Showing posts with label Jennifer Tilly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jennifer Tilly. Show all posts

Sunday, November 6, 2011

The Horrors Of Being A Child Adult Surrounded By Adult Children: Terry Gilliam's Intriguing Tideland


The Good: Dark, Visually spectacular, Acting, DVD bonus features
The Bad: Repetitive quality, Lack of plot
The Basics: Terry Gilliam's visually impressive psychological horror takes the viewer into a young girl's struggle to endure with her imagination as she encounters repetitive traumas in her daily life.


Sitting down preparing to watch Tideland for the first time, I realized Tideland is a remarkably polarizing film. When I sat to write my review, the reviews I read were at the extreme, love-it or hate-it, nothing in between. Having once declared - and continued to support the idea - that Terry Gilliam had created the best film ever with Brazil, I knew that Tideland's director could well have created another perfect film. My fear was that he might have created an absolute lemon (which I've yet to see from Gilliam).

As it stands, Tideland is not a perfect film, nor is it a lemon and on DVD is becomes a truly wonderful film to watch and study, but one that is hard to recommend for a permanent collection. The result is a film that has truly spectacular aspects, but falls within the bounds of the expected greatness of the creator, much like Mystic River did with stacking its deck on the casting. Overshadowed by the similarly themed Pan's Labyrinth, Tideland remains a work worthy of attention, but neglected it.

In this fashion, the story of the film Tideland illustrates the themes within the movie.

Jeliza-Rose is a girl who has developed an emotionally self-sufficient personality due to her neglect by her drug-addicted father and emotional abuse by her chain-smoking mother. Kept company by the heads of her dolls, Jeliza-Rose has a pretty healthy knack for talking to herself and overcoming the fears and insecurities of being a child by play-acting most of the time. When her mother dies of a drug overdose, her father uproots her and the two flee to an abandoned farmhouse in the middle of wheat country.

There, Jeliza-Rose begins to delight in being a kid in the tall grass, the wreckage of a school bus, the clothes left behind by her absent grandmother (whose house it is), and her own imaginary world that extends from all that she encounters. It is not long before her father shoots up one too many times and Jeliza-Rose is left at the mercy of her imagination and two disturbing and damaged neighbors, the cyclops wraith-like Dell and her mentally-impaired brother Dixon. Jeliza-Rose essentially joins their weird family and while hunger and loneliness begin to overtake her, her imagination begins to overcome her sense of reality.

Tideland is not an adult fairy tale like The City Of Lost Children (reviewed here!) or Pan's Labyrinth, it is a psychological study of scarred adults and the survival instincts of children. Introduced by Terry Gilliam, the film blurs the borders between reality and fantasy in a way that will seem very familiar to fans of Gilliam's works. Indeed, movies where characters encounter the real and the unreal indiscriminately have become somewhat commonplace in mainstream cinema, which is not to say that they are unwelcome. Far from it; the ones that do it best make for enduring entertainment or cinema that reveals deeper truths about the perceptions we have about life and the world we live in.

Tideland is not to be written off as entertainment, but it hardly expands the perceptions we have about the emotional endurance of children or the dangers of them modeling after those who are unable to take care of themselves. As Gilliam notes in his introduction; children are resilient and they see the world differently than we do. What Tideland does that almost no other cinematic outing has ever attempted is it fearlessly explores exactly what that means and what the limits of it might be. In other words, this is not a film that treads lightly into the idea of childish resiliency, it throws protagonist Jeliza-Rose into the deep end of the ocean and when she begins to swim, she's given leg weights. That's an endurance test!

As a result, Jeliza-Rose begins to be more effected by the things she relies on. Mustique, her favorite doll head, becomes her reliable best friend and the companion she most relies upon to combat fear. And living in the middle of nowhere in a creepy house with the embalmed skin of your dead father is certainly a place rich in potential for fear! As a result of her dependence upon what is reliable, Jeliza-Rose exhibits more emotion when Mustique falls down a rabbit hole than when her father expires. In the absence of her crutch against fear, Jeliza-Rose becomes more dependent upon her human companions, Dell and Dixon.

