The Artist is a linear film that is clearly divided; it is a
film in which hardly a word is spoken and yet it is a film that has a lot to
say to its audience. It takes a while to
adjust to the dialogue of expressions, captions and music, but once an awareness
of the absence of expected banter has exited stage left, the story and the
characters progress and develop at a spritely pace which befits the backdrop of
the late 1920s Art Deco Hollywood Land with its stars, starlets and the
bustling romance of the early movie industry.
The Artist is George Valentin, a wide
smiling leading man of the silent movie era, acclaimed and adored who laughs at
and dismisses the new wave of ‘talkies’ which
leads rapidly to his decline and destitution. Unlike Peppy Miller, a young,
ambitious woman whose fame ascends as Valentin’s descends, most aptly
illustrated through sets and a story that is age-old and highly symbolic. It
is not by chance that Valentin first experiences someone talking in a film in a
screen test for the play ‘Romeo and Juliet’ which infamously features ‘two
households, both alike in dignity’ and ‘a pair of star-crossed lovers’. This is
the crux of the film, and the two households are ‘silence’ and ‘speech’ and the
two lovers are 'Valentin' and 'Miller', and the story moves from one of light-hearted
frivolity to heart break and tragedy. Valentin views Miller as representing the
new and the young who seek to usurp him and at one point possess him, whereas
Miller reveres Valentin for the foundations that he has built and the insight
that he provides as when he advises her to have something that sets her apart
such as a beauty spot, which is in fact the making of her as a film star. Valentin
does not consider evolution of art as an inevitable process, let alone a
positive process,
but this film evidences that what is great one moment is dismissed the next.
The French Director, Michel Hazanavicius, illustrates this most hilariously to
his home audience by featuring Napoleon requesting a chair and being told that
he is no more than an ‘extra’, a mere addendum. Valentin is played to
perfection by Jean Dujardin, who is subtle with a genre that could have so
easily been overacted, as evidenced by how John Goodwin struggles to not ham
his character, a struggle which at times he loses. What ultimately unites the two households and
brings the star crossed lovers to each other is what initially attracted them
to each other when a physical barrier was in between them and where they fell
in love during a series of ‘takes’. This is a language that speaks to us all
and one that features in many films which share the same theme and speaks to
the wider world as a whole, that of music and dance. Is this worthy of the Oscar it is most likely to
win? Or is this film a frothy novelty whose concept is quirky enough in a year
of unremarkable film making? It is a novelty film but once you get past the
froth it is a relevant subject that is astutely executed and deserves to be watched
but most importantly understood by young and old alike.Film Reviews 2012
Sunday, 26 February 2012
The Artist is a linear film that is clearly divided; it is a
film in which hardly a word is spoken and yet it is a film that has a lot to
say to its audience. It takes a while to
adjust to the dialogue of expressions, captions and music, but once an awareness
of the absence of expected banter has exited stage left, the story and the
characters progress and develop at a spritely pace which befits the backdrop of
the late 1920s Art Deco Hollywood Land with its stars, starlets and the
bustling romance of the early movie industry.
The Artist is George Valentin, a wide
smiling leading man of the silent movie era, acclaimed and adored who laughs at
and dismisses the new wave of ‘talkies’ which
leads rapidly to his decline and destitution. Unlike Peppy Miller, a young,
ambitious woman whose fame ascends as Valentin’s descends, most aptly
illustrated through sets and a story that is age-old and highly symbolic. It
is not by chance that Valentin first experiences someone talking in a film in a
screen test for the play ‘Romeo and Juliet’ which infamously features ‘two
households, both alike in dignity’ and ‘a pair of star-crossed lovers’. This is
the crux of the film, and the two households are ‘silence’ and ‘speech’ and the
two lovers are 'Valentin' and 'Miller', and the story moves from one of light-hearted
frivolity to heart break and tragedy. Valentin views Miller as representing the
new and the young who seek to usurp him and at one point possess him, whereas
Miller reveres Valentin for the foundations that he has built and the insight
that he provides as when he advises her to have something that sets her apart
such as a beauty spot, which is in fact the making of her as a film star. Valentin
does not consider evolution of art as an inevitable process, let alone a
positive process,
but this film evidences that what is great one moment is dismissed the next.
The French Director, Michel Hazanavicius, illustrates this most hilariously to
his home audience by featuring Napoleon requesting a chair and being told that
he is no more than an ‘extra’, a mere addendum. Valentin is played to
perfection by Jean Dujardin, who is subtle with a genre that could have so
easily been overacted, as evidenced by how John Goodwin struggles to not ham
his character, a struggle which at times he loses. What ultimately unites the two households and
brings the star crossed lovers to each other is what initially attracted them
to each other when a physical barrier was in between them and where they fell
in love during a series of ‘takes’. This is a language that speaks to us all
and one that features in many films which share the same theme and speaks to
the wider world as a whole, that of music and dance. Is this worthy of the Oscar it is most likely to
win? Or is this film a frothy novelty whose concept is quirky enough in a year
of unremarkable film making? It is a novelty film but once you get past the
froth it is a relevant subject that is astutely executed and deserves to be watched
but most importantly understood by young and old alike.
The
Iron Lady is a film with a singular subject, Margaret Thatcher, the first and
only female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, as well as the longest
serving one. It is the personal and political life of a woman who did not
separate the two, of a woman who had a clear philosophy and of a woman who was
loved and hated in equal measures. The
progression of Thatcher’s life is told through a series of flashbacks she
experiences as an older woman, who now in her mid-80s has started to experience
episodes of dementia and hallucinations of her late husband Denis who the
audience also see and hear. Director
Phylidda Lloyd interweaves between eras at a balanced pace, the flash backs
focus more on Thatcher’s early adult years and her more successful years in power, little time
is given to the years in between 1959 and 1979 which would have provided a
useful backdrop to the character of Denis, and the changes he made to
accommodate for the career of his wife.
Whilst the film dabbles with far too many camera angles and symbolic imaginary,
it delivers well when encapsulating what Margaret Thatcher advocated as an
approach to life, that of ‘thinking and doing’ as opposed to her portrayed perspective
of the modern way of ‘feeling and being’. The Iron Lady is portrayed as one who
knows the value of the basics in life and how determined she is to maintain
those basics, whether it be as a young girl saving the butter in the family
grocery or many years later as the Prime Minister quizzing her cabinet on the
price of butter, or commenting on the price of milk. The film illustrates well how power
changes people, and that those who stand up to bullies can indeed become the
bully themselves, and it is this that is ultimately the downfall of Thatcher,
but not necessarily of Thatcherism. At
least half of the film features Margaret as an older woman, fragile, slightly
senile yet lucid and insightful. The role of Thatcher as a middle-aged and
older lady is acted by Meryl Streep, whose performance is outstanding, most
especially when portraying the vulnerable Margaret whose presence juxtaposes so
ironically with the title of the film. Streep becomes an older person, her stance,
her walk, her eyes, she is quite simply superb. The surrounding players are
solid in their characters, though Carol Thatcher was more like Helen Lederer
from Absolutely Fabulous, so Sloan Road rolled was her speech impediment. I enjoyed the film, though it has not
received any notable acclaim except for the performance by Streep. It is an interesting perspective, many would
argue a sympathetic perspective of a woman who is not yet gone and who will
undoubtedly never be forgotten, nor by many, forgiven. Friday, 13 January 2012
![]() |
| www.warhorsemovie.co.uk |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
