The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button movie poster

 

This Dork Reporter is slowly cool­ing on for­mer favorite David Fincher. His under­rated first fea­ture Alien3 is highly com­pro­mised, but eas­ily the next most the­mat­i­cally inter­est­ing entry in the Alien fran­chise (after, of course, Rid­ley Scott’s rich orig­i­nal). Se7en is one of the most gut-wrenchingly dis­turb­ing movies ever made, notable for hav­ing vir­tu­ally no vio­lence appear onscreen, despite its rep­u­ta­tion. Fight Club is per­haps the movie of the nineties, an eccen­tric blast of coun­ter­cul­tural fury. But almost every­thing that fol­lowed seemed a dis­ap­point­ment. The Game was wildly implau­si­ble with­out the pop and siz­zle that car­ried the sim­i­larly over-the-top Fight Club. Panic Room was an empty exer­cise in style, seem­ingly con­ceived solely for Fincher to exper­i­ment with new dig­i­tal tech­niques that would allow him to cre­ate impos­si­bly con­tin­u­ous cam­era moves through the walls and floors of a city brown­stone (and pos­si­bly also as another vehi­cle for star Jodie Foster’s per­sona as a sin­gle par­ent to be reck­oned with). Zodiac was highly praised both as a tight pro­ce­dural thriller and as a tour-de-force of still more bleeding-edge dig­i­tal spe­cial effects (so good that most view­ers wouldn’t sus­pect that many sequences were not tra­di­tion­ally shot in cam­era), but it did absolutely noth­ing for me. I’m won­der­ing if I missed some key aspect of it that would open it up to me — and that per­haps I should reap­praise it now that a director’s cut is avail­able on DVD.

Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonYou’re only as old as you feel

The advance mar­ket­ing for The Curi­ous Case of Ben­jamin But­ton excited me at first, but I was appre­hen­sive when I learned the screen­play (loosely based on a 1921 short story by F. Scott Fitzger­ald) was by Eric Roth, the writer of For­rest Gump. Indeed, it did turn out to be con­structed in a sim­i­lar vein and tone, even mim­ic­k­ing some of the corni­est devices of Gump: the famous dig­i­tal feather twirling in the wind has been replaced by an unlikely reap­pear­ing hum­ming­bird; Forrest’s mother’s apho­rism “life is like a box of choco­lates; you never know what you’re going to get” has its ana­log in the less mem­o­rable “you never know what’s com­ing for you”; even For­rest Gump’s parade of cameos by famous or infa­mous Amer­i­cans is here con­tin­ued with an appear­ance by Teddy Roo­sevelt. Against my will, this cutesi­ness did suc­ceed in draw­ing me in for most of its run­ning time. I was engrossed for much of it, but its leisurely three-hour run­ning time hon­estly strained my patience by about the two-hour mark.

Fincher and Roth relate the decades-long story via the fram­ing device of Benjamin’s (Brad Pitt) one true love Daisy (Cate Blanchett) on her deathbed, intro­duc­ing her adult daugh­ter Car­o­line (Julia Ormond) to her bio­log­i­cal father through a dra­matic read­ing of his diary, with gaps filled in from her own mem­ory. A soon-to-be infa­mous hur­ri­cane brews out­side the Louisiana hos­pi­tal room, shortly to erase much of Ben­jamin and Daisy’s milieu. The mul­ti­ple lay­ers of sto­ry­telling result is no less than three speak­ing voices to nar­rate the tale in voiceover. One fram­ing device too far?

