Posts Tagged ‘Adaptations’

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Friday, December 23rd, 2011

2001 (USA)
Director: David Fincher
Viewed: December 19, 2011
Format: Digital Theatrical Project (Wehrenberg Ronnies 20)

An argument can be made that David Fincher’s adaptation of Steig Larsson’s phenomenally popular pulp whodunit, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, is an exercise in style over substance. Certainly, the film’s opening credit sequence lends credence to this position: Yeah Yeah Yeahs vocalist Karen O growls out a cover of Led Zepellin’s “Immigrant Song” as oily black liquid oozes over human figures that are embraced and penetrated by writhing computer cables. It’s jarringly reminiscent of a James Bond opening, and perhaps a sly inter-textual joke at that, given that leading man Daniel Craig is serving as the current 007. The rest of the film is only moderately less brash.

However, such aggressive styling proves to be a tick-mark in the film’s favor, at least when one considers it alongside both the source material and Niel’s Arden Oplev’s comparatively flat, mirthless 2009 Swedish film adaptation. Under Oplev’s hand, Larsson’s grim tale of buried family secrets and socialist democracy gone freakishly awry was many things—workmanlike, satisfactory, disposable—but stylish it was not. The most valuable card up the sleeve of the 2009 film was Noomi Rapace, who embodied waifish, wounded hacker-sleuth Lisbeth Salander with eerie precision and a curious kind of dark magnetism.

Fincher’s take doesn’t add any appreciable depth to Larsson’s tale, and in this respect it is remarkably similar to the Swedish film. Screenwriter Steve Zallian wisely excises the Scandinavian politics and finance that dominated hefty stretches of the novel. Such components are arguable crucial for understanding the wider context of Larrson’s story, but what is digestible on the page is probably unworkable in a film. Zallian also trims and tweaks the narrative in other ways, mostly to make the story a little smoother and more symmetrical. From a thematic perspective, however, the new film is unsophisticated, offering little beyond the visceral appeal of an unsolved mystery, seat-squirming tension, and a streak of white-hot pseudo-feminist rage.

Insofar as this is the extent of what any version of the The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo could offer, David Fincher’s film is an unquestionably handsome and persuasive realization of the tale. It’s visually striking, crisply conveyed, and blessed with a lucid, seductive aesthetic and mood, which is more than one can say of most murder mysteries. Rooney Mara—slinky and wide-eyed beneath ghostly eyebrows—conveys her own variation of Lisbeth, more shrinking, awkward, and defensive than Rapace’s portrayal, but also more fearsome and razor-edged when provoked. Beyond Mara and Craig the film features a cast of familiar faces—Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgård, and Robin Wright among them—as well as Swedish stars and long-lost character actors (Julian Sands!), all of whom acquit themselves well enough. (Perhaps the film’s only formal blunder is the vaguely accented English dialog, which is distracting given the explicit decision to retain the Swedish setting.)

The real stars here, however, are the craftsmen behind the film, a team of returning Fincher collaborators who manage to render a stomach-churning tale of rape, murder, and revenge as something deliriously attractive. Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth bestows a familiar yellowish “greasy-gothic” look to most of the interior spaces, but elsewhere a chilly gray dominates, and appropriately so. The adroit editing from Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall—who have now cut the director’s past four films—keeps things humming along with enviable vigor and clarity, a necessary asset in a story so laden with exposition. Just as essential is the score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, which effectively evokes an atmosphere of pure wrongness by layering plucked-out, discordant melodies over ambient droning and buzzing. These various visual and aural elements coalesce (perhaps “curdle” is a better term) into an atmosphere that is oppressive, gnawing, and eminently fitting for the tale. And therein lies the primary appeal of The Girl With a Dragon Tattoo: As a lurid, shallow thriller steeped in hideous beauty.

Look/Listen: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Friday, December 23rd, 2011

My review of Tomas Alfredson’s Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is up at Look/Listen. Check it out.

