Closer: Ugh - Impressions and Expressions of Ijon — LiveJournal
Avoid the film Closer. The plot is terrible, the characters weak. Clive Owen's brilliant acting is the sole virtue of this film. I squirmed throughout. It's been a long time since I've suffered so much at the movies.
Current Mood: altruistic
Current Music: Third World Love -- Ein Karem
|Date:||March 20th, 2005 02:43 pm (UTC)|| |
I enjoyed it. The characters were well-drawn, and Julia Roberts, while not a great actress, played much better than usual. Natalie Portman is simply breathtakingly beautiful and a pleasure to watch. The plot and action were very formulaic rather than terrible, and that is, I think, due to the fact that the film is little more than a play directly transferred to the screen. In other words, there's very little there but the characters talking (and not doing anything else) in various context; the medium of the moving pictures is underutilised. Nevertheless, it was an enjoyable movie.
|Date:||March 20th, 2005 03:27 pm (UTC)|| |
I watched it recently and found it very interesting. I don't get why everyone thinks Owen was such a brilliant actor, but then again I don't know what details people look for to judge acting; it does seem to me that he was handed a lot of fabulous lines, and it's hard not to come off well in that situation.
I also felt that the movie had no plot; I don't think this bothered me as much as it bothered you, but it was enough that I wasn't really going to recommend it. And the characters, yes, weak (mostly I was bothered by their lack of motivation for going from one situation to another). But sole virtue? No; there really were a lot of fabulous lines, extremely funny ones, and they weren't all his. Natalie Portman did a credible job of being The Most Beautiful Woman In The Galaxy, struggling boldly through a series of appalling haircuts. And the most diabolical meet-cute ever.
The thing that left me particularly befuddled is that the movie seems convinced that it has themes -- you know it has them because it uses words like "honesty" and "cowardice" a lot -- yet it seems to have no particular stance on any of these things. I know that stories that are About Issues tend to be terrible, but this wasn't really about anything else, so it could have stood to have opinions on issues -- and regardless, stories that clearly have issues without having answers, or at least clearly raised questions and suggested directions, leave a bad taste in my mouth.
And I think it's an interesting conceit -- having the emotional center of the movie be, in a way, a woman who doesn't exist, a woman who excised herself from a timeline in America, fabricated an existence, and then excised herself from a timeline in England. Someone you can drop in and pull out wherever. But it's problematic; I'm not sure if it can be managed without having the woman's thoughts be extremely opaque (as they were in the movie), and then it's hard to justify why she's the emotional heart of things and how she has such an effect on others (aside from being The Most Beautiful Woman In The Galaxy).
|Date:||March 23rd, 2005 08:42 am (UTC)|| |
I wish I'd read this before
I hated it.