Shame on “Liz & Dick”

Shameful… There is no other word for it. The idea alone of Lindsay Lohan playing Liz Taylor was painful enough. Now we have pictures to deepen the wound. Not only is there no resemblance between the starlet and the legend, the vulgarity of Lohan is an insult to the beauty and class of the great Elizabeth. 
No matter how good the makeup (which is terrible by the way), no matter how good the costumes, this TV film is an insult to the memory of the greatest stars Hollywood ever had. Don’t even get me started on the choice of Grant Bowler to play Richard Burton. How can you hire average actors to play legends? Fortunately, this is Lifetime. So I can only hope that no one will watch this outrageous production. 
                              
                                 What is he doing, biting her? Is this another Twilight?

                                            
                                                     How can you compare that beauty…
lindsay lohan liz dick costume changes 00
…with THIS ?
This is just ridiculous.

Now let’s look at some real beauty, shall we?

           
Viddy Well. 
E.C
lire le billet

LES MISERABLES – TRAILER REVIEW

When I first was asked if I knew «Laymiz», I said no. It was only after I was explained the plot that I realized they were in fact talking about “Les miz.” short for: Les Misérables, and were refering to the stage musical adapted from this masterpiece of French literature. The stage musical was first produced in 1980 in Paris and directed by Robert Hossein. Alain Boublil and Jean-Marc Natel wrote the lyrics of the songs Claude-Michel Schönberg composed. Their translation to English by Herbert Kretmzer turned the musical into a worldwide success. The next natural step was to illustrate the saying “There’s no business like showbusiness”, and turn it into a movie. If you are French, you might be acquainted with the countless adaptations of the classic, both for television and cinema. This, however, is the first adaptation of the stage musical. Directed by Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech) and starring Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Amanda Seyfried and Sacha Baron Cohen. Here are a few scattered images from the trailer. This first glimpse only allows us to get a general idea of the indeed very 19th-century/ «Oliver Twist»-like photography. After the Susan Boyle phenomenon from Britain’s got talent, the trailer chooses, once again, to put the same song «I dreamed a dream» on the spotlight.  Does the movie come too late? Or will Anne Hathaway manage to give a new birth to the song and be believable as a tormented Fantine?
For my part, I have had a bit of an overdose, but I let you judge for yourself:
Viddy Well, 

E.D

lire le billet

News of the Week

Here’s the news we found interesting this week.



Drive will get a sequel
Looks like every kind of movie is getting a sequel these days. Just days after James Sallis, author of Drive,  released its sequel, Driven, he announced that a plan is being made to adapt that novel as well. In the sequel, the hero, using Paul West as a new identity, is living in Phoenix with his fiancée. But after an attack that leaves his girlfriend dead, violence reemerges. Nothing has been said whether or not both Winding Refn and Gosling would be back. But I doubt it could be otherwise.


Michael Emerson hired by Woody Allen

Nothing is known about Woody’s new project, as usual. But as always, there’s an incredible cast attached to it, the last member to join the club being the incredible Michael Emerson (Ben Linus in Lost). The rest of the cast includes Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin, Bradley Cooper, Sally Hawkins and Bobby Cannavale.
Michael Mann goes to Venice
The director will be President of the jury of the 69th International Venice Film Festival. These last few years, the festival has become the new “Cannes”, getting major quality pictures in competition. From Lust, Caution to La Graine et le mulet, Venice has managed to grab masterpieces that strangely didn’t make it in the Cannes competition. So this year, here are the films I hope we’ll see in Venice: The Master by Paul Thomas Anderson, Low Life by James Gray and To the Wonder by Terrence Malick.
The Master
Low Life
To the Wonder
David Cronenberg and his stars
David Cronenberg is hoping that his new project Map to the Stars will be his next film. He has apparently already gotten Robert Pattinson and Viggo Mortensen on board. The script tells the story of two former child stars destroyed by Hollywood. The film is described by Cronenberg as very “extreme”, ” difficult” and “satirical”. The director is hoping that this time he’ll get to film in the US as the Los Angeles setting is essential to the story. I hope that Cronenberg will manage to get this film done, because it sounds great!