The Adventures of Tintin

Tuesday, December 20th, 2011

2011 (USA / New Zealand)
Director: Steven Spielberg
Viewed: December 17, 2011
Format: Digital Theatrical Projection (Wehrenberg Des Peres 14)

Adapting the beloved Tintin stories to film has been a passion project for Steven Spielberg for nearly three decades. The director first sought to option the work of Belgian comic artist Hergé in 1983, after the runaway success of Raiders of the Lost Ark and E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial had solidified Spielberg’s reputation as a Hollywood powerhouse. Twenty-eight years is a staggeringly long time for a film to languish in Development Hell, but the feature that has finally emerged, The Adventures of Tintin, is no worse the wear for its long gestation. In fact, Tintin is that rarest of things in this era when aggressive, directionless ugliness dominates the cinema of big-budget spectacle: a work in which cutting-edge technology allows a genuine film artist to express themselves without the usual analog limitations. It’s telling that the seeds of Tintin were planted by the Steven Spielberg of 1983, a man who had so recently given the world Raiders, one of the most perfect action-adventure films of all time. The Adventures of Tintin—which is, astonishingly, the first animated feature of the director’s career—gives splendid, ebullient expression to the same rousing spirit of derring-do that suffused the first chapter of the Indiana Jones saga. Moreover, Tintin finds the veteran director newly empowered by the potential of the digital film-making space, where his camera can be anywhere and move in any way he might imagine.

Adored in his native Belgium and among comics aficionados the world over, the eponymous Tintin is a young reporter of uncertain age and boundless pluck, who has an affinity for stumbling into globe-trotting adventures with his loyal wire fox terrier, Snowy. Adapted by a trio of British screenwriters—Steven Moffat, Joe Cornish, and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World director Edgar Wright—The Adventures of Tintin incorporates three of Hergé’s Tintin stories: The Crab with the Golden Claws, The Secret of the Unicorn, and Red Rackham’s Treasure. Apart from amalgamating the various plot elements from these books, the only significant change that the script makes to the source material is to switch Tintin’s nationality from Belgian to British, an alteration that is no doubt heretical among more impassioned devotees of the ginger-haired journalist. However, this change allows the characters to speak in English without the need for distracting logical leaps, while also preserving the decaying colonial tone of Tintin’s mid-twentieth-century escapades.

The film’s events begin with Tintin’s purchase of an antique model ship, and from there proceed to all manner of chases, escapes, fisticuffs, and shoot-outs, at locales ranging from the streets of London to an ocean freighter to a Moroccan palace. To say more about the story would rob the viewer of one of the primary pleasures of The Adventures of Tintin: A thrilling awareness that the next clue could take Tintin and Snowy anywhere in the world and reveal almost any wonder. Aside from Tintin himself (Jamie Bell), the film features many iconic Hergé characters, including the perpetually soused Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis), the imperious Ivanonvich Sakharine (Daniel Craig), bumbling police inspectors Thompson and Thompson (Simon Pegg and Nick Frost), pickpocket Silk (Toby Jones), and opera diva Bianca Castafiore (Kim Stengel). Created with motion-capture animation from Weta Digital, the film boasts a unique look that is at once realistic and cartoonish. Rather than attempt an animated realization of Hergé’s style, Tintin uses the character designs of the cartoonist’s original stories as a reference point and then extrapolates from there. The result is something that is more soft and natural than the exaggerated plasticity of most computer-animated characters, but also obviously drawn from the traditions of European comic art. As such, it seldom risks the Uncanny Valley of Robert Zemeckis’ digital monsters.

Beyond the characters, the world of The Adventures of Tintin is almost ludicrously detailed and gorgeous, an ever-so-slightly stylized vision of the mid-twentieth century. Unlike the setting of the Indiana Jones films, Tintin’s world is mostly free of supernatural threats, and as such the obstacles that the reporter and his dog confront seem downright prosaic from a twenty-first century vantage. There are encrypted riddles, secret compartments, locked doors, trackless oceans, searing deserts, and lots of goons with guns. Contemporary viewers might ask, “Shouldn’t there be some mummies or aliens in there?” Perish the thought. One of the film’s singular achievements is how marvelously thrilling Tintin’s materially-grounded adventures seem, in part because the work is saturated with such giddy affection for its source material, without being embarrassingly slavish or self-referential. However, it’s also due to Speilberg’s enviable skill at rendering elemental action sequences—e.g. Snowy chasing a truck through the London streets—with breathtaking vigor and wit.

