MOVIE OF THE WEEK (7/11/14): THIRD PERSON
WATCH THE TRAILER HERE:
KEY CAST MEMBERS: Olivia Wilde, Liam Neeson, Mila Kunis, James Franco, Adrien Brody, Maria Bello, Moran Atias, Riccardo Scamarcio, Kim Basinger, Loan Chabanol and Vinicio Marchioni
WRITER(S): Paul Haggis
DIRECTOR(S): Paul Haggis
WEB SITE: http://www.sonyclassics.com/thirdperson/60 SECOND PLOT SYNOPSIS (OR AS CLOSE TO IT AS ONE CAN TRY TO MAKE): Following the format of the Academy Award-winning Crash, writer/director Paul Haggis' biggest movie to date, Third Person interweaves three stories simultaneously as it looks at the ideas of loss, love, redemption and second chances.
Michael (Liam Neeson) is a Pulitzer Prize winning writer who's taken up temporary residence in a fancy Paris hotel so he can finish his next book and be with his lover Anna (Olivia Wilde), an unrestrained journalist and aspiring writer herself. That, unfortunately, is not good news for Michael's estranged wife (Kim Basinger) ... But given that Anna is receiving texts from another man as soon as she gets to town, her presence might not be great for Michael, either ...
Meanwhile, in Rome, Scott (Adrien Brody) is conducting his potentially illegal business and enjoying his life. That is until he stumbles into the ironically-as-it-ends-up-named "Café Americano"and discovers Monika (Moran Atias), an alluring, mysterious woman who is more concerned about getting her daughter back from a smuggler than meeting him. Neither Scott nor Michael has things going as rough as Julia (Mila Kunis), however, who is locked into a desperate struggle to regain visitation rights to see her son Jesse (Oliver Crouch). But given the nearly fatal incident that happened on her watch, Jesse's father (James Franco) is not as keen on the idea as is Julia's lawyer (Maria Bello) ... Then again, Julia's penchant for always messing things up at the most critical time isn't helping her own case.
WHO WILL LIKE THIS FILM THE MOST?: Paul Haggis fans, Olivia Wilde fans, anyone who still believes Crash deserved all of the Academy Awards it won
WHO WON'T – OR SHOULDN'T – LIKE THIS FILM?: Everyone who hated Crash, people who hate sappy/confusing/artful dramas where there is nothing beneath its superficial surface
BOTTOM LINE – IS IT GOOD, GREAT, BAD OR DOWNRIGHT AWFUL? Awful. AWFUL. And as someone who used to like the movie Crash, I feel indirectly responsible for allowing this to exist and now, much like Haggis needs to as a filmmaker, need to pay retribution for my previous error in judgment.
WHAT'S GOOD (OR BAD) ABOUT IT? Crash, in case you didn't know, is one of the most controversial Oscar-winning films of the last 10 years. Just do a Google search for the phrase "crash movie criticism" and you'll see more than enough results to let you know not everyone was on board with the Academy's decision way back in 2005. People felt the film was highly contrived, the incidents depicted were a bit too perfect in terms of the awful nature of their events and in other cases, many just felt it was a well-intended mess where the audience is told "see, this is bad" in no uncertain terms just in case they might somehow miss the message. (And boy, is Crash filled with messages.)
As someone who found the film a good watch at the time, however, I was willing to overlook those factors because of the good job that film's cast did at selling the story. It is impossible, however, to do that with Third Person because of its self-indulgent, striving to be more than it is nature and the nonsensical, ridiculous actions of its characters. While some of this was evident in Crash, the prevalence of it in Third Person – conducted in a manner that almost feels as if trying to up the ante and enhance the drama – makes the film at varying points silly and devoid of any realism or connection to the characters. In fact, the viewer is much more likely to have nothing but disdain and scorn for the characters based on their actions, almost all of which are either so blatantly self-destructive or asinine that no other reaction would make sense. While Kunis is the only actor whose character's actions can be somewhat understood and sympathized with, the overwrought nature in which her plight is depicted is so heavy handed you become numb to the situation.
