Sunday, September 6, 2009

Magnolia


Magnolia - 1999

Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Writer: Paul Thomas Anderson
Players: Tom Cruise, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Julliane Moore, John C. Reiley, William H. Macy, and so on.
IMDB # 242 [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0175880/]

The Gist:
Paul Thomas Anderson has created a massively unique project with Magnolia. It stands as giant, whirring monolith of drama possibly overstating its purpose and overstaying its welcome. However, it is hard to say if that is truly the case only watching the film once. You have many intertwining story lines dealing with a wide gamut of human grief and frailty: approaching death (e.g. cancer), suicide, sexual abuse, drug addiction, drug overdose, loneliness, grandiose misogyny covering personal insecurities, lots and lots of daddy issues, and so on. These potent subjects are displayed with great pitch and fervor, almost to the point of stunting their purpose. And yet there is something oddly affecting about this film. It hosts, perhaps, the strangest narrative rhythm I have ever seen. The camera is constantly moving, it tracks subjects, wip pans to other subjects, and creates a visual thread showing the connection between all of the characters. And this is generally the point, that all these characters are connected, and that presumably we are all connected. It suggests a greater plan at work, suggests that coincidences are in fact just indications of that greater plan. And somewhere in there PTA decides that it's going to rain frogs.

Why It's Kind of Cool:
First of all, it is a film of great performances. Phillip Seymour Hoffman, in particular, is insanely impressive. And yet, in the host of supporting roles that I've heard him receive praise for this one is rarely mentioned. And he kills, he's barely in it but when he is he's raw and sensitive and you feel like all his nerves are exposed and snapping like broken power lines. Watch it, you'll see. Also the scene with Cruise and the interviewer is this incredibly involving battle for control. In fact, most of the drama, while a little over the top, is still very powerful. As the movie progressed I could feel the weight of the story pressing down on me, and if I film can do that it's doing something right. Finally, the frog sequence is amazing. It sort of plays into the overstated, stylized aspect of the film and just goes for broke. Honestly if I'm on the fence about that stylized, staged feeling about the film, the frog's probably put me over. It's fucking weird and unique and offers a surreal climax that fits the tone perfectly.

Why it Could Be Better:
I mentioned the strange narrative rhythm before. I don't know if it's a detraction or not, but it is certainly off putting. I read somewhere that the film was trying to mimic the build of "A Day in the Life" by the Beatles. If this is true, they failed. The song, a classic, builds and then breaks down, and then builds back up again. This film, however, starts at full build. It opens at a crescendo, and then attempts to carry that crescendo for a good two thirds of the film. That, if nothing else, makes the film one of its kind. But while being fascinating, it undermines its dramatic tension. The reason things have a build is so we can become more involved, and when it reaches its climax we are right there with it. Instead the film almost has an anti-climax, save the whole frogs bit. Its something that would probably grow on you in repeated viewings but almost demands repeated viewings in order to do so. A film that can't be nearly appreciated to its full extent the first time around is either doing something very right or something very wrong. Or both. I've already mentioned the staged and stylized aspect of the film, which only sometimes feels too forced and too mechanical. But those moments are jarring and show that this is truly a flawed film (if not beautiful and ambitious). And as a side note, Julianne Moore has one cool scene with the lawyer but it seems this scene is replayed in other scenes to exponentially diminishing affect. By the end of the movie she becomes shrill and histrionic and I almost wish she was never in the film at all.


No comments:

Post a Comment