Dell is a necrophilic drifter whose mood swings from the somber and religious to the sex-crazed and shrieking. She is skilled enough to be able to embalm a body, responsible enough to get food delivered and perceptive enough to know that Jeliza-Rose needs to be looked after like her brother Dixon, but the limits of her competence are quickly reached. As Jeliza-Rose and Dixon grow closer together, Dell becomes flightier and looks toward keeping Dixon to herself and, conversely, wandering aimlessly the fields around the two houses with little perception of where she is and of what is going on around her. Jeliza-Rose likens her to a ghost and in many ways that perception illustrates how on the ball the girl is. Unfortunately for her, when Dell chooses to haunt - whenever there are no bees around - Jeliza-Rose usually ends up hurt or confused.

But with Dixon, she finds a playmate operating at about her level. Having had brain surgery to treat his epilepsy, Dixon is an adult who functions like a child. "Swimming" through the sea of tall grass around the two houses, he understands the train that comes through as a shark, giant and powerful. He is somewhat indifferent to his protective sister and he does not truly understand love or sex, which get him and Jeliza-Rose into no small amount of trouble with Dell.

Jeliza-Rose is the very model of resiliency that she is intended to be. Schooled on Alice In Wonderland, she endures the daily horrors that surround her with whatever grace she possesses, which is largely living without a comprehension of what she is seeing - when Dell fellates the delivery man, she is convinced the woman is a vampire sucking his blood - or extending the mundane into the extraordinary.

When Mustique falls down the rabbit hole, Jeliza-Rose is able to envision the head falling to the center of the Earth. It is in that way that Tideland is actually incredibly perceptive and articulate at expressing its themes and ideas. Jeliza-Rose does not fully understand death - she play-acts dying frequently - which is evident by her failure to recognize her father's transition into a corpse (though he was pretty immobile before that, so it's hard to blame the girl!). She is not able to understand the philosophic distances between life and death, but she understands spatial relationships. So, of course, she reacts more hurt and surprised and traumatized when her doll head falls what she believes to be an infinite distance (anything out of reach is a lightyear away in the perceptions of a child) into the earth!

In order to achieve the thematic goals of Tideland and truly illustrate the resiliency of a child and the nature and power of childish imagination, Tideland has to utilize extraordinary visuals. The "extraordinary" takes the form of visual effects and simple exposure. Terry Gilliam and co-writer Tony Grisoni, who adapted Mitch Cullin's novel, are responsible for putting on screen some of the most bleak and disturbing images possible. They include the gored out flesh-bodies of people like Jeliza-Rose's father and showing Dell engaged in necrophilia. But even the more mundane disturbances in reality, like young Jeliza-Rose preparing her parents' heroin are shocking for the audacity of the reality they create. Gilliam is daring enough to show on screen what many live in denial of; drug-addicted parents usually are enabled and their children often become tools to their fix! Tideland fearlessly shows that with a straightforward use of scenes that include the mundane task of the girl cooking her dad's drugs.

Gilliam, then, needs to make the rest of the world that much more extraordinary and he does that through visual effects. Not degenerating to computer generated characters or much in the way of lavish surreal sequences, Gilliam uses light and color as one of the most profound visual effects possible. Tideland is a film rich in color. Fans of Gilliam's work may not be prepared for it! Gone are the grays that muted the mood of Brazil and 12 Monkeys, Tideland explodes with color from almost its first frames. Out in the country, Jeliza-Rose lives in a vivid world filled with sun-drenched yellows and earthy warm browns. After opening in blackness, Tideland becomes a visually rich, colorful world that always seems slightly unreal. As a result, the viewer is drawn into the same sense of imagination that Jeliza-Rose has. Everything is just a little too bright and with a world so overexposed it seems natural to make up one's own mysteries.

But Tideland does pretty much just that. After Jeliza-Rose is relocated to the country and meets Dell and Dixon, the movie is in many ways over. Gilliam provides the viewer with further examples of the surreal and extraordinary, but the net effect is what we're introduced to at the beginning; the girl imagines her way through her obstacles. She never becomes so confined or trapped in any physical sense in the real world - save by hunger - that she cannot make it comprehensible using her imagination.

And it is delightful to watch the moments where Jeliza-Rose screams in delight inside the wrecked bus while the nearby train rattles it. Jodelle Ferland plays the scene perfectly and with clarity with her disturbing scream, but her ecstatic smile, so the viewer knows without a doubt that she has childish glee overcoming her.

