REVIEW: The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button

The winter season in Hollywood means awards movies. Every year around this time, we see movies start to come out that will eventually collect a myriad of accolades on the way to competing for the big prize, the Academy Award for Best Picture. But up to this point, I hadn't seen any films that I thought could be serious favorites to win that category. Sure there were fan favorites like The Dark Knight or Wall-E, or indie sleepers like Slumdog Millionaire, but none of them seemed like movies that we'd traditionally consider Oscar bait. Well, Oscar voters just got thrown a serious piece of bait.

David Fincher, keeping himself uncharacteristically busy, makes his second movie in as many years, following up last year's Zodiac with an adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's short-story of the same name (though the film's story is a considerable departure from the original). Brad Pitt stars as the titular Button, a man who is born old and ages backwards. Cate Blanchett co-stars as the appropriately-named Daisy, his childhood sweetheart. Taraji P. Henson, Tilda Swinton, Julia Ormond, and Jared Harris turn in notable supporting performances as well.

Where to begin? This is a movie that is both groundbreaking and traditional. The make-up and effects used to cast Pitt as an elderly child and a disarmingly youthful old man are stunning, to say the least. Fincher, as usual, gives us a visually arresting movie that is unafraid to use creative means to deliver the story. But the film is also traditional in the vein of Hollywood epics of old. It takes a very classical approach to telling its sweeping narrative that spans the entire life of a man. It travels through various localities and several time periods, but like the best of old Hollywood, it is a love story at its heart. And whether he did so intentionally or not, Fincher suffuses the film with a haunting sense of romance, crafting a genuinely moving tale that remains nonetheless just slightly emotionally distant and hard to touch. Fincher does do a tremendous job navigating the time that flies by, pacing the eighty-odd years covered in the film with surprising fluidity. It being a massive story, though, the film still runs 2 hours and 47 minutes. But it's a quick 2 hour and 47 minutes, and earlier concerns over a laggy third act seem to have been cleared up, as you never really notice the running time because what's happening on screen is so captivating.

Eric Roth's screenplay is his most ambitious in some time, and it mirrors the scope of another one of his movies, Forrest Gump. Like that film, Benjamin Button gives us a peculiar character that is something of an outcast who, like Forrest, finds the love of his life at an early age and then spends a good deal of his formative years pursuing her. Despite the odds, he also goes on to lead a colorful and meaningful life. The story can be dark at times, but Roth peppers it with strokes of humor and romance that humanize it. We invest in his characters on a basic level, and this allows us to join them on their fantastic journey. In fact, this film is very much about the journey we’re all on. Time and age are considered in interesting ways throughout the movie, adding up to a meditation on how no matter if we’re going forward or backward, we’re still headed to the same place. There's also an interesting frame story involving Hurricane Katrina that adds an element of foreboding to the film, but the innocuous way it plays out is moving and organic without feeling overdone or heavy-handed.

Brad Pitt turns in one of his most memorable performances yet, bringing a casual amiability and subtle tones of heartache to a truly intriguing character. He breathes a tangible vivacity into Benjamin Button at every point of his life, but does his best work in the early years, when Button has the most to learn and the fearlessness to pursue that knowledge. It's hard for someone as recognizable as Brad Pitt to disappear into a role, but he does it in spectacular fashion in this movie. Cate Blanchett is equally stellar, giving us a complicated look at the girl who gets entangled in the life of the mystifying Benjamin Button. In an interesting twist, Daisy grows to be more obsessed about age than Button, who is comfortable in his skin after having dealt with age as a constant and palpable presence in his life for so long. Blanchett imbues Daisy with mixes of grace, moxie, and vulnerability, a fully-realized character from beginning to end.

There should be at least a brief mention here of the amazing work other contributors to the film have put in. Usually Fincher's gaffer, Claudio Miranda has stepped in as the Director of Photography and given audiences a gorgeously-shot film, particularly ripe with shadows and hard edges. Alexander Desplat is again wonderful, turning in a hauntingly beautiful score. The production design and art direction give us a lush vision of America throughout the 1900s, adding a vivid sense of life to the environments we pass through.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is one of those rare films that combines all the right storytelling elements with a great cast, culminating in an intensely satisfying cinematic experience. I expect it to receive at least a nomination in every major category this February, and they'd all be justly earned. I hesitate to come off sounding hyperbolic, but this is one of those films that doesn't just make best-of-the-year lists; it could very well enter the discussion of best-of-all-time lists. When it opens this Christmas, make sure you get out to see it. It's not a journey you'll want to miss being a part of.

Continued after the jump...

