vein of “All the President’s Men” or “The Parallax View” – both of which, at first glance, seem like “Farewell’s” natural peers — the film stumbles towards more or less predictable domestic soap opera. And that’s a shame, given a subject widely considered one of the pivotal episodes in the demise of the Cold War.

Grade: C+

Directed by: Christian Carion
Written by: Christian Carion, Eric Reynaud
Cast: Emir Kusturica, Guillaume Canet, Alexandra Maria Lara, Ingeborga Dapkunaite, Oleksii Gorbunov, Dina Korzun, Philipe Magnan, Niels Arestrup, Fred Ward, Willem Dafoe, David Soul, Evgenie Kharlanov, Valentin Varetsky


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.