As with all short stories, and indeed the short story form, structure is the sword of damocles that hangs tenuously over the plot ... given the temporal nature of the story, we know what the inevitable end is and are in some ways already prepared for this as an audience from the minute we walk into the darkened theatre and the opening frames flicker onto the screen ...
What happens in between is the art of both screenwriter and director ...
Since Fight Club burst so frenetically onto our screens, I have always been prepared to give David Finch a soupcon of my time and intellectual energy ... until now.
This is technically an amazing and beautiful film ... make up artists and CGI experts deserve all the accolades in the book as the final look of the film was never intrusive or a distraction ... the acting is solid and New Orleans is a beautiful city ... or should I say was(?) ...
But, and I am sure you will hear this time and time again, the film is really too long!! And the arc, is not so much a cyclonic wave, but a gentle rise on an otherwise calm ocean ... yes we live and love and have moments of regret, passion, joy and hardship ... but these are universal truths and would be the same regardless of whether we age forwards naturally, or as this film seems to posit, age backwards freakishly.
And this is the problem I have with this story ... what exactly has turning the conventions of time achieved? How has it made me see anything in a different light?
I need my friend D to watch this and for us to sit down and discuss it over a glass of wine ... perhaps that would afford me some clarity ...
So if you have a spare 2 and a whole bit hours, have a look ... you may find it worth your time. But I think I would like to have my afternoon back ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment