Cecil says: We saw this at one of our local cinemas in Beckenham. Before the film started, I remarked to Bea how the average age of the audience was quite a bit older than when we went to Ritzy in Brixton last week - probably in part because Brixton is a more youthful, trendy place, but also possibly, as Bea said to me: because this is a film about a marriage and most of the kids at the Brixton cinema would not relate to that...It was telling, therefore, that the two young teenage girls next to us in the Beckenham cinema fidgeted and talked through most of the film and said audibly at the end: 'Well, that was the most depressing film I have ever seen'. So, if you're 23 or younger, maybe Revolutionary Road is not for you...
If you're into 50s design, it's a fantastic film: wonderful images of massed men in trilbies heading off to work on the commuter trains; great furniture in the rooms; fantastic cars (where did they find all those 1950s beauties? Havana??); and great dances...
But the film is not really about the 50s, or anything else social or historical. It is a film about a relationship, and actually the issues and conflicts, dilemmas and solutions could all happen in any relationship today. It's about desires, goals in life and realising that the person you are with may not be the one you should share these with. When is a dream best left as just that: a dream? Whose dream was it, anyway? How do you juggle great career opportunities with fulfilling dreams that take you elsewhere? Is it best to talk about things or leave things unsaid so that those cans of worms are not opened?
These are the questions - and Kate Winslett and Leonardo di Caprio do a great job of living through them. Top marks to them both.
By the way, spot the similarity between the sex scene in the car and the Titanic sex scene (same director, same leading players) - is that a hand I see sliding down the window of the car???
***.5
Bea says: A cheery film - not. But for all its downbeat take on life and marriage, it is truly absorbing. A very intelligent piece of writing, many aspects of it rang true for Cecil and me, both in our current relationship, and past ones. Like walking together after a row, but feeling miles apart, for example. Like saying "I don't love you any more". (Had to reassure Cecil that was about past relationships!)
And to me it had some real depth; dredging up my classics and English "A" levels, I thought the character of John not unlike the Greek chorus, or the Fool in Shakespeare - the "fool" who tells the most insightful truths, and the messages about communication, as the couples who stay together are the ones who don't talk and don't listen.
I was however slightly less enamoured with Winslett and DiCaprio's performances, and Sam Mendes' direction. Whilst very good, I've seen this theme before, and better dealt with, by Ang Lee, Sigourney Weaver and Kevin Kostner, in The Ice Storm. If you like this, you'll love that.
*** .5
Sunday, 8 February 2009
Frost/Nixon
Bea says: Seen at a favourite venue of mine, the Ritzy cinema in Brixton, late on a cold, wet Sunday afternoon. The cinema was rammed with people going to see "Milk", but "Frost/Nixon" was our choice, luckily. Before seeing this film I knew a few things about Watergate - mostly that it involved President Nixon in a not very flattering way, and I knew of David Frost as a fairly serious political interviewer (imagine my surprise when I saw the lightweight TV he was doing prior to the interview). That's about it - sketchy. I think this film was probably made for people of my generation; it filled in the gaps in my knowledge, and I found the story gripping from start to finish. Frost as a character doesn't really come out of it very well, despite the interview being his idea originally; he comes across actually as more of an ideas man, without the necessary tenacity to follow things up, and without his crack research and production team the interview as we know it would never really have happened (although that is probably true for many key television interviews in history). A few scenes stay with me - Nixon's phone call to Frost which changed the direction of the interview entirely; intentional on Nixon's part perhaps?? Late in the film, the scene where Frost watches Nixon leave the filming, knowing what has just happened, and knowing what he has just done - a slightly bitter victory. And toward the end, and I probably paraphrase here: "people only remember Watergate because every political (and other) scandal now has a -gate attached...". That is, I am afraid, true for me.
***.5
Cecil says...For me, the Watergate hearings conjure up memories of the TV being on all day - something we were definitely not normally allowed as kids - and dominating a summer holiday (at my uncle's?); and the famous Nixon sweaty-armpits moment...The whole episode is one of the early big political moments in world politics at a time when I was gradually becoming more politically aware. Fascinating for me, therefore, was to hear from Bea after the film how little she really knew about Nixon and the Watergate story. Even more fascinating was to meet Bea's cousin after the film: this guy was not even born when Watergate happened so it is part of his educated awareness but not something that has any personal resonance for him. It made me think that for someone of his age, Watergate must be a bit like Suez for someone of my age: not quite born so no sense of the time or the people involved, but aware through education and listening to older people of just how significant this moment was in history.
