Change Your Image
mildred
Reviews
The Hours (2002)
Disappointing and distressing
The disappointments: 1)hopelessly mannered and unengaging performances by Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore 2) pointlessly obtrusive music by Philip Glass 3)Miranda Richardson (which sister was off her head?) 4)the insistence on lesbian relationships - four scenes of female kissing - which had little to do with the plight of the mainspring of the story (V Wolfe herself-or were we to understand that her incestuous, lesbian love for her sister was the root of her problem - oh p-e-r-lease!) Overwhelmingly irritating and bothersome was the narrative equation between two neurotic,self-obsessed and self-indulgent women (was their problem really that they felt "trapped"? Ah did-dums!) with the well-portrayed reality of serious, severe and ultimately terminal mental illness. The scene where Leonard pursues Virginia to the local station (with its telling final shot of home-going commuters flowing past them) came close to capturing his anguished, desperate and helpless anxiety and her cool assessment of the situation, recognition of everyone else's involvement and straight understanding of the inevitable outcome. What a total and pointless waste of effort this was. An exploration of the correlation between Wolfe's mental illness and her creativity would have been more to the point. In a group discussion after the showing it was telling that no-one referred to Streep and Moore by their role names and no-one referred to Kidman as other than Virginia. One thing which Nicole Kidman's, otherwise fine, performance did not attempt was to convey her extremely upper-crust affected accent and the intolerable snobbishness of her attitudes.This was an acknowledged part of her REAL persona and to portray her as a gentle, shy (frightened of the servants!)gazelle was dishonest. OK I partly admired Kidman's performance - the whole thing, especially the "English Country" scenes - looked OK, but what was it all supposed to be ABOUT?
Sari & Trainers (1999)
Young love in Spitalfields
Lovely. A meeting is fixed "on the church steps" between a young Indian girl and a Pakistani schoolfellow. The girl's brothers try to prevent the meeting, locking her up indoors and menacing her admirer. She puts to good use the family stock - they are in the sari fabric business - and a length of radiant gold silk provides her means of escape and her disguise - the sight of it billowing out above the mundane street scene makes the heart soar. In spite of the obstructions, they manage to keep the tryst on the steps of Christ Church Spitalfields. The title comes from the incongruity of her garb when meeting her date - gold sari + stylish trainers. It is a charming film on many fronts: the universality of young love, the Romeo and Juliet theme - young love across the barriers and, for all lovers of contemporary London, the shots of Spitalfields - for centuries the hub of multi-cultural London.
True Crime (1999)
Generally a mess and, a sad failure in light of previous C E Movies.
Oh Clint! How could you! I know that they've not all been utterly marvellous, but Unforgiven and Josey Wales could have absolved you from quite a bit of guilt. This one is the most horrible, self-indulgent mess.
What is it supposed to be about? 1)An aged guy who has squandered his talent and messed up his life, and that of others? 2)The barbaric horrors of capital punishment? or was it, perhaps,3)nothing more than an irresistible desire to pretend that you are still young and sexy in spite of the wrinkles? or, is it 4)supposed to be nothing more than a cliffhanging drama? or is it 5)making a serious statement about the oppression and exploitation of black adults in the States?
If 1)then it lacks the tragic dimension and relapses into bathos with Ev's attempt at the end to pull the girl in the toy store, having acquired no self-knowledge through the events of the film, and permitting so much extraneous detail that the thread is totally obscured.
If 2)the point is well-made in the prison scenes, but again obscured by the other events. And is it really necessary that the black family be quite so saintly - the point would be well made if they were allowed some convincing human frailty and emotional messiness.
If 3) then the whole film is ridiculous and offensive. The presentation of Clint in all but the final scene as a hard-drinking, heavy-smoking, neglected, shabby loser deprives his pulling-power of all credibility - particularly when he conquers such luscious and glowing bodies as the boss's wife. Yes, I know that the most luscious young women can be seduced by old men who are sufficiently rich and powerful, but this guy! what must he smell like, for a start.
So perhaps it's supposed to be an encumbered cliff-hanging drama. Oh, please. The ending has to be the most ludicrous in years. We are to believe that Warren's granny would, during the 10 seconds allowed her by the demands of the plot, forget her role in the earlier scene as the dignified exemplar of black oppression, and when shown the connection between her pendant and that round Amy's neck in the photo, leap without hesitation to the conclusion that her grandson was the killer. Not only does she accept this preposterous conclusion - how come Frank couldn't have dropped the pendant he'd just ripped off the corpse and innocent Warren picked it up and taken it home as a present for his gran? - but she sets off in Clint's filthy and dangerous car (driven by a drunk)yelling that the innocent young man must be saved. Please, Clint, do us a favour!
The only reason I have awarded it 3 out of 10 is that it is occasionally redeemed by the acting. James Wood especially and even Clint himself on occasion. Yes really.