REVIEW: The Yellow Handkerchief

The Yellow Handkerchief follows three displaced strangers on a roadtrip through the rural highways of Louisiana, each of them on their own private journey of self-discovery, but united in their search for some kind of connection.

The story begins with Brett, deftly played by William Hurt, who has just been released from a six-year stint in prison for manslaughter. Adrift in an now-unfamiliar world, he begins to make his way vaguely south, and along the way meets angsty (is there any other kind?) teenager Martine, played by Kristen Stewart, and her new "ride" Gordy, played by Eddie Redmayne. The trio end up riding together as Martine seeks to leave behind a family that doesn't really care about her, Gordy to be closer to Martine, and Brett to reconcile his past - and a wife named May, played by Maria Bello - with the harsh realities of his present.



Story-wise, we're in familiar territory here. There is nothing ground-breaking in the presentation of Yellow Handkerchief, as we have seen this particular conceit before. The one thing that separates Yellow Handkerchief is the strength of its actors. William Hurt is perfect as ex-convict Brett Hanson. There is a line that Brett says to May, that he can see her life in that face, and such is true in Hurt's performance. Every tragedy and disappointment that Brett has suffered in his tumultuous life is etched in the lines on Hurt's face and reflected in the glistening pools of his eyes. The movie is largely redeemed because we feel for and believe in Brett, and want him to find the measure of peace that he is so desperately looking for.

Maria Bello brings strength and grace to her portrayal of May. She is both fiercely independent and frighteningly vulnerable, and makes it so easy to believe why it is at once unbearable for Brett to be away from her but too painful for him to return either. Kristen Stewart is lovely as the brave but lonely Martine, headstrong enough to make it on her own but too delicate to suffer being alone. And although it's unusual to see him outside of a period piece, Eddie Redmayne is winning and effortlessly charming as the outcast Gordy, never really loved by anyone but so ready to give love all the same.



Where Yellow Handkerchief hits some speedbumps (and maybe what derails it entirely) is the actual development of the characters and their relationships. The set up, for the most part, works for each of the four players. However, the progression of their mutual and their individual arcs (save perhaps Brett's) takes massive and unearned leaps throughout the movie. Bello, especially, is required to hit a few emotional notes in her relationship with Brett that are just too sudden to be truly believable. At one point, it feels like May and Brett jump from casual acquaintances to lovers to man & wife within the span of a few days. She does the best she can, but the writing simply isn't strong enough to carry us from one beat to the other. Similarly, the change in the dynamic between Martine and Gordy is almost lazily played out, as if the tension between them is supposed to magically evolve to love at the 75-minute mark. We're also never completely sure why Martine so implicitly trusts Brett, even as strangers. Although we're given hints, one can't help but feel as if there needs to be more meaningful interaction between the two for us to buy the growth of their relationship. In fact, I am reminded of earlier this year's The Lucky Ones, Neil Burger's dramedy about three Iraq war veterans on a cross-country roadtrip. As much as we like the characters involved and desperately want to like their story, their relationships unfold too awkwardly and tritely for us to ever fully be with them.

Ultimately, The Yellow Handkerchief is a character piece that never quite lets us connect with the characters. While the performances are sublime, the writing just can't quite flesh out the relationships enough for the audience to buy them. The story goes through all the motions, complete with even a (spoiler alert!) rather well executed reunion at its end, but one still can't help but feel unsatisfied after leaving the theater. A special note should be made about Chris Menge's excellent cinematography, though. Menge lushly captures the glowing hues of Louisiana, making liberal use of huge soft sources and lens flares to portray the atmosphere and romance of the south. Otherwise, Yellow Handkerchief, which premiered at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival and may find its way to theaters, won't bring anything memorable to the table.

Continued after the jump...

Some Thoughts On Quantum Of Solace

Note: This post contains SPOILERS

Rather than posting a review (which I'd already be late on, as it is), I'm instead going to turn this into a sort of response-to-general-criticism piece that happens to review the film at the same time.

First, let me just say this -- Quantum of Solace is not Casino Royale. A lot of people have been saying this, most of them disappointed with that revelation. However, I don't mean this as a negative. This is a film that is very much a natural progression of everything Casino Royale set up. Still, it's also a very different movie in many ways. Casino Royale had the unenviable task of reinventing a franchise. Fortunately, the film turned out to be something of a master work, at least in terms of redefining a decades-old series. And being the "first" movie in a franchise, it was also necessarily epic in scope.

