Saturday, June 18, 2005

See, this is why I don't like British guys: "Closer"

Here's a little bit of Hollywood heresy: I don't get the Julia Roberts thing.

Really, I know "Pretty Woman" launched that million-dollar smile, and that fair Julia even has an Oscar to her name. But I've never understood why she become the It girl of my generation. Talented? I guess, but not great. Good-looking? Maybe in a girl-next-door way, but other than her having a large mouth I can't tell what the big deal is. Be honest: Is it all relative because her brother is less-than-perfect Eric Roberts, still trying to recapture the magic 20 years after "Star 80" and "The Pope of Greenwich Village?"

In any case, it's clear I wasn't going to give "Closer" a pass just because of Julia Roberts, and she doesn't do that much compared with her co-stars, an All-Star cast of actors du jour: Jude Law -- required by law to be in one movie a week in '04 -- Clive Owen and Natalie Portman. You may recall Owen and Portman getting supporting actors nominations, and they're deserved. But that doesn't make the movie a slam dunk by any means.

Our story: Four people form two couples -- Law and Portman, Roberts and Owen -- then proceed to get mixed up with each other in love, sex and betrayal over the course of a few years. That's pretty much it, but director Mike Nichols tries to keep things interesting by setting each scene a year after the previous one, so you're trying to figure out when each relationship is about to fall apart and who's the bigger asshole. Really.

Neither the missus nor my sister thought too much of this whole mess, saying something to the effect of, "I don't like any of these people." As I hinted, Roberts doesn't set the screen on fire, playing the woman torn between Law and Owen yet pretty subdued through the whole movie. The only time she gets fired up is in one scene with Owen, and that's more a credit to him. He may not be the next James Bond, but that's fine as long as he delivers solid performances like this. As the guy who goes from being jerked around to doing the jerking, he shows impressive range and had me rooting for him as much as anyone in this movie.

As for the other two, Law essentially plays a big weenie -- just once, can't we see that in credits ... "and Jude Law as Big Weenie" -- and does a decent job, but nothing compared with his better turns ("The Talented Mr. Ripley, "Road to Perdition," even "Gattaca"; didn't see "Cold Mountain"). Maybe he was just tired from hoping from set to set.

Portman fares better, although I had a pretty hard time believing her as a stripper until we got to the money scene in her place of business. Now calm down ... no frontal nudity here. But I didn't expect to see Queen Amidala in a thong, and she definitely plays with Owen's head like any good stripper would. (The one on his shoulders, you neanderthals.)

Everyone was talking about this being Portman's first real "grown-up" role, and I suspect more than a few fans of "Beautiful Girls" couldn't wait to see her working the pole. (On the dance floor. Jeez.) The girl can act in general, I think. Throw out the "Star Wars" trilogy -- which proves that as a screenwriter, George Lucas is a good special-effects guy -- and she was solid in her debut movie, "The Professional," as well as "Girls" and "Garden State." Hard to believe she's only 24, and here's to many more thongs in her future.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home