Death of Kathryn Joosten
The actress whom we have had the pleasure to see in many TV shows, such as Desperate Housewives, which had won her two Emmys, The West Wing or Ally McBeal has died of lung cancer. She was 72.
Sad week for SNL
After the departure of the incredible Kristen Wiig, SNL is losing another of its great talents: Andy Samberg. Just the thought of not seeing anymore of Samberg’s great digital shorts makes me cry…

Viddy Well !

E.C

lire le billet

PROMETHEUS  – Did Scott lose the sacred fire?

Prometheus promised to be great and left me with a bitter taste of unfinished business. Not just because the ending could not be more explicit about a sequel, but because the content itself never truly came to honor the grandness of the title.
Reminder: Prometheus was the titan from Greek mythology who stole the sacred fire of divine knowledge to the Gods to give it to the mortals. He was then punished in return and condemned to be chained to a rock as an eagle ate his liver – the only organ in the human body that keeps growing back – for eternity.
Because we have watched the trailer and because we know the tagline to be ‘The search for our beginning could lead to our end’, it was naturally that we put two and two together to figure out this would be about humans wanting to know more than they are supposed to, and being punished for it. We even recall that legendary Alien scene where a lovely-looking E.T. violently exits John Hurt’s convulsing body while everybody around screams in sheer horror, and how it might all be linked with Prometheus’ punishment. And indeed, without revealing too much, there is a similar scene in Prometheus.

Prometheus, by Paul Rubens
John Hurt in Alien (1979)

The movie, who could have been titled «Alien Begins», proves that gut feeling to be right. We were hoping for another level of depth to appear in this outline at some point; psychologically and narratively, but this sadly never comes. 
Visually stunning, narratively uninspiring
The movie is very impressive visually, in terms of setting and special effects, Aliens are what we hoped them to be and more: perfectly disgusting. We did not expect any less from the creator of Alien. Less horror would have proven disappointing. Our heart races as the characters are being chased, we cringe in our seats when some of them die (spoiler? Not really), the surrounding sound and the 3D operate their magic on us: we experience it all with fearful delight – how could we not? We’re not cylons.
And yet. We cannot but be aware of what they are selling us: the movie borrows entire scenes, images and references to many sci-fi classics, to sometimes an indecent extent: 2001: A Space Odyssey being the most obvious one. Aesthetically first: when Michael Fassbender as the perfect robot walks around the ship in a similar fashion as the characters do in 2001. His name is David, his personality combines both that of Hal the endearing computer created by mankind and the character who embodies the human race ‘Dave’. The whole fourth dimension part from Kubrick’s classic clearly inspired the setting of the ship. Using Kubrick’s divine fire does not work here.
Followed by a character borrowed from Zemeckis’ Contact, adapted from Carl Sagan’s novel: a rich entrepreneur decides to finance a space expedition for personal health reasons. We also think of A.I. and their human looking robots. 
And perphaps this was the original idea: to combine many sci-fi references that worked successfully to create one great sci-fi epic. But despite a few interesting inventions, there is nothing really transcendentally new in the end, and that is where we are let down. A myth is supposed to be renewed, to leave wondering and to raise new questions. The only question we have at the end of the film is «When will Prometheus 2 be released?». Because we know for a fact it is coming.
We also regret the lack of depth of some characters; three of them are just there to fill the ship or to die first, because they are quite unfit to be a part of such an expedition. We even wonder how they got hired in the first place. When the time of their disappearance comes, we firmly believe they have been asking for it since the beginning of the film with a succession of simplistic dialogue. 
Noomi Rapace and Michael Fassbender hold the fire

Noomi Rapace is excellent as a new Ripley (same haircut as Sigourney Weaver, same tendency to walk around the ship in underwear). She is the only human worth saving.
The most interesting invention is perhaps that of Michael Fassbender’s character. An actor who continues to prove the length of his talent with this impressive performance as an un-feeling Nazi-looking robot. 