But we get it. If the point of Tideland is to show what we rationally know but almost never see on screen, the argument the movie more effectively makes is that we don't truly need to. What seems like it might be an escalation of bizarre incidents and encounters between Jeliza-Rose and the crazy necrophiliac and her loping, uninhibited dependent brother begins to quickly feel like simple repetition instead. Jeliza-Rose goes off with Dixon and is yelled at by Dell who abruptly appears. Jeliza-Rose goes off with Dixon and is yelled at by Dell who abruptly appears. Jeliza-Rose goes off with Dixon and is yelled at by Dell who abruptly appears. Jeliza-Rose goes off with Dixon and is yelled at by Dell who abruptly appears. She essentially encounters the same obstacles over and over again and reacts to them in a way that is more or less the same.

At least the film looks great while she does it!

Tideland's protagonist is certainly a likable one and it is hard not to watch the film and feel some empathy for her. The movie is, in some ways, like watching two hours of Gollum fighting with Smeagol; what might for a moment seem amusing, might entertain a little, but the longer it goes on the more disturbed by the reality of it we become. When Jeliza-Rose's dolls begin speaking to her without her moving her lips, the film has reached that point where it is saturated with an unsettling quality. Yet still, Jeliza-Rose endures.

What keeps us watching is the acting. Opening with a pretty stellar performance by Jeff Bridges that is hard to acknowledge as anything other than derivative of his role from The Big Lebowski, Terry Gilliam yet again illustrates that genius may be seeing the potentials in performers that has gone untapped.

Brendan Fletcher, who I had never seen in anything else, is a virtual contortionist in his physical performance of Dixon. He completely characterizes Dixon's mood using his posture, going from a rigid upright-looking citizen with a head cocked awkwardly to one side at an extreme angle to a misdressed hunched over free spirit who laughs with childlike glee along with his young costar. Fletcher's acting challenge is to recreate the sense of whimsy and intellectual freedom that comes natural to a young person like Jodelle Ferland (his costar). Fletcher delivers admirably!

Janet McTeer was unrecognizable to me and that's saying something impressive about the quality of her performance. McTeer was in Songcatcher and the part was memorable, distinctive and had her as remarkably formal. In Tideland, McTeer is wacky without being funny, off-center without being overly villainous and . . . well, primal. It is such a departure from roles I have seen her in previously, yet she sells the reality of it so well with her delivery of the dialogue that it is hard not to acknowledge her talent.

But it's hard to acknowledge the talent of newcomer Jodelle Ferland, the top-billed actress in Tideland, who plays the young Jeliza-Rose. Ferland is a little girl playing a little girl. She brings all the trappings of her youth to bear in playing someone who presumably possesses all he abilities and imagination of a young actress. In other words, Ferland is employed as an actress where she is required to portray a reality that comes from imagination. Jeliza-Rose is a character who lives in a reality that inspires her to imagine she is someone other than she is, be it more confident, a princess or simply in another place. As a result, it's very hard to get a bead on how good an actress Jodelle Ferland actually is.

What I will acknowledge without any hesitation is that Ferland is completely convincing as Jeliza-Rose. She makes it through all of her lines in a way that they are perfectly delivered and we have no doubt at all that we are watching Jeliza-Rose every moment Ferland is on the screen. That's exceptional acting in my book, which at best sets the bar high for Ferland's next project.

On DVD, Tideland is awash in bonus features that explore the reality of the film and Jeliza-Rose's situation. After schlepping through some of the longest pre-menu previews I've ever encountered on a DVD, Disc one offers the film, the Terry Gilliam introduction (which automatically begins when one plays the film) and a full-length commentary. Gilliam and co-writer Grisoni discuss finding the book Tideland, adapting it to screen, casting and challenges they met with getting it released throughout the film in a way that is very informative and documents well their inspiration and struggles. The second disc is packed with deleted scenes (I find myself wondering, as always, why Gilliam did not restore them to the film!), featurettes on the making of Tideland and a documentary on Terry Gilliam as well as trailers and interviews with Gilliam and others. For those who find Tideland compelling, there is a richness to the DVD bonus features that explore the process and concept behind it. For those who found the film disturbing, the bonus features - which, to be fair would be very hard to sit through if one did not enjoy the primary feature - try to explain and lessen the horror of the movie.