Cate Blanchett in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonCate Blanchett is a beau­ti­ful woman, but it’s eerie to see her appear to be in her 20s

The cen­tral con­ceit of the story is a fan­tas­ti­cally unfor­tu­nate dis­ease that afflicts one Ben­jamin But­ton. His body is born aged and decrepit, and ages back­wards while his mind matures nor­mally. As he aptly puts it when still a boy, he was “born old.” Tak­ing this story as any­thing other than a para­ble or fairy tale would be to miss the point, but the pho­to­re­al­is­tic spe­cial effects place the movie firmly in believ­able real­ity. So this viewer’s mind (when not dis­tracted by the high-tech visu­als) wan­dered into logis­tics. Some of the rules don’t seem to hold up: as a chrono­log­i­cal ado­les­cent, he man­i­fests the typ­i­cal sex­ual desires and self-centeredness. But his aged body strangely has the phys­i­cal fit­ness and stamina/potency to act them out (we see him preen­ing in front of a mir­ror, seem­ingly only aged from the neck up). Also, pre­sum­ably, Ben­jamin can be assured to die when his body regresses to infancy. So, given his phys­i­cal state at birth, is his death date pre-ordained? If he had been born with an infan­tilized body of a 20-year old, could he have been assured of only hav­ing two decades to live? Is he imper­vi­ous to harm? Indeed, he some­how man­ages to sur­vive being stepped on as a new­born, and later, is one of the few sur­vivors of a Ger­man sub­ma­rine attack on an out­classed tug­boat dur­ing World War II.

Ben­jamin is adopted by Quee­nie (Taraji P. Hen­son), an unfor­tu­nately stereo­typ­i­cal African Amer­i­can char­ac­ter, and spends his youth and old age (and vice versa!) at the nurs­ing home she man­ages. There, he meets his one true love Daisy, the niece of one of the ten­ants. Benjamin’s curi­ous con­di­tion pre­vents him from hav­ing any kind of nor­mal friend­ship or rela­tion­ship with her, so he leaves home to find his way in the world. He has his first seri­ous rela­tion­ship with Eliz­a­beth Abbott (Tilda Swin­ton), an older woman who thinks she’s younger than him (later, we learn that meet­ing him helped her change her life). Even­tu­ally, Ben­jamin and Daisy do meet at roughly the same phys­i­cal age and con­sum­mate their mutual love. When Daisy quite rightly asks Ben­jamin if he will still love her when she’s old and wrinkly, he jok­ingly turns it around and asks if she will still love him when he has acne. But what first amuses even­tu­ally comes back around to become one of the most painfully emo­tional sequences in the whole movie: Ben­jamin does after all regress into senil­ity (or per­haps even Alzheimer’s, before it was iden­ti­fied), trapped in the body of a pim­ply teenager. As always, the point is that the bell curve of a human life can be seen as a mir­ror image of itself: here, the impetu­ous­ness, aggres­sion, and mood swings of senil­ity are equated with the tumult of ado­les­cence. Like­wise, extreme youth and old age both are char­ac­ter­ized as the ulti­mate states of depen­dence and vulnerability.

Tilda Swinton in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonTilda Swin­ton as Benjamin’s first lover, an older woman whom he allows to believe is younger

The spe­cial effects that allow an aged ver­sion of Pitt’s face to be super­im­posed over another, diminu­tive actor are light years in advance of the still-creepy dig­i­tal roto­scop­ing ani­ma­tion style used in Robert Zemeckis’ The Polar Express and Beowulf (although the lat­ter is an excel­lent film in spite of the inef­fec­tive effects). But no mat­ter how eerily fluid and seam­less the effects, I could not shake the feel­ing that I was watch­ing some­thing largely actu­al­ized by ani­ma­tors equipped with a giant com­puter server farm. These obvi­ously cut­ting edge tech­niques are more com­pre­hen­si­ble to me than what­ever the makeup and/or CG wiz­ards did to make 44-year-old Pitt and the 39 Blanchett appear to be in their smooth-skinned and limber-limbed 20s. Also, it must be said that an arti­fi­cially aged Pitt in his hypo­thet­i­cal 50s and 60s is a dead ringer for Robert Redford.

