This is my third entry into Alan Parker's filmography (after BIRDY 1984, 8/10 and THE LIFE OF David GALE 2003, 7/10), SHOOT THE MOON is a visceral divorce drama, centres on Faith and George Dunlap (Keaton and Finney), a couple married for 15 years with four daughters, living in a quaint farmhouse near San Francisco, George is a successful writer, but he has an affair with a divorcée Sandy (Allen), from the beginning Parker and screenwriter Goldman manifestly position George as the one who gets frustrated in their marriage, and should be responsible for the dissolution of their marriage.
It is understandable George is suffocated by the domestic hoopla created by their four young daughters, as the opening sequences vividly render how the family bliss looks like when Faith is surrounded by the non-stopping children's nagging, and for men, the situation could be disheartening, which creates a plausible excuse for his affair, but after a second thought, it is actually a lame one, as it is the couple's concerted agreement to have so many children, why complain now? I hope Goldman doesn't suggest that children is the main factor that causes the disintegration although it apparently seems so. Thus, George leaves, and lives with Sandy and her son together, while Faith fumbles around with her new life sans George, so viewers sympathy is totally on her, and the children, especially their eldest daughter Sherry (Hill, actually is the best thing in the film as the premature girl tormented by her parents' divorce), whose silent treatment towards her father will trigger George's nut-case behaviour on her birthday. Yes, George is a nut-case apart from being an adulterer, things worsen when Faith moves on with a casual romance with a contractor Frank (Weller), who is paid to build a tennis court outside their house. Eventually George will be demonised as a complete lunatic driven by his arbitrary jealousy in the final act, it is a baffling climax felt much too contrived. So, what should it make audience feel? The ex- husband cannot stand his ex-wife being happy again with another man, although he is content with his new lover, does he want her back after they rekindle a one-night passion thanks to the magic potion of alcohol? Personally, no a fan of the gimmick that shifts all the blame on the husband while still makes him an impenitent jerk.
The performances are basically serviceable, Keaton is at her best with her unglamorous candidness when transits from a downcast victim to a nonplussed object-of-desire. Finney, great in hiding his British accent, unfortunately is quite repulsive to keep viewers investing in his emotional roller-coaster (lol to the reference from Sandy to the girls that having sex with their dad is like eating ice cream, she clearly doesn't see through what a lost cause he is).
Without an assignment of score, the film is intermittently accompanied by the scoreless bars of piano music interludes, reminiscent of the love lost in time, and occasionally, the scenic cinematography is breathtaking to watch. However it tallies with its time when divorce becomes a topical trend in America's silver screen, the film fails to connect with new audience owing to its blatant dramatisation and poor character developments, sorry Mr. Parker.
It is understandable George is suffocated by the domestic hoopla created by their four young daughters, as the opening sequences vividly render how the family bliss looks like when Faith is surrounded by the non-stopping children's nagging, and for men, the situation could be disheartening, which creates a plausible excuse for his affair, but after a second thought, it is actually a lame one, as it is the couple's concerted agreement to have so many children, why complain now? I hope Goldman doesn't suggest that children is the main factor that causes the disintegration although it apparently seems so. Thus, George leaves, and lives with Sandy and her son together, while Faith fumbles around with her new life sans George, so viewers sympathy is totally on her, and the children, especially their eldest daughter Sherry (Hill, actually is the best thing in the film as the premature girl tormented by her parents' divorce), whose silent treatment towards her father will trigger George's nut-case behaviour on her birthday. Yes, George is a nut-case apart from being an adulterer, things worsen when Faith moves on with a casual romance with a contractor Frank (Weller), who is paid to build a tennis court outside their house. Eventually George will be demonised as a complete lunatic driven by his arbitrary jealousy in the final act, it is a baffling climax felt much too contrived. So, what should it make audience feel? The ex- husband cannot stand his ex-wife being happy again with another man, although he is content with his new lover, does he want her back after they rekindle a one-night passion thanks to the magic potion of alcohol? Personally, no a fan of the gimmick that shifts all the blame on the husband while still makes him an impenitent jerk.
The performances are basically serviceable, Keaton is at her best with her unglamorous candidness when transits from a downcast victim to a nonplussed object-of-desire. Finney, great in hiding his British accent, unfortunately is quite repulsive to keep viewers investing in his emotional roller-coaster (lol to the reference from Sandy to the girls that having sex with their dad is like eating ice cream, she clearly doesn't see through what a lost cause he is).
Without an assignment of score, the film is intermittently accompanied by the scoreless bars of piano music interludes, reminiscent of the love lost in time, and occasionally, the scenic cinematography is breathtaking to watch. However it tallies with its time when divorce becomes a topical trend in America's silver screen, the film fails to connect with new audience owing to its blatant dramatisation and poor character developments, sorry Mr. Parker.