The Four Word Film Review Fourum

All Forums

Film Related

Films

Revolutionary Road

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

Smilies

[quote][i]Originally posted by BaftaBaby[/i]
[br][url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0959337/"]Revolutionary Road[/url]

There's nothing wrong with the look of Sam Mendes' latest. Roger Deakins' cinematography perfectly captures the crisp unremarkable surface atmos of late-1950s suburban American life.

There's nothing wrong with the acting, some of which is quite extraordinary in unexpected moments. For example, there's an unspoken reaction by Kathy Bates when Kate Winslett, the real-estate client who's become her friend, says she and hubby Leonardo di Caprio would "love" to meet her son John. That's the son who's on a day pass from the asylum where he's being treated. Bates says "You would?" managing to convey beneath her surprise all the pain of rejection, the taint on her family, her determination that her disturbed son's return to reality is just around the corner, that perhaps in the Wheelers she's finally found a truly decent couple.

As John, Michael Shannon will probably get an award nomination. He transcends the slight literary nature of his character as the pronouncer of home truths, however cheesy that is as a concept -- out of the mouths of loonies comes great wisdom.

In fact, too many of the film's sentiments are mired in some of the social misconceptions of their original source novel. Its author, Richard Yates drew great acclaim at the time for helping to show America the buried emotional tangle beneath its facade.

But as full of arresting moments as the film is, it's clear it can never have the impact of the novel some fifty years later. I don't mean it cattily, but the film may have been Mendes' gift to his wife Winslett to give her a role so emotionally complex that it might have been the creation of Virginia Woolfe. Might have been. But isn't. Though Winslett certainly proves she'd have been up to the challenge - especially in her quieter moments. She's quite wonderful at extruding only subtle hints of the torrents within.

I understand the wife is the main character in the book, but with all the hoo-hah and expectation surrounding the casting of di Caprio as the husband, the focus is inevitably divided. That weakens the film because his character is just not as interesting as hers. di Caprio delivers the goods, though.

Here are a couple convinced they're deserving of more than what's expected of people their age, class, and intellectual status. They're determined to avoid conformity at all costs. Except they're not so special as they want to believe. They can see there's a world of The Arts, of emerging Science and Technology, of the exuberance of travel. But they just don't make the cut.

Hope is such a fragile thing.

April - her very name is full of promise - keeps the hope alive as the couple sink into the quicksand of suburbia and the duties of family life. Frank is much quicker to let go, to discover and accept the cozy benefits of deceit and surface appearance that fuel the American Dream. Even he eventually realizes he was only holding on to her coat-tails.

Her grip is tighter, so there's more at stake. Sadly for the film, when the denouement comes it brings neither surprise nor significance.

[/quote]

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.

T O P I C R E V I E W
BaftaBaby	Posted - 12/18/2008 : 10:03:01 Revolutionary Road There's nothing wrong with the look of Sam Mendes' latest. Roger Deakins' cinematography perfectly captures the crisp unremarkable surface atmos of late-1950s suburban American life. There's nothing wrong with the acting, some of which is quite extraordinary in unexpected moments. For example, there's an unspoken reaction by Kathy Bates when Kate Winslett, the real-estate client who's become her friend, says she and hubby Leonardo di Caprio would "love" to meet her son John. That's the son who's on a day pass from the asylum where he's being treated. Bates says "You would?" managing to convey beneath her surprise all the pain of rejection, the taint on her family, her determination that her disturbed son's return to reality is just around the corner, that perhaps in the Wheelers she's finally found a truly decent couple. As John, Michael Shannon will probably get an award nomination. He transcends the slight literary nature of his character as the pronouncer of home truths, however cheesy that is as a concept -- out of the mouths of loonies comes great wisdom. In fact, too many of the film's sentiments are mired in some of the social misconceptions of their original source novel. Its author, Richard Yates drew great acclaim at the time for helping to show America the buried emotional tangle beneath its facade. But as full of arresting moments as the film is, it's clear it can never have the impact of the novel some fifty years later. I don't mean it cattily, but the film may have been Mendes' gift to his wife Winslett to give her a role so emotionally complex that it might have been the creation of Virginia Woolfe. Might have been. But isn't. Though Winslett certainly proves she'd have been up to the challenge - especially in her quieter moments. She's quite wonderful at extruding only subtle hints of the torrents within. I understand the wife is the main character in the book, but with all the hoo-hah and expectation surrounding the casting of di Caprio as the husband, the focus is inevitably divided. That weakens the film because his character is just not as interesting as hers. di Caprio delivers the goods, though. Here are a couple convinced they're deserving of more than what's expected of people their age, class, and intellectual status. They're determined to avoid conformity at all costs. Except they're not so special as they want to believe. They can see there's a world of The Arts, of emerging Science and Technology, of the exuberance of travel. But they just don't make the cut. Hope is such a fragile thing. April - her very name is full of promise - keeps the hope alive as the couple sink into the quicksand of suburbia and the duties of family life. Frank is much quicker to let go, to discover and accept the cozy benefits of deceit and surface appearance that fuel the American Dream. Even he eventually realizes he was only holding on to her coat-tails. Her grip is tighter, so there's more at stake. Sadly for the film, when the denouement comes it brings neither surprise nor significance.
2 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
Demisemicenturian	Posted - 12/26/2010 : 21:44:21 Revolutionary Road quote: Originally posted by BaftaBabe I understand the wife is the main character in the book, but with all the hoo-hah and expectation surrounding the casting of di Caprio as the husband, the focus is inevitably divided. That weakens the film because his character is just not as interesting as hers. di Caprio delivers the goods, though. It's DiCaprio. Even if it began with a lower-case letter, it would be no more correct to retain that at the start of a sentence than the first letter of a common noun. Anyway, I thought it was really good and that Winslet more deserved an Oscar for this than for The Reader. 5/5
ChocolateLady	Posted - 12/18/2008 : 12:49:52 I saw a clip of it yesterday when Kate was on Jay Leno. Once again I see a small clip and while Kate sounds almost convincing with her American accent and attitude, I'm then slapped in the face with Leo's famous scowl. Why? Why? Why couldn't they find just one tiny clip where he doesn't scowl? (I know, its just me, isn't it - but it sooooooooooo gets my skin crawling!)

The Four Word Film Review Fourum

Snitz Forums 2000