In fact, none of the actors are really the problem with Third Person; it's writer/director Haggis. Story-wise, his clichéd from start to finish silly romance between Brody and Atias is just plain pititful and the daddy-issues character he saddles Wilde – who as an actress does a great job with in showing her actual acting prowess – ends up becoming unbelievable thanks to a twist which does more to destroy her character than build it.
The underdeveloped, clichéd tales are only problem with Third Person, though, as Haggis' love for interweaving them weakens the film even further as his "these stories are connected ... or are they?" presentation at best come off as unnecessarily gimmicky and at worst as nonsensical and confusing. If you have trouble telling which characters are suffering which plight and/or are connected, you likely won't be alone. Only one of the three stories is interesting on its own, but this method of storytelling makes the weaker stories even more so. Despite the unconventional storytelling, Haggis is ironically so methodical that your intrigue wears down as the movie drags on, making you much more inclined to check your watch than the dialogue/progression of events on screen.
In conclusion, if Haggis had put less of a first person imprint on the film and considered the actual role of the third person – the audience – and their reaction to watching the movie, Third Person might not be the leading contender for this year's overwrought drama box office bomb that it is.
WHO WON'T – OR SHOULDN'T – LIKE THIS FILM?: Everyone who hated Crash, people who hate sappy/confusing/artful dramas where there is nothing beneath its superficial surface
BOTTOM LINE – IS IT GOOD, GREAT, BAD OR DOWNRIGHT AWFUL? Awful. AWFUL. And as someone who used to like the movie Crash, I feel indirectly responsible for allowing this to exist and now, much like Haggis needs to as a filmmaker, need to pay retribution for my previous error in judgment.
WHAT'S GOOD (OR BAD) ABOUT IT? Crash, in case you didn't know, is one of the most controversial Oscar-winning films of the last 10 years. Just do a Google search for the phrase "crash movie criticism" and you'll see more than enough results to let you know not everyone was on board with the Academy's decision way back in 2005. People felt the film was highly contrived, the incidents depicted were a bit too perfect in terms of the awful nature of their events and in other cases, many just felt it was a well-intended mess where the audience is told "see, this is bad" in no uncertain terms just in case they might somehow miss the message. (And boy, is Crash filled with messages.)
As someone who found the film a good watch at the time, however, I was willing to overlook those factors because of the good job that film's cast did at selling the story. It is impossible, however, to do that with Third Person because of its self-indulgent, striving to be more than it is nature and the nonsensical, ridiculous actions of its characters. While some of this was evident in Crash, the prevalence of it in Third Person – conducted in a manner that almost feels as if trying to up the ante and enhance the drama – makes the film at varying points silly and devoid of any realism or connection to the characters. In fact, the viewer is much more likely to have nothing but disdain and scorn for the characters based on their actions, almost all of which are either so blatantly self-destructive or asinine that no other reaction would make sense. While Kunis is the only actor whose character's actions can be somewhat understood and sympathized with, the overwrought nature in which her plight is depicted is so heavy handed you become numb to the situation.
In fact, none of the actors are really the problem with Third Person; it's writer/director Haggis. Story-wise, his clichéd from start to finish silly romance between Brody and Atias is just plain pititful and the daddy-issues character he saddles Wilde – who as an actress does a great job with in showing her actual acting prowess – ends up becoming unbelievable thanks to a twist which does more to destroy her character than build it.
The underdeveloped, clichéd tales are only problem with Third Person, though, as Haggis' love for interweaving them weakens the film even further as his "these stories are connected ... or are they?" presentation at best come off as unnecessarily gimmicky and at worst as nonsensical and confusing. If you have trouble telling which characters are suffering which plight and/or are connected, you likely won't be alone. Only one of the three stories is interesting on its own, but this method of storytelling makes the weaker stories even more so. Despite the unconventional storytelling, Haggis is ironically so methodical that your intrigue wears down as the movie drags on, making you much more inclined to check your watch than the dialogue/progression of events on screen.
In conclusion, if Haggis had put less of a first person imprint on the film and considered the actual role of the third person – the audience – and their reaction to watching the movie, Third Person might not be the leading contender for this year's overwrought drama box office bomb that it is.
OVERALL RATING (OUT OF FOUR POSSIBLE BUCKETS OF POPCORN):
Comments
Post a Comment