There must be some­thing in the bot­tled water film­mak­ers have been drink­ing recently, for I’ve noticed a decided trend towards movies about aging recently. Sarah Polley’s Away From Her (read The Dork Report review) and Tamara Jenkin’s The Sav­ages (read The Dork Report review) both look at the senil­ity than often comes at the end of life, and how it may affect the lives of those still liv­ing, for bet­ter or for worse. But another pair of movies dealt with mor­tal­ity and the fear of unfin­ished busi­ness through the lens of fan­tasy: Fran­cis Ford Coppola’s Youth With­out Youth (read The Dork Report review) and Char­lie Kaufman’s Synec­doche, New York (read The Dork Report review). All of these movies tap into most people’s fear of aging: not only of los­ing phys­i­cal health and thus inde­pen­dence, but also of the reli­a­bil­ity of one’s own mind.


Offi­cial movie site: www.benjaminbutton.com

Buy the Cri­te­rion Col­lec­tion Blu-ray or DVD from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report.


Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading

 

Although every Coen Broth­ers film is unmis­tak­ably theirs alone (can the Auteur The­ory apply to more than one per­son at once?), Joel and Ethan have a rep­u­ta­tion for rarely mak­ing the films audi­ences want or expect from them at any given time. After Fargo, when every­body wanted another snowy mid­west­ern noir, Joel and Ethan gave the world The Big Lebowski instead (read The Dork Report Review). After a recent string of genre exper­i­ments like the Hep­burn & Tracy-esque roman­tic com­edy Intol­er­a­ble Cru­elty and a remake of Eal­ing com­edy The Ladykillers, the Coens sur­prised every­body yet again with the dead-serious nail­biter No Coun­try for Old Men. And, per­haps because they just can’t help them­selves, they give us whiplash all over again with Burn After Reading.

George Clooney and Francis McDormand in Burn After ReadingClooney and McDor­mand give this movie two thumbs up

Osten­si­bly another caper com­edy like The Big Lebowsi, Burn After Read­ing is actu­ally more amus­ing than hilar­i­ous. The char­ac­ters are a pecu­liar kind of stu­pid com­mon in Coen films: unaware of their lim­i­ta­tions, yet mani­a­cally dri­ven. But the mis­chie­vous Coens under­mine the light enter­tain­ment value of the film by punc­tu­at­ing the con­vo­luted noirish plot and seem­ingly light tone with scenes of extreme violence.

Burn After ReadingJohn Mal­covich being John Malcovich

At the time, The Big Lebowski fea­tured many of the Coens’ reper­tory play­ers (John Good­man, Steve Buscemi, John Tur­turro). In con­trast, Burn After Read­ing sports the mar­quee names Clooney and Pitt, per­haps giv­ing it more atten­tion than it can hold. But its biggest hin­drance to join­ing the ranks of the best of the Coen Broth­ers is that it lacks a highly mem­o­rable (and quotable) char­ac­ter like H.I, Marge, or The Dude.

Burn After ReadingBrad Pitt is in pos­ses­sion of, as they say in movies like this, cer­tain documents

Offi­cial movie site: www.burnafterreading.com


The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

 

Had I seen The Assas­si­na­tion of Jesse James by the Cow­ard Robert Ford ear­lier, I might have included it among my Most Dis­ap­point­ing Films of 2007. Cer­tainly not because it’s “bad,” for could I make a bet­ter movie myself? Could I make a movie at all? And who appointed me a critic, any­way? But this blog is about my per­sonal reac­tions to movies, so here goes. Assas­si­na­tion was praised to the high heav­ens by pub­li­ca­tions includ­ing Dork Report favorite Sight & Sound, so I had expected it to be one of the year’s gems. And indeed, the act­ing is excel­lent and the cin­e­matog­ra­phy breath­tak­ing. But I would describe the movie as “nov­el­is­tic,” not nec­es­sar­ily a good thing with cin­ema, as opposed to, you know, novels.