The opening of the film leaves us wanting for more, which leads us to this crucial point:


The problem of filiation
Unknown engineers created humans and humans created robots. An interesting start. When David the robot asks ‘why did you create us?’ to humans who couldn’t care less about their son, the answer they give is «Because we could». A little easy, but at that point we are already halfway through the movie and we just want answers, so we accept it. When humans realize their creators are not what they hoped them to be, we expect this revelation to be mirrored in their relationship with robots. Sons killing their creators to inherit their father’s power, the thirst for existencialist knowledge: all this is left entirely undevelopped. Even the whole religious dimension that is a backbone to the quest: who created us? Shaw’s character (Noomi Rapace) and her Christian beliefs, the Holy Father and the son, the holy cross, the notion of sin and redemption, pagans versus monotheistic believers, it is all present but dealt with superficially.
Granted that the screenwriter is no longer Dan O’Bannon, writer of Alien. Damon Lindelof creator of Lost (but also of Cowboys & Aliens…) wrote the script, which is rather puzzling. Scott and Lindelof seemed like a great match. In the end, this was good, but not enough. 

Viddy Well, 
E.D.
lire le billet

CLASSIC OF THE WEEK: AUDREY HEPBURN FILMS, PART II

 

A VERY PEPPY GIRL

Dick Avery (Fred Astaire) sang it right : “you fill the air with smiles, for miles and miles and miles”. Many directors saw in Audrey Hepburn a great capacity for comedy. Paris when it Sizzles, or My Fair Lady are examples among others of how lively Hepburn was. There was in her a mixture of an enormous love for life as well as an attraction for melancholy. None of them saw it better that Stanley Donen and Billy Wilder.
FUNNY FACE(1957) by Stanley Donen
This was Hepburn and Donen’s first collaboration. Hepburn was very enthusiastic about making her first musical and working with the legendary Fred Astaire. Unlike in My Fair Lady, she did her own singing in the film. Her excitement is palpable in many scenes, especially the one where she performs her contemporary dance. That scene is quite revealing about Hepburn’s acting: the joy we see in her character, the love for life, the generosity that exudes from her imperfect and amateur dance… She manages to equal Astaire in grace and lightness, when she was not a professional dancer. All of these qualities have now become inseparable from Audrey Hepburn. And Donen captured all of them in one beautiful sequence.

You can find a great deal of funny moments: the girls chasing Jo to transform her into the perfect model, the soirée with the master of Empathicalism (a formidable Michel Auclair). The romance between Avery and Jo allows Donen to film some splendid moments, thanks to the help of Richard Avedon, on whom the character of Avery is based on. Avedon did a lot of photography for the film, especially the portrait Avery is developing when he sings “Funny Face”. These romantic scenes also allow Donen to reveal Hepburn’s melancholy. Remember the Anna Karenina photo shoot when it turns out that Jo doesn’t need fake tears, she’s already crying: Jo has fallen in love with Avery.

Donen saw how thin the line was between Hepburn’s joy and her sadness: at the end, the tears of sorrow transform into tears of happiness in a split second. And we have exactly the same performance from Hepburn at the end of Love in the Afternoon, which she shot back-to-back with Funny Face.

LOVE IN THE AFTERNOON (1957) by Billy Wilder
For his second collaboration with Hepburn, Wilder did not repeat the same mistake he did with Sabrina. He found her a partner who, although much older (a recurrent event in Hepburn’s career, she was always paired with much older man), was her match. And finding your match is the whole point of Love in the Afternoon. As always with Billy Wilder, there’s a lot of laughter involved: recurring gags (the band playing “Fascination” every night), idiotic characters (the foolish husband)… There’s also the traditional opposition between the philanderer and the young ingénue. There again Wilder offers Hepburn much more than he did in Sabrina. Ariane is neither passive nor subdued. She beats Frank Flannagan at his own game. She makes him believe that she too has hundreds of suitors and that, just like him, she doesn’t get attached.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5a8pXMe23I