That skill achieves its unrestrained potential in Tintin, as the unfettered director luxuriates in the liberation of his virtual camera. For some film-makers, such freedom can become an excuse for indulgent flourishes and headache-inducing excess. Not so with Spielberg, for while Tintin is often breathless and frenetic, it is also one of the most visually seamless and handsome things that the director has ever created. In short, Spielberg takes to the realms of computer animation like a sailor takes to drink, and the result is by turns jaw-dropping and just plain heavenly. A bravura escape sequence through a desert port on a hill—presented as a single, unbroken shot that swoops through windows and roars down narrow alleys—is probably the most thrilling thing to bear Spielberg’s name since Dr. Jones dangled from the grill of a cargo truck. Tintin’s scene is lessened only by the knowledge that it did not require the blood, sweat, and tears of analog stuntwork.

However, what’s truly novel about Tintin is not the meticulous choreography of its action set pieces—although I am hard-pressed to recall a feature film that is this flat-out gorgeous while also moving very, very fast—but the marriage of its distinctly modern animation approach to a very simple, determinedly old-fashioned story. There’s something almost wistful about the way that Tintin goes to the library to do research (!), and then reads vital exposition aloud for Snowy’s (i.e. the viewer’s) benefit. Quite apart from such quaint details, however, the film impresses with the sheer minimalism of its scenario. Through all the rushing to and fro from one destination to the next—whether by car, boat, or plane—the goal remains clear: Reach the Prize before the Bad Guys. Tintin is presented with a keen awareness that it is not narrative convolutions that draw the viewer into a treasure hunt, but the propulsive progression from A to B to C to X.

Perhaps, in this respect, Tintin risks some flimsiness, for it appears to have no point beyond simply existing as a rollicking action-adventure picture with a Boy Scout’s soul. However, given that such pictures are so rare, and almost never this luscious and smartly-crafted, it seems woefully hardhearted to grouse that Tintin lacks depth. Of course it lacks depth: It’s a Boy’s Own tale brought to glorious life. Other problems do weigh on Tintin here and there. The film possesses all the rhythmic hiccups that one might expect from the first of two feature-length films adapted from multiple books. (Spielberg and producer Peter Jackson will purportedly be co-directing the second Tintin film.) Moreover, Tintin never scans as a particularly rich character, given that his primary qualities are his utter fearlessness, quick-thinking, and almost super-heroic knack for wriggling out of trouble. Such characteristics make him an excellent hero for the purposes of a breezy adventure tale, but don’t lend him much personality. Of course, Tintin must be an Everylad who can appeal to any viewer who daydreams of sunken galleons and palm-studded oases. In this sense, Tintin’s earnestness and dauntless courage make him exactly the right hero for the film that bears his name. For who wouldn’t like to be so brave in the face of danger; to alternately clobber and maneuver and reason their way out of harrowing situations; and to race across the world in search of fortune and glory, all with a loyal pooch by their side?

Look/Listen: Gainsbourg: A Heroic Life

Friday, December 9th, 2011

My review of Joann Sfar’s Gainsbourg: A Heroic Life is up at Look/Listen, timed for the film’s five-day run at the Webster University Film Series that begins this Sunday . Check it out.

