I watched that movie last night. I should have known better. Baz Luhrmann needs to take his place next to Ewe Boll as one of the worst directors of all time. "Not that there's anything wrong with that" but his films are homosexuals' and washed-up actresses' dreams. Let's run down the line: Strictly Ballroom? Check. Romeo and Juliet? Check. Moulin Rouge? Check. Australia? Put it this way, it prominently features Judy Garland as well as damn near every character singing "Over the Rainbow" and Hugh Jackman's soapy torso. Check and check. His next film, Wicked, will come out in 2010 and will be a musical. Dear Lord.
Anyway, just because homosexuals and washed-up actresses like his movies doesn't mean that he's one of the worst directors of all time, but (and yes I'm dealing in stereotypes) they typically prefer over the top dynamics. Heaven forbid there be any subtlety. If you're going to go over the top there has to be some sort of tongue-in-cheek, self-referential mockery (eg. "Army of Darkness").
Not for Luhrmann. He's as sincere as can be. What a butthead. My example: Having already set up Jackman and Kidman as the "rough and tough man-down-under" and" hoity-toity, well bred little-miss-know-it-all" (respectively), they are forced to ride together across the Outback in a dump of a truck. Oh wow! They don't like each other and yet they're forced to spend time together! LOL! Then she looks out the side window and sees a herd of badly computer-generated kangaroos hopping along next to them. She gets a dreamy "Oh, all my hatred and disdain for this miserable country have been wiped away by majestic marsupials!" look on her face. That's about the point where I leaned over to the person I was with and said, "BAM!". Sure enough. BAM! One of Jackman's Aborigine friends riding on the top of the truck shot a kangaroo. Tight close up of Kidman screaming in abject horror and then next, THWUMP, as the carcass is slammed on the top of the roof and blood oozes down the windshield.
Now, besides the two groups I've mentioned, obviously there are others who like the film. A good fella I go to law school with tried to defend the movie. He said he thought it was "epic."
If epic means horrific pacing, schizophrenic tone, syrupy schmaltz so thick it would choke a bear, ridiculous implausibilities, a pointless last third of the film, and a social message being beaten over your head for the duration, then yes, it was really, really, really, really epic.
That and Hugh Jackman's character is known only as "The Drover" for the entire film. What the hell is that? Just because they say it in Australian accents doesn't make it any more reasonable. If he drove A Semi and they called him "The Trucker" the entire movie, you'd consider the filmmaker touched in the head. Someone must have had pictures of Jackman and Kidman having a three-way with a kangaroo. That's the only thing that explains their participating in the cinematic ebola that was that film.
On a last note, when the hell are actresses going to stop shooting their faces full of "what the hell is that"? It's one thing if a woman has naturally plump, succulent lips; it's quite another when she comes across as having an allergic reaction. It's one thing for a woman to stay youthful gracefully; it's quite another when you can tell she had her forehead embalmed since she couldn't furrow her brow without circus strong-men's assistance. I'm pretty sure I'd have found a 41 year old Nicole Kidman naturally attractive with regular-old make-up. Instead, I was just sort of agog at exactly what she'd done to herself. She had only about three expressions in the film because her facial range of motion has been pretty well destroyed.
It may have been an Australian movie, but it'is everything that's wrong with America.
No comments:
Post a Comment