Hepburn as always displays her subtlety. What she hides from Flannagan, she lets the viewer see: how hurt she is when he fails to recognize her, her emotion when he announces his departure… Wilder exploits her peppiness as well: her imagination goes wild as she invents more and more crazy lovers to make the one she loves jealous. Love in the Afternoon is a beautiful romantic comedy that is far from being traditional.
CHARADE(1963) by Stanley Donen
Who in all Hollywood had the same reputation for class, seduction and handsomeness as Hepburn? Many times, directors had tried to reunite Hepburn with Cary Grant. And Stanley Donen was the only one who succeeded, offering us one of the best onscreen couples ever. Donen escapes the traditional love story by turning the female character, Regina Lampert, into the predator. She’s the one who constantly pursues Cary Grant’s character with ardor. She tricks him into going into her bedroom at night and kisses him whenever she can. The suspense of the film is very well crafted, and the twists very amusing and witty. It allows Hepburn to play on different levels: fear, suspicion, love… Donen’s clever move is to make of Regina a strong woman, thus contrasting with Hepburn’s frailty. Regina is stubborn and very independent
. The thriller aspect of the film was so well done that when it was released, many people thought that Hitchcock had directed the film thus leading to the film’s famous nickname: “the best Hitchcock film that Hitchcock never made”.

Viddy Well and see you next week for the final part of Audrey Hepburn’s films.

E.C

lire le billet

DOWNTON SIXBEY PART 1: episodes 1 and 2.

For those of you who are now familiar with the period drama Downton Abbey, you will not have to wait for next season of this successful British series to get a glimpse of the (sometimes soapy) atmosphere we love.

An excellent parody has been released from the Jimmy Fallon’s Late Night show. Downton Sixbey, entitled after Studio 6B hosting the show, is a 6 episode dose of delight. All the characters are brought back to life with an uncanny resemblance…
Without further ado, here are the 2 first episodes. Episode 1 sets the mood, episode 2 truly takes off with Whoopi Goldberg as a guest star. Remember her performance as Queen Elizabeth at the Oscars… period drama suits her well!
Enjoy,
Viddy Well

E.D

lire le billet

THE NEWS!

‘The Silence of the Lambs’ is back… on TV

After more than ten years after the release of the film in 2001, NBC is to release Hannibal later this year, as a 13-episode series. The drama will be based on Thomas Harris’ novel The Silence of the Lambs, but will focus on Dr Lecter’s relationship with FBI profiler Will Graham, who will be played by Hugh Dancy. Lovely Clarice will not be a part of the adventure for this adapation. 
However, Lifetime is in preparation of its own series produced by MGM. Clarice will focus on Clarice Starling’s character, possibly on her childhood after her father got killed and her debut at the FBI academy. Who will replace oscar winner Jodie Foster for this role? We don’t know yet. Hopefully more news on casting will follow soon.
So, «Have the lambs stopped screaming, Clarice?» I guess not…

Harrison Ford in the Blade Runner’s sequel

Rumors have been confirmed, Ridley Scott wants Harrison Ford to be a part of the Blade Runner sequel, but not as the lead. The director reported to the U.K.’s Independent: ‘I don’t think it’ll be Harry (starring),… But I’ve got to have him in it somewhere. That’d be amusing.’
Les Misérables

New pictures from Tom Hooper’s film adaptation of Les Misérables, starring Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean, Russel Crowe as Javert and Anne Hathaway as Fantine, Cosette’s mother, who is forced to work as a prostitute to provide for her daughter. The film is a musical adaptation of Victor Hugo’s masterpiece, very much in the spirit of the stage musical apparently.
We have heard Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway sing before when they were hosting the Academy Awards, Russel Crowe however has yet to prove his musical talents!
Let us also hope that the film will be of the same quality as the director’s previously acclaimed film The King’s Speech.

‘Django Unchained’: more, more, more!

For those who intend to go see Ridley Scott’s Prometheus, here is a new incentive – if you ever needed one – to do so in hurry: The trailer for Tarantino’s Django Unchained will be released before the opening of the movie.
New images have also just been released:




Viddy Well, 


E.D.
lire le billet

COSMOPOLIS: CRONENBERG RÉINVENTE LE VAMPIRE

David Cronenberg adapte Don DeLillo et livre un film d’une splendeur et d’une virtuosité incontestables. Je voudrais juste parler de ma vision du film sous un angle assez spécifique. Car ce qui m’a frappé en voyant Cosmopolis, c’est la manière dont Cronenberg réinvente le mythe du vampire et l’adapte au XXIème siècle.
 