Assas­si­na­tion no doubt inher­ited its notably slow pace (not a prob­lem for me) from its source mate­r­ial, the novel by Ron Hansen. I haven’t read it, but I sus­pect my own chief com­plaint like­wise derives from the book: the omni­scient nar­ra­tion. I’m not one that thinks voiceover nar­ra­tion is a screenwriter’s crutch to be avoided at all costs, but there are two extremes in which it can be mis­used: to redun­dantly expli­cate the action seen on screen or to impart infor­ma­tion bet­ter shown that told. The Assas­si­na­tion of Jesse James does both. I wish I had made a note of an exam­ple or two, but there are numer­ous instances of nar­ra­tion that could sim­ply have been cut for not adding any­thing to what we’re watch­ing onscreen at the moment. But on the oppo­site end of the spec­trum, one of the most sig­nif­i­cant events of the story, Ford’s ulti­mate dis­il­lu­sion­ment with James and deci­sion to betray him to the law, hap­pens off­screen and is offhand­edly recounted by the nar­ra­tor. Ford approach­ing the author­i­ties to become a crim­i­nal infor­mant would have made for a dra­matic scene.

Brad Pitt in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert FordThrough amber fields of grain

Although the pair­ing is not quite fair, I am I huge fan of the HBO series Dead­wood and couldn’t help but com­pare the two in my head. Please set aside for a moment the only roughly related set­tings (Dead­wood is set in 1870s South Dakota, and Assas­si­na­tion in 1882 Mis­souri) and bear with me for a moment. Most obvi­ously, actor Gar­ret Dil­lahunt appears in both. Dil­lahunt may have been type­cast as a 19th Cen­tury sort, but his char­ac­ters could not be more dif­fer­ent. The Fran­cis Wol­cott of Dead­wood is an edu­cated, urbane, and yet dan­ger­ously per­verted early Mas­ter of the Uni­verse, a far cry from the sui­ci­dally igno­rant Ed Miller in Assas­si­na­tion. But where the two diverge, and Dead­wood cer­tainly pre­vails, is the dia­logue. David Milch’s script­ing is the kind of aston­ish­ingly pro­fane poetry that might result when char­ac­ters with Vic­to­rian edu­ca­tions find them­selves liv­ing in the ass-end of the world. I found myself spoiled by my mem­o­ries of the prematurely-cancelled Dead­wood, and wished Assas­si­na­tion had a lit­tle more of its poetry.

But enough grip­ing — time for the praise! Roger Deakin’s cin­e­matog­ra­phy is deli­cious, full of warm oranges and deep unbro­ken fields of black. A notable visual effect used to open new chap­ters in the story is a nar­row field of focus with a blurry halo, sug­gest­ing old daguer­rotypes (sim­i­lar to what I’ve seen recently in The Illu­sion­ist). Dork Report guest critic Snark­bait chris­tened the effect “Ye Old Timey Fil­ter No. 4,” but accord­ing to an inter­view with Deakins in Amer­i­can Cin­e­matog­ra­pher, the fil­ter is his own inven­tion and appro­pri­ately called the Deakinizer.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert FordThe James Gang in hap­pier days

There is fine act­ing all around, and two fun cameos from James Carville and Nick Cave (who cowrote the film’s music). Casey Affleck rounds out an excel­lent year in his career after Gone Baby Gone with a great per­for­mance as Robert Ford, obvi­ously not billed above Brad Pitt but arguably the main char­ac­ter. Sam Rock­well (as Charley Ford) is espe­cially great near the end of the film, as his simple-minded char­ac­ter trag­i­cally breaks down. Pitt makes a charm­ing and earthy, yet plainly socio­pathic Jesse James. James’ curse is that he’s always the smartest man in the room, but one need only wit­ness the par­tic­u­larly unhinged laugh Pitt gives him to see how lunatic and crim­i­nal the man actu­ally is.

I lied, one more com­plaint: Mary-Louise Parker & Zooey Deschanel, both fine, name actors, appear in minia­ture roles with min­i­mal dia­logue. Per­haps their char­ac­ters were sim­i­larly minor in the orig­i­nal novel, but they seem under­served in the film. Per­haps the female pres­ence in the actual lives of these his­tor­i­cal fig­ures was not sig­nif­i­cant, but to return to Dead­wood for a moment, Dead­wood repeat­edly proved it is not his­tor­i­cal revi­sion­ism to include women in a modern-day por­trait of a bygone era.


Offi­cial movie site: jessejamesmovie.warnerbros.com

Buy the DVD from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report.