StLIFF 2011: A Dangerous Method

Saturday, November 12th, 2011

2011 (Canada)
Director: David Cronenberg
Viewed: November 11, 2011
Format: Theatrical Projection (Landmark Plaza Frontenac Cinema)

For a film that ostensibly concerns itself with the relationship between pioneering psychiatrists Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) and Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen), A Dangerous Method offers little insight into the ways in which these men transformed one another, personally and professionally. That isn’t so much a criticism as an observation that that while film is quite invested in charting the emotional topography between the two men, each is hunkered down in a bunker constructed of their particular intellectual and emotional idiosyncrasies. Much is made of their contrasts: Swiss and Austrian, Gentile and Jew, young and old. Director David Cronenberg and screenwriter Christopher Hampton (who adapted the film from his own stage play, The Talking Cure, which is in turn based on David Kerr’s book A Most Dangerous Method) don’t allow either man to change much over the course of the film, particularly Freud, who is more professionally settled, more risk-averse, and deeply entrenched in the correctness of his theories. (There is a suggestion that if the pair had been closer contemporaries, their professional dynamic would have been vastly different.) The film presents both men as ahead-of-their-time giants, each naturally attracted to flame of the other’s intellect, and each quietly harboring a remarkably liberated worldview. The story of A Dangerous Method is in large part about how these men went from enthusiastic professional colleagues with deep, mutual admiration—Freud even comments at one point that Jung is his de facto successor—to frosty rivals who barely speak to one another.

It is the film’s third primary character who is granted a genuine arc. Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley) is a Russian Jewess with severe mental scars, but who nonetheless has ambitions to become a psychiatrist herself. When the film opens, Spielrein is shown to be barely functional, suffering from debilitating psycho-sexual fits elicited by feelings of humiliation and other stimuli. She is brought into Jung’s care at his hospital in Zurich, and over the course of the film’s eight or so years, she undergoes a transformation from psychic cripple to one of the first female psychoanalysts in the world. Spielrein’s case serves as a validation of Jung’s ambitions to actually cure patients of their unresolved psychological ailments, but the film posits a far more pivotal role for the woman in this erotic-medical-professional triangle. As Jung dryly observes, Spielrein is “something of a catalyst” on those around her. Her presence (and her nascent psychiatric theories) open up Jung to repressed sexual urges of his own, and before long the two are engaged in an intense, sadomasochistic-flavored affair. Ultimately, the acrid aftermath of Jung and Speilrein’s relationship reverberates through the psychoanalytical community, and–in perhaps the film’s most fictional leap–splits open the divisions between Jung and Freud that had already been forming. There is a quiet suggestion, through all of this academic turmoil, that Jung and Speilrein would have been an excellent match, but that circumstances (and Jung’s cowardice and self-righteousness) precluded a future for the couple. The film keeps this romantic tragedy element admirably understated without muting it entirely, such that when Jung admits late in the film that his adoration for Speilrein will never diminish, it’s a genuinely affecting moment.

Like Cronengberg’s other post-Spider films, A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, there’s a rigorous realism to A Dangerous Method, but not necessarily a discordance with the director’s other work. Going all the way back to Shivers, Cronenberg has long had a fascination with individuals who plunge headlong into perilous physical, psychological, and sexual realms. While his latest film is in many ways his most staid and accessible, there’s an undeniable thrill in seeing some of his favored themes brought to the forefront and discussed openly by historical figures. Even in a film that consists mostly of jargon-laden conversations and letter-writing, Cronenberg still finds those moments that speak to his perennial fascination with body and machine. These include Spielrein’s absent-minded fingering of her virginal bloodstain on a sheet; the pointed (yet restrained) presence of Freud’s cigar, with its lengthening ash and damp, chewed end; and the tender way that the film lingers on Jung’s wetting of his wife’s hands before hooking her to a kind of Edwardian polygraph. Spielrein herself becomes a kind of vessel for the distinguishing “Cronenbergian” deformations of the flesh and mind, through both her grotesque physical contortions and her bizarre sexual confessions. Indeed, one of the film’s creepiest moments involves Knightley’s description of a wet, questing “mollusc” that she recalls visiting her in her sleep. Both Fassbender and Mortensen do suitable work with their relatively static roles, but the film really belongs to Knightley (and isn’t that a suprise). Her madness-induced paroxysms early in the film are so over-the-top that they’re almost laughable, but once Speilrein begins to emerge from her shell, Knightley truly shines. She does a stunning job of holding on to a remnant of Spielrein’s queasy, unhinged quality, gradually tamping it down as the film’s years roll on without ever obliterating it entirely. It’s an astounding illusion to watch.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