« Un rat devint l’unité d’échange » : quand le capitalisme remplace la peste.
C’est à la peste que l’on doit le mythe du vampire. Des malades que l’on croyait morts étaient enterrés vivants, et finissaient par ressurgir de leurs tombes. Ces « morts-vivants » représentaient alors une menace terrible pour le reste de la population puisqu’ils portaient en eux la Mort Noire. C’est grâce à ses compagnons les rats, et à son sang contaminé, que Nosferatu dissémine la peste dans le film de Murnau, comme dans son remake par Herzog. Cosmopolis s’ouvre sur cette phrase : « Un rat devint l’unité d’échange ». La peste du XXIème siècle, c’est l’argent ; le capitalisme, ce spectre qui hante le monde. On le voit bien dans le film : les rats sont partout. On les brandit dans les lieux publics, provoquant la peur dans la foule. Les rats sont là, et ils vont semer la mort. Face à la peur des autres, Eric Packer, lui, rit. Car c’est lui l’ingénieur de cette épidémie, lui qui suit le cours de la bourse à chaque seconde, qui provoque cette cassure au sein de la population. Des émeutes éclatent : l’épidémie a bien commencé puisque l’anarchie s’installe. L’apocalypse peut désormais se produire. Des gens s’immolent, d’autres ont le visage défiguré par la haine. L’argent a contaminé tout le monde d’une manière ou d’une autre. La mort rôde : le président est en ville, on a peur d’un assassinat. Un rappeur est mort, ces obsèques font le tour de la ville. Et Eric, lui, attend la mort : chaque jour, dans sa limousine, son médecin vient l’examiner. Il ne cherche pas à vérifier qu’il est en bonne santé, bien au contraire : il attend avec impatience qu’on lui annonce une anomalie interne, quelque chose qui viendrait ronger ses entrailles. Eric veut en finir, mais ne sait comment faire puisqu’ il est déjà mort.
Dracula du XXIème siècle.
Robert Pattinson n’est pas là par hasard. Il est aux yeux du monde entier, l’incarnation du vampire. Alors Cronenberg le choisit pour incarner sa version du vampire moderne et permet ainsi à l’acteur de renaître de ses cendres. Si Edward Cullen est un faux vampire, Eric Packer, lui, en est bien un. Dans la ville, il circule dans sa limousine-cercueil, ses lunettes noires le protégeant d’un soleil néfaste. Il est blanc comme la mort. Son cœur bat d’un rythme trop régulier, trop artificiel. Il parle continuellement, analyse, explique chacun de ces gestes comme un robot. Eric n’a pas d’âme, pas de conscience. Le spectre, c’est lui. De sa fenêtre, il observe ce qui se passe au dehors et ne réagit pas. Ni contentement, ni culpabilité d’avoir mis la ville à feu et à sang. Lorsqu’il tue brusquement son garde du corps, Eric se teste : peut-il encore ressentir quelque chose d’humain ? La réponse est non, bien évidemment. La disparition de celui qui jusque là était son ombre ne lui fait aucun effet. Eric a l’instinct de l’animal, un instinct de tueur. Comme Dracula se nourrit de sang, Eric se nourrit du chaos. La violence fait partie de son monde, elle est inscrite au plus profond de lui-même. C’est pourquoi il parvient à lire l’histoire derrière l’œil torturé de son chauffeur. On se souvient de Joey, incarnation du mal, dans A History of Violence, qui avait ainsi martyrisé l’œil d’un homme avec un fil de fer. On le voit également dans sa relation au sexe, machinale, animale, qui ne lui procure aucun plaisir. Chaque femme qu’il rencontre – à l’exception de son épouse  – sera consommée. Mais aucune n’apporte sens ou sensation. Lorsqu’il couche avec sa garde du corps, Eric reste insatisfait et lui demande de lui donner une décharge avec son Taser. La douleur, la sienne, semble être tout ce qu’il lui reste. Eric rejoint également Dracula dans ce qu’il a d’aristocratique. Eric est riche, possède deux ascenseurs parmi un nombre incalculable d’objets. En bon aristocrate, il s’intéresse à l’art. Et veut acheter La Chapelle de Rothko. Toute La Chapelle dit-il. Et pourtant cette acquisition lui est refusée. Car Eric fait partie des damnés. Il est un vampire, un monstre. Sa chute est éternelle, et le paradis lui est refusé.
