Epic DistortionsIt’s amazing what the new wave of technology can do now. It can take Ray Winstone and turn him into a lean blonde with a strong six pack and huge biceps. It can take Crispin Glover and transform him into a nine foot tall, horrific monster. It can even make the 3-D process one of the best ways to see a movie. However, all that technology doesn’t mean very much when the actual depth of a story hasn’t caught up with those advancements. Beowulf suffers from a problem like this, and it is the reason it is a near miss of a film.
Taken from the ancient, and one of the most despised, epic poems, this grand tale revolves around the central title character, acted by Ray Winstone but modeled by someone with a much better body, who is a hero sent to destroy the monster Grendel, played by Crispin Clover. It is here we get a barrage of characters which include King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) who is an aging coot that is losing his grip on his kingdom, his queen (Robin Wright Penn), who is there to look good while keeping her clothes on, and Grendel’s mother (Angelina Jolie) who is there to look good without keeping her clothes on. The eye is also treated to a world of fancy with gushing blood, limbs torn apart, and animated nudity. Oh boy, what a nickel!
However, while Beowulf is very pleasing to the eye, there is a substance to it that is inherently missing. I think the missing element is something that cannot be avoided, no matter who adapted it, and it is the simple fact of the source material. Epic poems and ancient works are very difficult to translate into the modern age without either losing the symbolic references or adding too much joyride action. Strangely enough, this film actually suffers more so from the latter. When the action scenes do arrive, it never seems to be in great numbers. One of the first battles between Beowulf and Grendel has a balance of excitement and campy humor. Beowulf goes into this fight completely nude while director Robert Zemeckis takes cues from the Austin Powers filmmakers by strategically covering up his genitals with a sword or arm. However, once it is over, the fight doesn’t seem to have any significance, mainly because almost all the scenes involving Grendel that take place after a battle slow down the pace to an irritable crawl. Also, in the magnificent climax of the film when Beowulf fights off a dragon, it feels over too quickly and without any satisfaction afterward.
Even still, the film has a quality to it that will more than likely draw us in, and that is the animation. Robert Zemeckis, whose directorial career has included blockbusters like Back to the Future and the Oscar-winning Forrest Gump, has cornered the market on the motion capture animation industry that absolutely dazzles the eye. The sweat that falls from the heads, the gleaming of muscles, even the perfect capture of skin is much more refined than Zemeckis previous attempt with the Polar Express, and his style of direction makes good use of how technology can help a story.
Yet, technology still can only go so far. Screenwriters Roger Avery and Neil Gaiman have made what was an epic piece of ancient literature and have basically turned it into a thirteen year old boy’s fantasy. A movie with this much violence, gore, and nudity would be rated R in the live action world, but now animation has granted it a lower rating. I’ve no problem with the rating. I do have a little problem with technology at this point, however. It can make Ray Winstone look attractive, but still cannot make a plot have a lasting impact. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: B-.
It's A Family Affair Every once in a while, I see a film that possesses an unknown quality but does its best to capture my senses. I don’t know why I’m engrossed, but there is something about the presentation that arrests my mind and yields my thoughts to believe that what I’m watching is something grand and extraordinary. That element is what I felt when viewing this film, a smart, fast paced thrill ride that is also a great piece of filmmaking.
The story is a crime thriller, of sorts, that takes the cues of the multiple perspectives that interlock with other characters. At the center are the Hanson brothers. Hank Hanson, played with a wonderful sense of angst from Ethan Hawke, is a divorced dad with a nagging wife looking for her alimony payments, played by Amy Ryan who made an impressive turn in Gone Baby Gone. He is in desperate need of money and a break. Andy Hanson, with the impressive aid of Philip Seymour Hoffman, is a well to do businessman with a social life in shambles, a nasty drug habit and a hollow relationship with his wife, fellow Oscar winner Marisa Tomei. He is in desperate need of money and a break. It is Andy who proposes a solution to the problem of his and Hank’s. The plan: organize a faux robbery of their parents’ jewelry store and make off with the cash. However, the plan doesn’t go as conceived and painstaking detail is taken to reveal the events that led up to and followed that tragic moment.
A great strongpoint of the film is the magnificent ensemble where at the center is Hawke and Hoffman. Hoffman’s Andy is a devious and maniacal little man, but there is a sense that he isn’t totally bad. His ethics are very much in question, but the way he describes his plans and then his reaction to the botched robbery seem like genuine emotions that could draw us in and believe that his intentions are good. Hawke’s Hank is obviously a good man at heart with problems that would convince anyone to go along with Andy’s plan. Yet he handles situations very poorly, which causes resentment in his character that he could be so gullible. Both Hawke and Hoffman pull of these characters’ persona and make them believable. It does seem that Hoffman is on an acting level that’s a little higher than Hawke, which Hawke tries to match up to, but the two do excellent work. The supporting players, ranging from Tomei’s wife who only wants a spark in her marriage, to Albert Finney’s Charles, the father of the two who goes on a Death Wish like hunt to find answers surrounding what happened, are also a fine addition to the story that gives it an extra sense of wonder.
With its capitol use of interlocking storylines, different perspectives, fast dialogue, long camera takes, and quirky editing, one would think this is the work of a fresh-out-of-film-school director with an encyclopedic knowledge of Reservoir Dogs to his credit. What makes the film even more interesting is that is actually the work of legendary director Sidney Lumet, who at the spry old age of eighty-three manages to prove that he has no signs of stopping. Lumet is a director from the fifties, and that style is one that no longer is carried even by the best of filmmakers. It is a style that uses the actual art of making a movie to display its own characters. Every time Lumet moves the camera or edits to a different scene, it is actually an attempt to look into the soul of a character. Classic films like 12 Angry Men and Network use this similar method and Lumet knows how to use it. He also has the thankfulness of Kelly Masterson’s screenplay, a first attempt from this unknown writer who flushes out a rich story with characters to match.
This is more than likely the type of film that won’t get as much play or press time than others. And quite honestly, when December rolls around, and studios start campaigning for their releases two weeks before the year is gone, this will more than likely be film that will become lost. That is a shame because here is a great work of art that indulges the mind in viewing characters with questionable senses or morality while still containing a deep, emotional and human core. Not many films have done that for me. This one has, and I only hope that it can for others. **** / ****; GRADE: A.
No comments:
Post a Comment