But ultimately, Tideland is intended to be a film about people living through disturbing situations and surviving with their innate resiliency, something most people lose as they transition into adulthood. Fortunately, Gilliam did not lose that quality - as evidenced by him continuing to make imaginative and thought-provoking films. But then, we expect as much from Gilliam and as such, it's hard in some ways not to underwhelm some when the bar is set so high.

For other films by Terry Gilliam, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus
12 Monkeys
Brazil

7/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Nothing As It Seems For Those Bound To Perfection!




The Good: Good acting, EXCELLENT Characters, Well-written, Engaging plot
The Bad: Light on DVD features
The Basics: Bound is an engaging film that rightly won the Wachowski brothers a chance to write and direct The Matrix


It's easy to look at a film like Bound on the shelves and say "Hmm . . . I don't want to be caught leaving the store with THAT!" That could be the attitude that kept the film from doing well at the box office. Shame on you all with that attitude! Two strong-willed women tied up with rope on the cover of a video box is no reason not to pick up a film.

Bound follows Violet and Corky, one a girl Friday for a mobster, the other a rough and tumble handywoman. Violet works for Caesar, a petty thug for the local Mafia. Corky, fresh out of prison, is working next door working for the landlord who is also connected. When a rat in the organization is sniffed out, Caesar discovers one of his operatives behind it and his conflict with Johnnie, the son of the Don reaches a historic peak. Unfortunately, Caesar is ruled by his temper where Corky and Violet are ruled by cunning and intellect and the story goes from there! In the balance are a couple million dollars that Caesar must recover to the mob and Corky and Violet see their chance to take.

It's rare in this day in age that you can say you watched an artistic film that was great. In fact, the moment you say, "artistic film" you've lost a good chunk of the population. But Bound is an artist's solution to the brain dead action film blockbuster. That is to say, outside the protagonists being both women and lesbian, the characters could be in your average Schwarzenegger or Stallone action flick. That is, if Stallone and Schwarzenegger appeared in films using dialogue. Bound has the gravitas of other classic gangster films like The Godfather and GoodFella's.

What's the difference here, between Bound and your typical action-adventure or suspense film? Nothing is gratuitous, nothing is senseless. It's an irony that disappears with the second viewing, considering that Violet (Jennifer Tilly) comes across as senseless. Released in close proximity to the amazing The Usual Suspects, Bound makes similar leaps with narration and character. So, the first major difference is that Bound is not told in a linear fashion.

The simple plot is that two women fall in love and take the Mob for 2.17. . . million dollars. The first few minutes take the time to establish Corky and Violet, a pretty stereotypical dyke/fem lesbian combination who fall for one another when Violet becomes surprisingly sexually aggressive with Corky. The scenes of their lovemaking are actually erotic, unlike a lot of theatrical sex scenes which come across as choreographed and/or cheap. Filmed with a wonderful sense of shadow, light and movement, the lovemaking in Bound is not extraneous or simply sex for sex. Indeed, the line from Corky that immediately follows the lovemaking is a wonderful expression of what the experience means!

Populated by characters who have depth and extensive backstory - which comes into play without an added "this here is backstory" feel - the film is an artistic vision in cinematography, plot and scope. Indeed, the last scene Joe Pantoliano's Caesar appears in is one of the most beautifully shot scenes of any movie ever! Seriously: EVER!

Directors Andy and Larry Wachowski (yes, the same pair that made The Matrix and V For Vendetta) have an amazing eye for framing shots and camera movements, using the cinematography to tell the story, never letting it overwhelm the meaning or significance of the film's actions, but rather accenting what best defines the characters and moves the plot along. The Wachowski Brothers used Bound as a directoral audition to get funds for The Matrix and within moments of beginning this movie, the viewer will see why that deal could be sealed by this work. The style is distinctive, engaging and interesting.

In fact, Bound is more than an artistic film noir movie. It's shot with a keen eye for detail and written with a great appreciation for how a story may be told. It's the antidote to today's fast-paced, hard to watch movies that are visually stunning, but intellectually devoid. Bound has meaning.

The principle actors in the film are all amazing, playing at the top of their game. Christopher Meloni (tv's Law & Order: SVU) appears as the menacing psychopathic gangster Johnnie Marzzone. He is dark and edgy and the few scenes he is in he is unpredictable and connoting danger for every moment. Joe Pantoliano plays Caesar, the gangster who embodies the arrogance and assumed power of organized crime. Pantoliano plays Caesar with an ease and casual body language and slurred accented speech that makes it obvious why he would end up as a staple in gangster movies from this point forward in his career.