Le sang et la mort
C’est cette damnation, cette vie de mort éternelle qu’Eric cherche à fuir. Il roule continuellement dans sa limousine, espérant un jour arriver au cimetière. Très vite, il semble que seules deux choses peuvent l’amener au salut. La première : sa femme, Elise. La beauté pure de Sarah Gadon est éloquente : cette femme se refuse aux choses terrestres. Elle semble jeûner quand Eric dévore, se réfugie dans une bibliothèque pleine de vieux livres quand Eric a les yeux rivés sur ses écrans. Elise, comme la Mina de Dracula, représente l’innocence incorruptible. Et ce à quoi Eric ne pourra jamais accéder. La scène de la bibliothèque est en ce sens prodigieuse. Alors que le monde mis en scène par Cronenberg est un monde de science-fiction aux couleurs sombres et froides, le réalisateur nous propulse soudainement dans le monde d’autrefois, où la littérature est à l’honneur. Les couleurs y sont chaudes et rassurantes. Elise paraît enfin à sa place tandis qu’Eric se démarque par son allure de businessman. Elise n’est donc pas la solution, il faudra chercher ailleurs.
Eric ne s’éveille réellement que lorsque la menace contre lui se fait plus précise. Il sait que la mort vient, et souhaite aller à sa rencontre. Exit le garde du corps, qui aurait tué l’assassin. Exit l’arme monstrueuse du futur : Eric ne fera mine de se défendre qu’avec un vieux pistolet. Alors vient le face à face avec son Van Helsing : Benno Levin. La confrontation, qui dure 20 minutes, est éblouissante. Les deux personnages philosophent sur ce qui fait l’humain et ce qui crée la violence. Les deux acteurs livrent des performances inoubliables. Paul Giamatti crée un personnage à l’humanité déchirante et à la folie inquiétante. Benno, lui aussi, est contaminé (comme le suggère la serviette qu’il garde en permanence sur la tête). Et pour sur
vivre, pour se sauver, il doit tuer l’origine du mal, le spectre qui hante le monde, le capitalisme : Eric Packer. Robert Pattison est subjuguant de justesse. Après une première partie robotique, il nous dévoile l’humanité du monstre. Comme on empale et décapite un vampire pour l’exterminer, il faut que la mort de Packer, et son retour à l’humanité, passe par la violence physique. Afin d’en être certain, Packer se tire une balle dans la main, hurle de douleur. Le voilà à nouveau homme et mortel. Sa main trouée, comme un stigmate. « The Blood is the Life » : phrase à deux sens. Le sang est la mort de l’homme et la vie du vampire. Mais le sang fait aussi partie de l’imagerie chrétienne : c’est par son sang que le Christ apporte le salut. C’est le sang du Christ que le chrétien boit lors de l’Eucharistie. Dracula, véritable antéchrist, doit aussi verser son sang pour que l’humanité survive. Le sang que doit verser Packer, et que l’on ne verra pas, lui permet d’obtenir ce qu’il a si longuement cherché : la mort, et à travers elle, son humanité. La dernière image du film est celle d’Eric, les yeux ouverts, les larmes coulant sur son visage. Des larmes de bonheur, car il n’a plus à attendre. La mort, « clarté vibrante de [son] horizon noir », est là. 
Viddy Well.
E.C