So enter Quantum of Solace. This is a film that relies heavily on the audience having watched the first movie, having understood the new direction they were taking Bond in. This a modern, realistic Bond, set in a modern, realistic world. And he is more than the super-suave Bond your parents are familiar with. He is a highly efficient killer, but still a man with his own flaws and weaknesses. He hurts when you cut him. Cut him deeply enough, and he'll scar. This man carries the baggage of his past.

This is how we find Bond when Quantum of Solace starts, mere moments after the events of CR. We follow Bond as he gradually unravels the heavy tapestry of a mysterious organization working to undermine global stability. And while this business with global conspiracies must sound fairly standard for a Bond film, where QoS departs from traditional Bond plot lines is that it is a movie concerned chiefly with the psyche of its main character. The action is just a backdrop.

Critics and viewers who have complained about the lack of a plot or any sense of real emotion need to give the film another viewing. The plot is definitely there (albeit some of their concerns may be founded, but more on that later), and to proclaim the movie is emotionless and lacking in character development is dangerously close to lazy film digestion. The entire film is about Bond going through a profound but subtle transformation. After he was left vulnerable, betrayed, and deeply hurt by the death of Vesper Lynd in CR, he has to at least act like he can't be touched again. But really, QoS is about a strongly shaken Bond seeking a very personal form of revenge, and not just that, but also validation that his love and faith in Vesper were not misplaced. He is reckless. This is the Bond from CR unleashed. He wants to destroy, wants to kill, wants to exert his muscle-fortified will on everyone because it failed him so spectacularly in CR.

But then, he begins to change. Very subtly at first, but it's a momentous shift. Key to his transformation are Olga Kurylenko as Camille, Judi Dench as M, and Gemma Arterton as Strawberry Fields. Camille gives him someone to commiserate with. Her similar fate gives him a means for introspection, and in guiding her through her rage and despair, he finds a way through his own. M gives him someone to be accountable to, and she is also someone who sees his quest for what it really is, but still finds a way to trust him. She grounds him, however slightly, when he's lost all concern for anything but his own interests. And finally Fields humanizes him. Her death is an epiphanic moment for Bond, the idiomatic last straw spurring forward the understanding that is at the heart of his metamorphosis. He finally realizes that his actions have very real consequences for other people. All of their deaths carry weight now. For the first time, he feels guilty, he feels responsible. And in turn, this change allows him to confront everything Vesper's death meant to him. Having found this measure of solace, he is able to move on and take care of business. That is what the movie is about--James Bond becoming the James Bond we have come to know. We witness the growth; we see past the polished veneer and discover the scar tissue lying underneath it--damaged but stronger than before.

Now to address the plot issue. It's unfair to say the film has no plot, but this criticism is getting at a real problem of the film. Be it the script or Forster's direction, much of the plot isn't properly revealed. We're unsure who Bond's real target is during the movie, never certain how far up the ladder we're expected to go. We also can't see, even in a vague sense, where the movie is headed. Because of that, each location change or new development grows more and more disorienting. The climactic action sequence doesn't feel climactic; it could just be another action sequence in an action-heavy movie. Which leads to another of the movie's problems--Forster's work with the action sequences are hit or miss. Sometimes, they come off as the gritty and intense personal struggles they're meant to be. But more often than not, they're dizzily shot and difficult to follow. All of these things muddle the plot, forcing us to have to piece it together either on the fly or in retrospect. And when we finally come to the final scene, it's hard not to be left with a sense of dissatisfaction. It's a great scene, and a powerful conclusion, but doesn't carry the weight it should because we weren't properly greased for it. It feels like it could be the ending to a completely different movie. And for those obstacles, the movie may come off as plot-less.

But those who manage to identify the film for what it is before the end--that is, a deeply personal story of transformation for Bond--will find the ending to be a very logical and distinctly satisfying conclusion for the film. It’s a powerful end to a movie carried by powerful scenes, though it's true that the film is a bit lacking in connective tissue. Flawed though it may be, the film still advances a new Bond that is incredibly gratifying and exciting to watch. Naysayers complaining that the filmmakers are trying too hard to make him into Jason Bourne are misguided. This isn't Jason Bourne. This is the making of James Bond as Ian Fleming intended him to be--charming, deadly, but ultimately human. This movie does the heavy lifting for the entire re-invented franchise, bringing us ever closer to realizing this new Bond. And it is the Bond that I hope to see for years to come. I could watch a million 007 films about this James Bond, and I'm hoping the success of Quantum of Solace ensures that we see Craig continue his work in the 007 franchise for as long as it stays this fresh. Love it or hate it, QoS is definitely a necessary step in the right direction.

Continued after the jump...