Gina Gershon plays Corky and it's astonishing how well such a beautiful woman is able to transform herself into someone who is so . . . well, diesel. Gershon's Corky is more than simply a stereotype for powerful, somewhat masculine lesbians, she plays Corky with an intelligence and cunning that comes through in her eyes, her catlike movements while prowling and in her clenching of her jaw when interacting with the violent Caesar. Gershon lights up ever scene she is in this movie with a sense of physical power as she roams the halls in a tanktop, moving with lighting speed and quite simply acting like I've never seen Gershon perform before.

The lead is Jennifer Tilly as Violet. Tilly uses her high, girlish voice to seduce the viewer into believing her innocence. She plays the audience, just as Violet plays Caesar and her role is juicy. It's hard not to watch Tilly play in Bound and drool a little, so sensual are all her movements and so convincing is the faceted way she presents Violet.

Finally, in addition to being an intelligent film, it's nice to see some characters - even criminals - acting with intelligence. No one here is particularly stupid (though the police might be considered somewhat ignorant) and that's reassuring after slews of boring films with cardboard villains. Despite the emotions that overcome everyone once the chase for the money begins, most of the actions are guided by reason and character as opposed to simply instinct. Violet negotiates with Caesar, just as she plays the prominent mobsters Johnnie and Micky. It's clever.

This is a must see for anyone who likes drama. It's definitely intended for an adult audience.

For other films by the Wachowski brothers, please be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Matrix
The Matrix Reloaded
The Matrix Revolutions

10/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2007, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Monsters That Are, But Don't Know Why: Monsters, Inc.




The Good: Funny, Good animation, Good voiceovers
The Bad: Predictable plot, Unsure of What It Wants to Be
The Basics: Recommended for the achievement in animation more than the story that begins at too ambitions and degenerates into too juvenile.


Occasionally, there's a film that looks like a kid's movie, but turns out to be an adult film. Monsters, Inc. almost does that. It starts out and after the opening credits, quickly establishes itself as something that is not simply a children's film. The lines and concept are too deep for most children.

Monsters, Inc. begins as the story of a town in a recession. The monster town is experiencing a power shortage based on an inability to scare children. Apparently, they power their town on children's screams. The concept is above the heads of most children: you're talking economic terms, many of the lines are thinly veiled references to nuclear energy (the parallels between scream energy and nuclear are uncanny). Moreover, it's not at all a stretch to see the thinly veiled homosexual motif throughout the film. I mean, that's pretty easy considering the number of closets in the film.

Okay, so the film focuses on the cyclops Mike and the Big Blue Monster Sully. They currently hold the record for most scares and life is good for them. Then, one of Sully's competitors decides to commit fraud and in the process, contaminates the monster town with a human child. Human children are feared and - in the nuclear metaphor - viewed as a contaminant.

Sully ends up with the child and basically, the rest of the film is a confused chase around the monster town and the human world.

If you've seen Toy Story, you know the plot to Monsters, Inc. It's just different characters and minor variations on the theme. The problem is, the film doesn't know what it wants to be. One moment, it's adult with all sorts of intelligence as a metaphor for power, economics and gay rights issues. The next moment, it's a predictable plot with an infantile approach to the world.

I would suggest that there's too much in this to be truly enjoyable to little children. That is, the villainy of the villains in the film are based on economics, terms outside a child's understanding. Adults are likely to not enjoy the film as much for the predictable plot and infantile resolution. The film is probably ideal for younger teens as it lacks real character depth and lasting intelligence.

What is likely to be enjoyable to all is that the film is often funny. And the animation is incredible. The hair moves like hair on Sully, the bodies move like bodies. The computer animators at Pixar show a greater appreciation of How Things Work than most Disney films of late have shown.

The film is fun, but inconsistent in its ability to make commentary and when it fails to do that, it degenerates into something far more meaningful and, for those who like things to make sense, supposedly "fun."

For other Disney animated films, please visit my reviews of:
Tangled
Toy Story 3
A Christmas Carol
Up
The Incredibles
The Little Mermaid
Lady And The Tramp
Sleeping Beauty

6/10

For other film reviews, please check out my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.




| |