When I call this movie "Forrest Gump" for the new millenium, believe me it's no compliment. "Gump" is one of my most hated films of all time and now it's got "Button" for company. Sure enough, the same screenwriter, Eric Roth, is responsible for both of them. Somebody stop this guy. Based on a story by the great F. Scott Fitzgerald, the unlikely plot centers around a man (Benjamin Button) who is born just after WWI as an old man and ages backwards to become a small baby at the end of his life. It's a strange idea that doesn't really work for me in the first place, but the team of director David Fincher and actor Brad Pitt (starring as Button) has always been a winner in the past so I was hopeful that something intriguing might come of this clunky concept. There's a marvelous cast, settings all over the world, good production design and fabulous New Orleans for starters. So far, so good. There's also a writer (Roth) who reduces every character, situation and plot point into a sentimental homily and doesn't have a single original thought to offer for the movie's three hour running time. Perhaps if Button had been an interesting character the story might have worked, but he's an almost completely reactive cipher whose life experiences amount to a laundry list of cliches: experiencing his first sexual encounter at a house of prostitution, fighting an enemy submarine during WWII, having an affair with a married woman, hitting the bars with a sea captain, falling in love with a beautiful dancer, meeting up with the father who abandoned him as a child. Ho-hum.
It's shocking to me that a director of David Fincher's intensity and talent could turn out as maudlin a film as this one. The movie seems preoccupied with everyone's age to the exclusion of all else. Perhaps that is supposed to be the point of the story, but without credible, involving characters there's no reason to care about the issues of fate, death or love put forward by the filmmakers. This opus was obviously meant to be a grand, sprawling tale covering decades of change, full of colorful characters and unusual events with a touching hero who wins our hearts with his perseverance in the face of his odd circumstance. Unfortunately, for me, it is instead a movie that's much too long, packed with ideas I've already seen done so much better by any number of other writers, directors and actors and a leading character who's just plain boring. Even Brad Pitt can't save this film, although the exquisite Cate Blanchett manages to bring the badly underwritten character of Button's true love Daisy to life despite Roth's best efforts. Then there are the final insulting moments at the end where the audience is subjected to a glimpse of each character with a one word description (a dancer, an artist, blah blah blah) by Pitt's flat voiceover. If there is any momentous meaning to "Benjamin Button" it must be to remind the unsuspecting filmgoer to beware when the name of Eric Roth appears on the credits as screenwriter -- run for your life!
Things to love about this movie: The tryst between Button and the married woman (played by Tilda Swinton) at meetings in a deserted hotel works; scenes of New Orleans (though they are all too brief and rare); the woman who teaches Benjamin to play the piano
Things to hate about this movie: Some of the worst aging make-up I've ever seen; the tacky use of Hurricane Katrina as a backdrop for a character's deathbed scenes; three hours long and feels every minute of it; one mildly funny bit about a man being struck by lightning is repeated at least 5 times throughout the movie (once was enough); bad writing, bad directing, bad acting
Pleasant surprises: (This line is deliberately left blank)
Unpleasant surprises: I know it's shallow of me, but gorgeous Brad Pitt is covered by ugly, cheesy looking aging make-up for 75% of the movie; usually reliable actors such as Jason Flemyng, Taraji P. Henson, Julia Ormond and Jared Harris are dreadful here (probably due in part to their badly written characters); this mess is actually nominated for 5 Golden Globe Awards; Button seems slightly simple (is it the "Forrest Gump" virus?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I hate to write this comment, but must be brave. It's probably the first time we've truly parted ways on a movie.
I was not a fan of Forrest Gump (understatement of the decade) so went in expecting to hate this movie.
Came out loving it. I have always been uncomfortable with the topic of old age, the decline, the loss of independence and dignity. But this story so beautifully overcame that for me, that it made me re think my own fear of aging.
I have always wished we could get younger instead of older, never taking into account that in the end, we all end up in the same place, helpless and in need of care. The elderly characters in this movie were treated with great dignity. The "old folks home" was not the place to which we consign the elderly today, perhaps because people were allowed to age naturally and not be kept alive by drugs and medical "miracles".
I particularly loved the scene in which Daisy sustains the accident that ends her dance career, the entire set up, beginning with the woman who is late setting everything in motion. How the little things that happen in every day life can alter the course of events in mind changing ways.
I'm having real problems with Best Picture and think it should go to both this and Slumdog Millionaire jointly. Still speaking to me??
Yes, we definitely part ways on this movie. The old age component didn't work for me the same way it did for you, in fact it really annoyed me. I found the aging make-up to be very overdone and distracting, and the people in the old folks home didn't have any distinct personalities except being old. I think that's insulting.
The part involving the Cate Blanchett character's accident was a ho-hum for me because I'd already seen the same thing done much better years ago in "Run Lola Run" so nothing original there for me.
Of course I'm still speaking to you! I think we could go on and on about our differences on this movie, but it's fun to argue movies (at least I think it is).
It's just so rare for us to have such completely opposite views of the same movie. I feel like we're the reincarnation of Siskel and Ebert.
Post a Comment