Wednesday, July 20th, 2011

2011 (USA)
Director: David Yates
Viewed: July 17, 2011
Format: 3D Digital Projection (St. Louis Cinemas Moolah Theater)

[No significant spoilers below, although at this point I assume that the need for such forewarnings is virtually nil.]  It’s a safe bet that anyone who settles in to savor Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows: Part 2 has already committed themselves fully to the pop cultural phenomenon of the Potterverse, either as a devoted fan of J.K. Rowling’s novels or as an admirer of the films’ dense, highly burnished stripe of fantasy entertainment.  Appropriately, the second half of director David Yates’ Deathly Hallows adaptation wastes no breath bringing the viewer up to speed, but rather plunges forth almost precisely at the point where Part 1 concluded.  To wit: Harry, Ron, and Hermione are desperately searching for the three remaining Horcruxes that house the fragmented soul of the Dark Lord Voldemort, who is unfortunately now in possession of the fabled and all-powerful Elder Wand.

Warner Brothers’ decision to split Deathly Hallows into two feature films had the unfortunate effect of rendering Part 1 a little aimless, as Harry and his friends spent an undue proportion of the film’s running time wandering in the wilderness, far removed from the comforting familiarity of Hogwarts and woefully uncertain of their next move.  Part 2, on the other hand, functions as a fairly unrelenting action-adventure picture from roughly the ten minute mark all the way to the end.  This lends weight to the notion that the two parts balance one another, and are best considered as a single four-and-a-half-hour work.  The Harry Potter films’ propensity for flavoring Rowling’s stories with plenty of cinematic spectacle and derring-do–mounting since Azkaban, and conspicuous since Yates took over directing duties with Phoenix–has been one of the more exhilarating aspects of the adaptations, and here that same approach pays bountiful dividends to those viewers that have stuck it out to the end.

The first section of Part 2 comprises a break-in and subsequent break-out of the goblin-run bank Gringotts, a sequence that plays a little too much like a echo of the Ministry of Magic heist from Part 1. From there, the myriad threads of the story converge on Hogwarts, as Harry and his friends search for the final Horcruxes while Voldemort and his Death Eaters lays siege to the castle. This is, undoubtedly, what devotees of the franchise have been waiting for: an all-out, life-or-death melee featuring familiar faces both benevolent and malign, with the environs of Hogwarts as a poignant, rubble-strewn backdrop.

Gratifyingly for Potter aficionados, the filmmakers take pains to reference a staggering numbers of characters, creatures, locations, and events from previous chapters in the series. It’s a testament to both the richness of Rowling’s universe and the maturity of the film series’ approach that these nods come not as gratuitous shout-outs but natural outgrowths of the concluding chapter’s panoramic scope.  Nonetheless, Yates and series screenwriter Steve Kloves wisely maintain a scrupulous focus on Harry’s personal journey, even as they convey the sprawling chaos of the final conflict.  The entire cast is in characteristically fine form, and the final appearance of the superlative Alan Rickman as Severus Snape is naturally a treat. However, Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is absolutely Daniel Radcliffe’s film.  It’s his best performance in the franchise, and the film’s lump-in-the-throat moments work primarily due to the skillful blend of rawness and delicacy that Radcliffe brings to the role.

Snippets of authentic artistic triumph have appeared fleetingly within the Harry Potter films–a breathtaking shot, a masterful action set-piece, a deliciously delivered line–but the series has concerned itself first and foremost with escapist entertainment, albeit entertainment of a first-class sort.  Deathly Hallows: Part 2 does nothing to alter this formula, and it concludes the story of the Boy Who Lived with the sort of exacting extravagance that the hardcore devotees expect and the casual fans admire.  Now that we find ourselves at the end, particular accolades belong to production designer Stuart Craig, who has dedicated over a decade of his life to these damn films.  More than any other person aside from Rowling herself, Craig has been responsible for conjuring the indelible fantasy vision of the Potterverse.  Whatever the series’ merits and flaws, his work has been so consistently exceptional in quality and so staggering in scale that I sincerely doubt it will be equaled in my lifetime.