lire le billet

PALMARÈS DU FESTIVAL DE CANNES 2012

Voici le palmarès du jury du Festival de Cannes, présidé par Nanni Moretti.

Prix du court-métrage: Sessiz-Be Deng de  L. Rezan Yesilbas

Caméra d’Or: Beasts of the Southern Wild de Benh Zeitlin

Prix du Jury: The Angels’ Share, de Ken Loach

Prix du scénario: Aù delà des collines de Cristian Mungiu

Prix de la mise en scène: Post Tenebras Lux, Carlos Reygadas

Prix d’interprétation masculine: Mads Mikkelsen pour La Chasse de Thomas Vinterberg

Prix d’interprétation féminine: Cosmina Stratan et Cristina Flutur pour Au-delà des collines de Cristian Mungiu.

Grand Prix: Reality de Matteo Garrone

Palme d’Or: Amour de Michael Haneke

Heureusement que la palme est allée à Michael Haneke. Le reste me laisse un peu perplexe. J’aurais aimé un prix pour Thomas Bidegain, scénariste de De Rouille et d’Os de Jaques Audiard. Et un prix important à l’incompris Cosmopolis de David Cronenberg. Que le jury n’ait pas remis un double prix d’interprétation à Jean-Louis Trintignant et Emmanuelle Riva me semble assez honteux. Leur remettre un prix en les distinguant séparément aurait marqué l’histoire.

Palmarès décevant, en ce qui me concerne. Heureusement que la palme a été décernée à un aussi grand cinéaste.

Viddy Well

E.C

lire le billet

ON THE ROAD… Looking for Dean Moriarty.


It was with great anticipation that most of us rushed to the theater to see Kerouac’s classic brought to the screen. And as the first images appeared along with Sam Riley’s voiceover, the hope that it would meet our expectations hung still. Does the movie have it?
But soon the realization that there was something lacking from the succession of first sequences came as a bold evidence. What of the beat? What of the fever? There is no fleeting madness in this form, especially in the first part of the film. While the content of the book is there, the spirit is lacking. Walter Salles delivers a movie that is faithful to his body of work with well-established shots and matching cinematography, but which distances itself from Jack Karouac’s masterpiece.
Many pointed at the inadaptability of the book in terms of structure, saying that it is inherently literary and does not work cinematically. And truly, the text is a constant back and forth between places, with inumerable flashbacks, no beginning, no middle nor end as such, no climax, but a force that drives the story forward: that of Kerouac’s, who wrote his story in one breath, in the incredibly short and quite extraordinary amount of time of three weeks. The structure of the novel mainly revolves around the importance of Dean Moriarty’s character, a central figure that turns out to be greatly altered in the film.
Dean is wild, Dean drinks, he sleeps with men and women, Dean is on drugs for fun. Dean says “I don’t know what’s wrong with me. I do all these dumb things; think in all these distored ways“. But we never really see it. Why does he do it? Why is everyone so fascinated with him? Kerouac’s Dean is on the edge of everything, on the edge of reason, he mumbles his rambling thoughts, he is feverish even when he is not on drugs, he is looking for a truth through experience, he is looking for it, a meaning for life, for his existence. He looks for it through sex, drugs, jazz, travel, passionate friendship, and cruel distanciation from others. But unlike in the film, those are not the end, they are vessels for Dean’s quest for truth. And he fascinates everyone because it seems that sometimes, when he is being Dean Moriarty, he sees it, he sees a glimpse of truth and they are fascinated by the possibility that Dean Moriarty, that crazy, restless character, might actually be right. And that is why they follow him: because they too, want to experience it. Dean Moriarty is the force that pulls the narrative forward, he makes Sal Paradise leave and explore. In the movie, Dean Moriarty is just wandering aimlessly, he has no it, no purpose.

The other characters however are portrayed quite faithfully: Kirsten Dunst as sweet Camille, Sam Riley’s voice highlights the beauty of the text, Tom Sturridge as Carlo Marx turns out to be an interesting revelation, adding a depth to his character that we find lacking in others. Kristen Stewart as a 16-year old Marylou proves surprisingly believable in this difficult part. She is probably the one that conveys the best the ambivalence of her feelings towards Dean, between fascination and hatred, with one beautiful shot of her in the car on the verge of crying. Garrett Hedlund only reaches the potential his character could have had from the sequences in Mexico to the very end. The script did not allow the Dean Moriarty in him to reveal himself sooner. 
The «unsaid» dimension of the novel is absent. The silence between the lines, what Kerouac voluntarily skips, the fascination Sal Paradise has for Dean, the subtext of homosexuality, their common quest for the loss of their father – everything is visually or verbally explicit in the film. It could have been otherwise. 
Dean Moriarty is no longer the backbone to the structure in the film while he carried the spirit of this inspiring book. It is perhaps why in the end it feels so right when Sal Paradise starts typing: «I first met Dean not long after my father died». A sentence that lingers long after the movie ends, along with Sam Riley’s voiceover when he utters the almost mystical last words: «Dean Moriarty, Dean Moriarty, Dean Mo-ri-arty». 

Viddy Well, 

E.D.

lire le billet