The Beguiled - Review

​The worst thing that could have happened to Sofia Coppola’s The Beguiled, is the availability of 1971 version. It’s on HBO and has been playing heavily in repertory cinemas. One can't help but compare and Coppola's version doesn't come out well in the comparison.

The story unfolds during the Civil War at a Southern girls’ boarding school. An injured Union soldier (Colin Farrell) is given refuge and tended to by the women at the school  including the headmistress Miss Farnsworth (Nicole Kidman), a prim teacher (Kirsten Dunst) and a very curious student (Elle Fanning). Sexual tension and dangerous rivalries supposedly happen.

Yet “antiseptic” is the word that came to my mind the most while watching this film. Where is this supposed sexual tension? Where are the rivalries that simmer with jealousy and danger? In adapting the original novel by Thomas Cullinan, and the 1971 script by Albert Maltz and Grimes Grice, Coppola said she wanted to shift the focus from the soldier to the women. Yet what she did was strip away all the passion and dial down the desire to almost non existence. Coppola took out the heat, fun and tangled relationships and loyalties and kinda added nothing. Even the amusing stuff we heard in the trailer occurs off screen. There are no “vengeful bitches” in this version. The movie just sits there, only at the very end does it spring to life. And then only briefly.

.

Coppola has also erased the one black woman character from her adaptation, saying she didn’t want to deal “lightly” with slavery. It's fine if she doesn't want to depict slaves. But then why keep the American Civil War setting? Just move it to any other war and time, if all she wanted was to explore the dynamics between the white women. Any genteel isolated old timey society would've sufficed.

The actors are all good if dull. Dunst, in particular, doesn’t fare well. Her character should have the biggest arc, yet she’s not given the chance to unleash any fervor. Her performance is a slow burn that never lets it rip and ends without even a whimper. Not her fault but rather the writing and direction. Only Kidman understands what this story could be, and infuses her performance with mischievous archness. She should've been the auteur of this.

Terrible Terrible Paperboy

Efron, McConaughey, Kidman and Oyelowo in The Paperboy

I was really excited to see The Paperboy. Critics online were crapping on it in a major way. But there was all the campy elements that I read about. Those were what got me really excited. Plus Nicole Kidman always makes interesting choices. Which other actress has a varied career that includes The Hours, Dogville, Birth and Moulin Rouge to name just four great but disparate movies.  Lets just forget about Just Go With It and Trespass.

The Paperboy, directed by Lee Daniels of Precious fame,  tells the story of the titular character (Zac Efron), his brother, a journalist (Matthew McConaughey), the journalist's writing partner (David Oyelowo) trying to free a death row inmate (John Cusack) with the help of the inmate's pen pal and intended (Kidman). It takes place in the 1960s in swampy humid South Florida and is narrated by Efron's nanny/housekeeper (Macy Grey). It's as crazy as this synopsis implies.

It started OK but then it became unbearable.The characters didn't make sense, shocking scene followed shocking scene for no reason. Yes the famous one with Kidman peeing on Efron, but also two strange graphic sex scenes with Kidman & Cusack, And it was full of blood and gore that  it didn't earn with a coherent story. By the end I was looking away willing it to end.

But its not all bad. The period costumes were right on target. Daniels also an a great ear for capturing the nuances of race in that era and a few of the minor characters read authentic.

The acting is so - so. Efron is fine and he looks very good in the tighty whitties he spends most of the movie in.  But Cusack on the other hand was just plain bad. Macy Gray and Nicole were trying to do something interesting. Kidman goes all out, it's the kind of performance that would be called ballsy just for the crazy stuff Daniels & his screenplay put her through. McConaughey's character goes through a lot of crazy things too. But what story or vision are they serving? A very incoherent one at best that does not really even care about the story or its characters.Agree with critics who crapped on it - it alienated all the affection I had beforehand by being terrible.

The first movie of 2012 that I absolutely loathed ... and I have seen Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter.

Australia

Australia is 3 movies in one. It starts as a slapstick comedy, becomes an action adventure and ends as a war romance. Add to that a precocious kid, mystical magic and the plight of the "lost generation" of Australia and it is a hopscotch of many things, but not exactly a good movie.

That said it looks beautiful, well shot and designed. And Hugh Jackman is gorgeous, take your breath away gorgeous. Unfortunately Nicole Kidman does not fare as well. She's too manic and brittle to be an enchanting romantic heroine. And the supporting characters come in two stock types, hissing villians and angelic good people.

Rent it anyway but see it over 3 evenings.