So 'Frost/Nixon' didn't really tell me anything I didn't already know about the events of the time; nor did it give me any real insight into Nixon, who was pretty well laid bare at the time. As Bea says, the only intrigue in the film was this mysterious phone call from Nixon to Frost on the night before the final interview. Did it really happen? Why does Nixon have no memory of it, or why does he pretend it didn't happen?
But it is Frost, whose characterisation interested me. As a small boy, Frost was famous for me as one of the men who did 'That was the week that was' (a kind of Have I got News for You of its day, but in sketch-format rather than a quiz); his time as a trivial TV presenter is lost in my memory, but then he returns in more recent years as the presenter of the BBC's main Sunday morning political programme. He was never seen as a real hard-hitting political interviewer in the Brian Walden, John Humphries mode, though - in fact, in my vaguely political circles in the 1990s, I seem to recall him being considered a bit of a soft touch.
I hope one day the BBC do a more substantial profile of the guy. How did he progress from satirical comedy to trashy trivia to interview with Nixon to his own Sunday morning programme? Was the Nixon interview really his only punchy interview which broke new ground? Certainly he comes across in the film as a rather dislikeable character, more interested in glamour than substance, and only really working for a few last-minute hours on the preparation of this Nixon interview which gave him all the fame when, as Bea says, it is unlikely he'd have got anywhere without his researchers.
The final credits to the film amused me - and showed, I guess, that the film - as all US films - is targeted at an American audience. They gave a little list of 'what are they doing now'- style mentions, and Frost apparently has an annual summer party, which is 'still one of the big events on the London social scene' - well, this may impress an American audience, which probably sees the 'London social scene' as something to be in awe of, but it's not on my to-do list and somehow, I don't imagine I'll be getting an invite soon - but with a character like that, would I want to be invited?
**.5
***.5
Cecil says...For me, the Watergate hearings conjure up memories of the TV being on all day - something we were definitely not normally allowed as kids - and dominating a summer holiday (at my uncle's?); and the famous Nixon sweaty-armpits moment...The whole episode is one of the early big political moments in world politics at a time when I was gradually becoming more politically aware. Fascinating for me, therefore, was to hear from Bea after the film how little she really knew about Nixon and the Watergate story. Even more fascinating was to meet Bea's cousin after the film: this guy was not even born when Watergate happened so it is part of his educated awareness but not something that has any personal resonance for him. It made me think that for someone of his age, Watergate must be a bit like Suez for someone of my age: not quite born so no sense of the time or the people involved, but aware through education and listening to older people of just how significant this moment was in history.
So 'Frost/Nixon' didn't really tell me anything I didn't already know about the events of the time; nor did it give me any real insight into Nixon, who was pretty well laid bare at the time. As Bea says, the only intrigue in the film was this mysterious phone call from Nixon to Frost on the night before the final interview. Did it really happen? Why does Nixon have no memory of it, or why does he pretend it didn't happen?
But it is Frost, whose characterisation interested me. As a small boy, Frost was famous for me as one of the men who did 'That was the week that was' (a kind of Have I got News for You of its day, but in sketch-format rather than a quiz); his time as a trivial TV presenter is lost in my memory, but then he returns in more recent years as the presenter of the BBC's main Sunday morning political programme. He was never seen as a real hard-hitting political interviewer in the Brian Walden, John Humphries mode, though - in fact, in my vaguely political circles in the 1990s, I seem to recall him being considered a bit of a soft touch.
I hope one day the BBC do a more substantial profile of the guy. How did he progress from satirical comedy to trashy trivia to interview with Nixon to his own Sunday morning programme? Was the Nixon interview really his only punchy interview which broke new ground? Certainly he comes across in the film as a rather dislikeable character, more interested in glamour than substance, and only really working for a few last-minute hours on the preparation of this Nixon interview which gave him all the fame when, as Bea says, it is unlikely he'd have got anywhere without his researchers.
The final credits to the film amused me - and showed, I guess, that the film - as all US films - is targeted at an American audience. They gave a little list of 'what are they doing now'- style mentions, and Frost apparently has an annual summer party, which is 'still one of the big events on the London social scene' - well, this may impress an American audience, which probably sees the 'London social scene' as something to be in awe of, but it's not on my to-do list and somehow, I don't imagine I'll be getting an invite soon - but with a character like that, would I want to be invited?
**.5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)