Red Cliff (International Version)

Friday, June 24th, 2011

2008 (China)
Director: John Woo
Viewed: June 21, 2011
Format: Blu-ray - Magnolia (2010)

The Battle of Red Cliffs is probably the most famous military conflict from one of the most celebrated and routinely sentimentalized eras of Chinese history, the Three Kingdoms Period. It’s an event that has acquired a virtually legendary character since it unfolded in roughly A.D. 208-209. However, the battle remains relatively obscure in the West, save among two stripes of Sinophiles: the rare fan of Koei’s never-ending Dynasty Warriors video game franchise, and the even rarer reader that has braved a translation of Luo Guanzhong’s fourteenth-century novel, The Romance of the Three Kingdoms. (I count myself in the former category, for the record.)

For other Western viewers of John Woo’s gargantuan, heavily fictionalized military epic Red Cliff, the vast cast of characters and unfamiliar political conflicts will likely be daunting. Fortunately, Woo ably preserves the elementary human threads that have made the Romance an enduring touchstone in China’s national mythology, and in the process provides ample handholds for a non-Asian audience. The emotional and thematic terrain will be familiar to fans of Shakespeare and The Sopranos alike: ambition, pride, loyalty, lust, tradition, and free will. Oh, and it goes without saying that the film is hellzapoppin’ with gigantic battle scenes, fantastic martial arts heroics, and fountains of blood.

The so-called International Version of Red Cliff–comprising two separate films that screened theatrically in Asia–clocks in at a staggering 288 minutes. Only a handful of living auteurs can pull off that kind of behemoth without the film in question risking bloat, and none of them are named John Woo. Accordingly, Red Cliff features several sequences that amount to little more than prosaic wheel-spinning, such as the limp romantic subplot and a maudlin (and rather cheap) storyline about a friendship across enemy lines. It’s easy to single out these overstuffed points, but the lengthy running time also has its virtues. The size and scope of Red Cliff permits a full and evenhanded treatment of the numerous larger-than-life characters on all sides of the conflict, which is one of the distinctly modern strengths of the Romance. It also gives Woo license to to slow things down a little, showering loving attention on the action sequences, which rely mainly on practical effects at the smaller scale and go digital for the majestic panning shots of vast armies and navies. The director allows plot points to play out in a relatively measured manner, providing that much more gratification when the myriad schemes finally come to fruition. In the current era of Michael Bay-born hysterical ugliness, this kind of deliberate, byzantine historical epic almost feels quaint.

In keeping with the traditional portrayal in the Romance, the ruthless Prime Minister and Wei warlord Cao Cao (Fengyi Zhang) is the closest thing the film has to a villain, but even he is portrayed as a tragic figure rather than an amoral monster. On the other hand, Woo shakes up his Chinese audience’s expectations by downplaying the normally heroic role of the Shu generals, especially the renowned Three Brothers of Liu Bei (Yong You), Guan Yu (Ba Sen Zha Bu), and Zhang Fei (Jinsheng Zang). Red Cliff shifts the focus to resolute Wu general Zhou Yu, a tweak telegraphed by the casting of Hong Kong mega-star Tony Leung in the role. In general, the depiction of the characters favors the mythical and archetypal over the nuanced, partly out of deference to established conceptions of these historical and pseudo-historical personalities, but also out of necessity, given the sweep of the thing. The film is assisted in this respect by a host of glowing, lively performances, especially from Takeshi Kaneshiro as serene tactician Zhunge Liang and Wei Zhao as the spirited warrior maiden Sun Shang Xiang. If those character names mean anything to you, the pleasures of Red Cliff will probably be that much more acute.

Look/Listen: Incendies

Friday, May 20th, 2011

My review of Denis Villeneuve’s Incendies is up at Look/Listen. Check it out.

