When crafting a story, there is always that feeling that
there is more that can be done with the premise. No story is capable of
exploring every single facet that it brushes against, and when dealing with
something as intensive as cinema, the smaller details require as much
preparation as humanly possible.
I’ve covered a few movies in the past that felt like they
were trying to make statements on anything and everything connected to its core
idea, but movies feeling cluttered doesn’t get a gut rejection from me as a
critic. All I really ask is that, if something is going to be brought up
on-screen, it should at least be given enough weight that it makes sense why it
is being highlighted. For a good example of this, there’s last year’s Suspiria,
which not only dealt with a whole slew of different ideas but managed to give
all of them room to breathe so it all made sense. For a bad example of this, we
have today’s ChloĆ« Grace-Moretz feature.
From there, we have Isabelle Huppert in the title role, who
feels perpetually stuck between two very different kinds of psychological
villains. At times, she has the quiet, tortured air that made her turn in The
Piano Teacher so enthralling, and at others, she feels one homemade make-up job
away from being in a remake of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane? As much as that
brand of psycho-biddy thrills isn’t exactly being in vogue at the moment, for a
modern take on that same concept of the crazed older female antagonist, it
could have worked… but again, the writing just isn’t there. There’s some
notions of grieving and applying the ‘we’ll get you a new dog’ mentality to attempts to replace the people we’ve lost, but they end up buried
underneath the varying layers of camp that keep this from being as creepy as it
could have been.
Yeah, it’s a recurring thing where genuinely talented people
are brought into this production, but none of them manage to raise the overall
quality as much as they should. Javier Navarrete’s work with the soundtrack
definitely wrings the tension out of his piano-heavy orchestrations, and Seamus
McGarvey’s camera work help add to the feeling of helplessness that is enforced
by the script’s attempts to force the plot down a specific direction. You’ve
seen this before, where the main character in a scary movie tries to get
outside help but no-one is able to provide it, save for those closest to them.
Admittedly, said help comes from Maika Monroe as her roommate, who comes across
as the most genuinely complex character here, but their friendship never clicks
in the right way that makes the plot turns (which range from the outright
stupid, like her advice on how to get rid of Greta, to the boringly contrived,
like her role in the finale) feel worthwhile.
It all just falls short, primarily because amidst all the
different tones and ideas that it tries to grasp, the main intent of the whole
thing never really comes into focus. And what’s worse is that the ideas that
come the closest to the foreground are ones that have been done much better in
many other films. As I’ve said in past, I care more about competence than
originality; I’d rather watch an old story told well than a new story told
poorly. This film, in spite of the talent involved both in front of and behind
the camera, manages a few scattered moments of true chill but never comes together
into a cohesive whole. And as a result of that, it’s quite difficult to
recommend since it’s not even that clear what the film was trying to do in the
first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment