By Katey Rich
Yesterday I subjected myself to what might be called the double feature from hell: A 1:30 p.m. screening of There Will Be Blood, followed by Sweeney Todd at 7 p.m. At least I had enough time to break for an egg sandwich and a trip to the office in-between.
When I saw Blood for the first time last week, I preceded it with Nanking, the workmanlike but emotionally compelling documentary about the Rape of Nanking that occurred during the Japanese invasion of China in World War II. The combination of the two films left me drained, and somewhat full of despair: What a world, what a world. I was concerned that the Sweeney and Blood pairing would have a similar effect, especially since I was so looking forward to Sweeney and to, well, not feeling suicidal for the rest of the evening.
I'm thrilled to report that the effect was precisely the opposite: Walking out of the theatre at 9:30, with snow on the ground and chill in the air, I was exhilarated. These are dark films, harsh and unrelenting, but also exquisitely made, each of them featuring actors and directors who can capture the power of film like no one else. I don't want to over-simplify by comparing the two films-- they are very different, except for the blood blood blood-- but with stellar lead performances, technically perfect direction and entirely singular visions, each film is among the best I've seen all year.
I've already covered There Will Be Blood, and I'm not allowed to say much about Sweeney, given that it's under embargo for a little while, but I concur with the word on the street that it's something special, and maybe even with famed musical-nut Tom O'Neil's assertion that "Burton has created a masterpiece for the ages." It is, unlike so many musical adaptations, a real movie, never stopping to stage a production number (Chicago!) or grinding the plot to a halt so that someone can belt out the first-act finale (Dreamgirls!) Much of this is owed to Stephen Sondheim's music, which is as brilliant as I was led to expect (I wasn't remotely familiar with Sondheim or the musical itself going in). Based on the reaction from my Sondheim-fanatic friend Jess, who attended the screening with me, most of the original music is intact except for numbers that involve a large number of people singing. To me, this is a great move. Big group songs are much tougher to pull off onscreen than onstage, simply given how far away from everyone the camera has to be in order to keep them all in frame. Keeping the musical numbers intimate, usually one-or-two-person affairs, makes Sweeney feel much more like a complete film rather than an adaptation.
Sweeney blew me away at first blush, but it was on the second viewing of Blood that I was finally able to accept that it's a real work of art. My problems with the film's structure disappeared once I was given time to think about it, and watching the whole thing unfold with the ending in mind, it was much clearer how Eli and Daniel develop as characters both parallel and opposite to each another. The chilling climax is just as heart-pounding as it was the first time; in my theatre several audience members were laughing at the borderline-campy acting, but were punished for it mere seconds later as the film reached a close. I don't think any film should require a second viewing in order to understand it, but Blood has a lot to offer under closer examination. That's the mark of a perplexing film, yes, but also a great one.
No comments:
Post a Comment