The Thin Red Line

Monday, April 25th, 2011

1998 (USA)
Director: Terrence Malick
Viewed: April 21, 2011
Format: Blu-ray - Criterion (2010)

When I first encountered Terrence Malick’s haunting film in its theatrical release thirteen years ago, I didn’t quite know what to think, but I was certain that I had witnessed an inimitable species of war picture. I had never seen a Malick film before, and was somewhat unprepared for the signature elements of his style: the brooding voice-over narration, the rapturous regard for natural beauty, the curiously reflective and philosophical tone. Released around the same time as Saving Private Ryan, The Thin Red Line perhaps unavoidably prompted comparisons to Spielberg’s ode to the Greatest Generation. In 1998, I emerged from Malick’s film appreciating it as an admirable and unconventional entry in the genre, if a little too unconventional for my tastes. However, its potent visuals left an unforgettable stamp on my consciousness, exemplified by the underwater shots of Melanesians swimming in painfully blue Pacific waters. With a decade’s worth of hindsight and broadened cinematic experience, it’s obvious to me now that The Thin Red Line is the superior World War II film of that year, a work of genuine cinematic art compared to Spielberg’s reverential but problematic R-rated Veterans Day fairy tale.

Indeed, revisiting The Thin Red Line on the stupendous new Blu-ray from Criterion, I’m prepared to call the film a stone-cold masterpiece. Three years ago, I was confident that Malick’s The New World was the obviously finer work, but now I’m not so sure. In telling (loosely) the story of the Guadacanal campaign, and in particular the Battle of Galloping Horse, The Thin Red Line effortlessly blends two seemingly contradictory currents: novelist James Jones’ profoundly contemptuous stance towards modern warfare, and the director’s own euphoric wonderment at life itself, in all its manifestations. The result is undeniably a towering achievement, a tone poem to the cosmos’ twin mysteries of cruelty and splendor.

Malick’s The Thin Red Line is unfailingly affecting on its own terms, but Jones’ pessimistic ethos lurks like an enormous, slouching beast in the film’s long shadows. Criterion’s liner notes include an essential 1963 essay by Jones, “Phony War Films,” in which he excoriates well-loved works such as The Guns of Navarone, Bataan, and Men in War. Jones dismisses Hollywood’s war features for their brainless lack of realism; for their trite plots and stock characters; and for their contemptible romanticization of individual heroism in an age of ruthless, mechanized horror. The essay provides valuable context for Malick’s adaptation, offering a glimpse of the caustic antiwar sentiment that underlies the source material and compels the film’s bleakest sentiments.

Malick strives for authenticity in his depiction of contemporary warfare, with its unpredictable violence and cold disregard for the enlisted man’s humanity, but his perpetually awestruck sensibility permits a more sweeping gaze than does Jones’ lacerated cynicism. The Thin Red Line regards the massacre of soldiers by pitiless machine gun fire as but one movement in the symphony of the universe. In Malick’s hands, such brutality harmonizes with the silent gliding of a viper through rustling grass, or the feeble struggles of a dying nestling. This approach is not without risks, as pulling back too far from the twentieth century’s paramount cruelties can diminish them into mere amoral events to be admired for their own dark beauty. And in truth, one of the film’s most strangely lovely sequences is a fogbound assault on a starving Japanese jungle encampment, which John Toll’s photography and Hans Zimmer’s tremendous score transform into an operatic whirl of surreal horror.

However, a filmmaker as adroit as Malick is attuned to his work’s inherent risks. Crucially, he establishes within The Thin Red Line a dialogue between the dour pragmatism of Sergeant Welsh (Sean Penn) and the ecstatic hopefulness of Private Witt (James Caviezel). This dialogue is conveyed both through explicit conversations between the two men–where Penn’s bitter edge seems dominant, but can never quite find an opening in Caviezel’s agreeable evasions–and also through the film’s narrative events and luscious visual language. Neither worldview “wins” this duel, of course. Malick parries each desperate lunge of hope and despair with its complement, resulting in a sweat-soaked poetic melee of mutually annihilating questions and answers. I think it is telling, however, that the film ends with joyous Melanesian chanting and the indelible image of a lone, sprouting coconut in the receding tide. The mere endurance of life amid the worst atrocities humankind can muster, Malick suggests, is itself an argument for the blessed character of existence.

