Change Your Image
eyetothescreen
Reviews
Wittgenstein (1993)
Wittgenstein--worth a second look
I must disagree with other assessments of Jarman's "Wittgenstein." While the film is clearly not for Wittgenstein initiates (a bit of reading about the man is probably helpful before viewing), I can't class it as the rather boring, trivial exercise in biography others seem to feel it is. Jarman's films are always so contentiously received(which is a good thing), so all I can do is offer my own reception of it. First, while biographical details are somewhat slight, I think there are enough to frame at least a gist of the man Wittgenstein, and second, I must disagree that the exploration of Wittgenstein's sexuality is trivial or inconsequential. Biographically, Wittgenstein's sexuality troubled him greatly. Cinematically, I don't think it's irrelevant to follow a scene of Wittgenstein vainly attempting to explain his philosophy to students and colleagues, an effort which leaves him visibly upset and isolated, his back to the camera and his audience, with a scene of him at the movies, breaking his icy, rigid posture and his earlier-expressed desire that his companion and student, Johnny, not spoil the plot of the movie by distracting him with questions, to deliberately end his isolation and grasp Johnny's hand. Yes, Jarman's portrait of Wittgenstein is not of an attractive or really likable man, and Wittgenstein doesn't seem to have actually been one, so his abrasiveness in the film is not disagreeable for me, much as the abrasiveness of Gauguin in "Lust for Life" isn't. As for Jarman's allegedly un-daring cinematography, I'm no cinematographer, but Jarman seems to have favored dark backgrounds, long scenes and theatrical stagings in other films, and sometimes manages to produce interesting and subtle arrangements thereby. Perhaps his work on "Wittgenstein" was impacted by his encroaching blindness, though I wouldn't suggest writing off the high or low points of the film as the result of his visual impairment. Finally, "Wittgenstein" seems to me like a film deserving of a second viewing. Perhaps it's rather pretentious, perhaps it's a little harsh. Perhaps, though, it's also attempting to make some subtle and not-so-subtle commentary on what's important in a life, how that ought to be presented, and from what perspectives.
Naked Lunch (1991)
He done Bill right, he done Bill wrong(this may contain spoilers).
Warning: This may contain spoilers for the film. As I write this review, I fully realize that it would be well-nigh impossible to make an accurate film version of William S. Burroughs' hallucinatory nonlinear masterwork "Naked Lunch", and that the result of such a project would probably be overelaborate and tedious. Thank goodness director and screenwriter Cronenberg chose not to make a film directly from the text, but rather pursued a unique vision of Mr. Burroughs' book and life. The film doesn't suffer from its basically linear structure, and the marriage of new dialogue with Burroughs "routines" like "The Talking Asshole" is comfortable and sometimes nearly seamless. The visuals are inspired, and the overall feel of the picture is surreal creepiness, of insidious madness seething under a surface of fierce normality-something all readers of William Burroughs are doubtlessly familiar with. Still, these successes of adaptation do not blind one to other, less successful liberties taken with Burroughs' work. Most annoyingly, the portrayal of William Lee's (a semiautobiographical character used in many of Burroughs' stories) affair with the second Joan in Interzone reeks of an unwonted melodrama; his rescue of her from Dr. Benway seems like something that belongs in an Indiana Jones film. This is not to say that Burroughs never used elements of adventure in his writings; indeed, he often did, but it is to say that Cronenberg's use of them here comes off as heavy-handed. Another small irritant is the heterosexualization of the protagonist, but at least it is not total. Overall, though, the picture is sound, and a great wild attempt to translate a truly amazing book and man into celluloid, and few besides Cronenberg could have done it better.
Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)
Sex and the Victorians-a heady combination
The incomparable direction of Francis Ford Coppola combines well with Bram Stoker's vampire potboiler in this millionth retelling of the Dracula story. Featuring a mostly outstanding and delightfully surprising cast (note Tom Waits' role as Renfield), it serves up a touching story of a love condemned to live past death in a swirl of ornate costumes and a shower of blood. Yet it is more than a basic sex-and-blood vampire romp; Coppola's script, which is fairly closely based on Stoker's 1898 book, subtly explores Victorian ideas about class, religion, and sexuality while still presenting enough of a symbolic spectacle to keep intelligent viewers interested. After all, Stoker's "Dracula" was a popular novel that only recently gained academic respect, and its leap from book to stage, and then stage to screen, was an entirely popular and natural one. How refreshing to see amidst the puerile carnage of vampire flicks one that reflects and enhances the respect "Dracula" richly deserves.
The Phantom of the Opera (1925)
Lon Chaney-nothing else matters.
While its story diverges in some significant ways from Leroux's original novel-a curious fact, since Leroux himself was partially involved in the production of the film-and while most of its cast seems to be uncertain of how precisely to act in front of a camera, the crowning jewel of Rupert Julian's "Phantom of the Opera" is Lon Chaney, renowned silent horror actor and makeup artist extraordinaire. Famed for his frequent portrayals of soulful monsters, his careful development of a face for the terribly deformed title character and his ability to depict, through the makeup, a sensitive, tormented human being easily carry the film, making it an unforgettable classic for those who take the time to watch it.
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Why doesn't Ben Affleck do quality films anymore?
I have seen "Pearl Harbor" once, free of charge, and even that encounter felt like an imposition. The film is an abomination; it relies on a trite, if sweeping, score and a wealth of explosions to give it the feel of an epic, but its tired dialogue and minimally detailed script keep it far from that pantheon. Also, it's packed with historical inaccuracies, so many that I felt an apology to all who were actually stationed at Pearl Harbor during the attack might well be due. As for the actors themselves, nearly every performance was a disappointment, particularly Ben Affleck's. From his work with directors like Gus Van Sant and Kevin Smith, we have seen that he is capable of bringing to the screen characters that are both complex and compelling, but that seems not to be his interest in "Pearl Harbor". There is a hint of chemistry with costar Josh Hartnett that might have been developed and made the film more compelling, but, as presented, it is execrable.
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
It could have been a love story
Note: This commentary contains spoilers for "Moulin Rouge".
"Moulin Rouge" is one of those films that one is not certain how to rate. While it is clever in concept and visually rich, the plot lacks substance, relying on a sugar-coated set of "true bohemian" tenants to tell what is essentially a hackneyed boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl story. It's also historically annoying, lousing up with its portrayal of the privileged fin-de-siecle artist Toulouse-Lautrec as a starving writer/performer, but succeeding with a number of coy David Bowie references.
Yet its most frustrating aspect is its inability or refusal to create audience sympathy for Satine (played by Nicole Kidman), the actress-prostitute who abandons her credo of love for money only to have a fling with the poor poet Christian (played by Ewan McGregor). Certainly she is pretty, certainly she is sexy, but when she gives up all for love during a song montage, the audience doesn't yet have a real reason to care about her-we simply haven't had enough time alone with her away from the lights and color. Ewan McGregor is more successful as her lover, but he acted a much finer love affair with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers in "Velvet Goldmine". Indeed, "Velvet Goldmine" is a good picture to measure "Moulin Rouge" against, since it too tells a splashy, sexy rock-and-roll love story, but manages to do it with sure style and real sentiment, things "Moulin Rouge" only grasps after.