Jane Eyre

Friday, April 15th, 2011

2011 (UK)
Director: Cary Fukunaga
Viewed: April 14, 2011
Format: Theatrical Print (Landmark Tivoli Theater)

From a capsule summary of Cary Fukunaga’s 2009 feature film debut, Sin Nombre, one might conclude that it is a gritty, realistic portrait of the horrors of illegal immigration and Mexican gang culture. Not so. Whatever its faults, the film’s most enthralling characteristic is its stylized sensationalism. Fukunaga renders the northward flight of a fraught Hondouran girl and a hard-bitten Mexican fugitive as a mythic Hero’s Journey out of Hell. The director’s use of resonant visuals and his conspicuous care for details (both naturalistic and heightened) signals that he favors an evocative story over real-world Serious Issues. Thus, a Chiapas rail yard becomes a terrifying and sulfurous Purgatory, while MS-13 thugs convening in a graveyard take on the aspect of reveling demons.

In this light, word that the director would be helming, of all things, the latest adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s seminal novel Jane Eyre elicited first confusion, then profound curiosity. True to form, Fukunaga stresses the gothic elements of the source material, tweaking Brontë’s tale into something approaching a moody ghost story (in spirit if not in substance), complete with twisted woodlands and phantom whispers. The film veritably drips with Northern damp, thanks in large part to the striking design overseen by Will-Hughes Jones and the peerless location selection. The film is an excellent illustration of genuine atmospherics, as opposed to mere lavish window dressing, particularly now that every limp period film seems to boast the latter.

The novel describes Jane as studiously plain and Rochester as a homely lout, whereas Fukunaga’s film offers the angelic Mia Wasikowska and the unfailingly absorbing Michael Fassbender. No matter. Nearly every character in the film is an effortlessly and richly realized figure, wholly apposite to Brontë’s shadowy yarn of personal honor and ghastly secrets. Yet none of the performances are what one could justly call dazzling, or even particularly actorly. Even Fassbender, whose early scenes as the snappish Rochester are admittedly a bit of a jolt, seems to shrink a bit in the chill winds of the Derbyshire hill country. This ultimately works in Jane Eyre’s favor, as it permits Fukunaga’s direction to take center stage, along with the cinematography of Adriano Goldman, whose lensing of Sin Nombre was nowhere near as lovely.

Fukunaga uses his setting to fine thematic effect, conjuring from moor and manor a wracked aura of alternating exposure and suffocation, which harmonizes elegantly with Jane’s entrapment between comfort and self-respect, yearning and dread. Often, the film’s style wanders into distinctly impressionistic terrain, employing dreamy close-ups and drifting focus in a manner that recalls Jane Campion’s cinematic odes. Indeed, Dario Marianelli’s score of quiet, mournful strings draws unmistakably from Michael Nyman’s prominent work in The Piano, but also from George Fenton’s underrated score for the Jekyll-and-Hyde flop Mary Reilly.

That Fukunaga manages to establish such a potent mood without losing sight of the humane coming-of-age pathos at the story’s core, or skimping on the dense thematic treatment of gender, class, and morality, is quite an achievement. Moira Buffini’s screen adaptation is generally faithful, although unlike the novel’s linear narrative, it makes ample use of flashback. Pointedly, she allows most of the novel’s moments of moralistic vindication to wither away, leaving a more desolate (and credible) “Tale of Woe,” as Rochester would say. Of course, running through the whole thing is the dodge-parry-thrust of Brontë’s dialog, which unsurprisingly attains full flower in any scene shared by Wasikowska and Fassbender. It’s delicious stuff, but in a work that is otherwise so overtly cinematic, the dialog seems more a remnant of the story’s literary genome than a natural outgrowth of the film’s style.