Movie Mom

Movie Mom

Birth

posted by rkumar
D
Lowest Recommended Age:Mature High Schooler
Profanity:Some strong language
Nudity/Sex:Explicit sexual situation, references, inappropriate relationship with child
Alcohol/Drugs:Drinking and smoking
Violence/Scariness:Creepy and tense atmosphere, some shoving
Diversity Issues:Mild stereotyping of "family retainer"
Movie Release Date:2004

In the middle of a story that lurches from unsettling to preposterous by way of sheer ookiness, there is a moment of sheer, breathtaking bravura, shared by actress and director.

At her engagement party, Anna (Nicole Kidman) has just been told by a 10 year old boy that he is the reincarnation of her late husband. Soon after, she and the fiance are at the theater, after another unsettling confrontation with the boy. Director Jonathan Glazer gives us a close-up of Anna’s face and then stays there for what is in these MTV-ADD days of skittery jump cuts and cluttered, flashy edits, a seemingly endless shot. Both Glazer and Kidman are flying without a net. A take of that length risks making the audience uncomfortable, taking them out of the story. Most actors would feel they had to do something show-offy to hold our attention. But Kidman trusts us and she trusts herself. She doesn’t use tricks. She doesn’t bite her lip or wipe away a tear. She just lets her longing and disbelief touch almost imperceptively on those impeccable features. It is a wonder to see.

But the rest of the movie is just an “I wonder what they were thinking.”

Or maybe “I wonder if they knew what they were thinking.” I’m not saying everything always has to fit together, but this movie keeps changing its mind about its most basic premise.

Ambiguity is fine — it’s always good to see a movie that has enough respect for the audience to leave something to the imagination. But inconsistency is another thing entirely, and in this movie it just leaves the viewer feeling cheated. Ambiguity only works if the incomplete pieces don’t clash with each other. It’s okay to leave blank spaces as long as the pieces that are there fit together.

The idea of having a loved one return after death is an enticing one, featured in many films, good and bad. The ones that work have some point of view that resonates with our desires (Truly Madly Deeply) or our fears (Blithe Spirit). This one seems to have given more thought to its elegant decors (marvelously evocative) than to its underlying theories. Has Sean returned to prevent Anna from marrying someone who is hiding his true nature? Was Sean less than the devoted husband Anna wants to remember? Is this just a disturbed boy, obsessed with a beautiful woman? Any of these could have been the basis for a good movie, but the film just hints in those directions and then doubles back. And what are all these grown-up people doing living together in one apartment? It’s sort of the Upper East Side version of the Ponderosa.

Meanwhile, the film gets creepy in ways it apparently does not intend. It is bad enough when Anna tries to shock 10-year-old Sean out of what she hopes is a delusion by asking him how he intends to satisfy her sexually. It is close to awful when he takes off all his clothes and climbs into the bathtub with her. And the last fifteen minutes make no sense whatsoever.

In the midst of all this mess, there are some lovely performances, especially Alison Elliot as Laura, Anna’s pregnant sister, Arliss Howard as her husband, and Ted Levine and Cara Seymour as Sean’s parents. All create real characters in their brief screen time. It’s always nice to hear Lauren Bacall’s clipped diction, but it only reminds us of the many far better movies we have enjoyed her in.

Parents should know that the movie includes sexual references, including adultery, and an explicit (and completely gratuitous) sexual situation as well as situations that come close to sexual abuse of a minor. A young boy takes a bath with an adult woman and later they kiss. Characters drink and smoke and use some strong language. The only minority cast member plays a somewhat stereotyped family retainer. The themes may be very disturbing to some audience members.

Families who see this movie should talk about their own views on life after death. What would they like to hear from those they have lost? What should we say now to those who are still here?

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy other movies with this theme, including Ghost, Truly, Madly, Deeply, and Blithe Spirit. They will also enjoy seeing some of Bacall’s best work in To Have and Have Not, The Big Sleep, and Designing Woman.



You Might Also Like...
Previous Posts

Interview: Joel Smallbone of "The Book of Esther" and For King and Country
Joel Smallbone of King and Country plays Xerxes in "The Book of Esther," his first film role.  He was nice enough to take some time off from his For King and Country tour to talk to me about playing the Biblical king. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko63DUcc8i4[/youtube] How did you g

posted 8:00:43am Jun. 19, 2013 | read full post »

MVP of the Week: Nathan Fillion
Nathan Fillion is this week's MVP, with performances in two very different films. In Pixar's animated "Monsters University," he provides the voice for the obnoxious campus jock. And in Joss Whedon's swanky, black and white, modern-dress version of Shakespeare's "Much Ado About Nothing," Fillion play

posted 8:00:02am Jun. 19, 2013 | read full post »

New From SpiritClips: Hallmark Hall of Fame and More For Families
New from SpiritClips: unlimited access to Hallmark Hall of Fame movies, thoughtfully selected Hollywood classics and original short films via the web and stream-to-TV devices.  This is a great source for inspiring, heartwarming stories that you won't find anywhere else.  Take a look!

posted 10:33:23pm Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Linda Holmes: Where Are the Women in Movies?
Linda Holmes of NPR's Monkey See blog has written a piece that is more than the usual "Why aren't there more women in/making movies?" There are 617 movie showings today — that's just today, Friday — within 10 miles of my house. Of those 617 showings, 561 of them — 90 percent — are storie

posted 3:59:07pm Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Claire LaZebnik Remembers A Visit from Patricia Neal
Claire LaZebnik wrote a beautiful piece in the Wall Street Journal about a visit from the late Oscar-winning actress Patricia Neal.  The first movie I ever reviewed -- for my high school paper -- was Neal's comeback film, "The Subject Was Roses" (with a very young Martin Sheen as her son).  Neal

posted 8:00:26am Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Advertisement
Comments Post the First Comment »
post a comment

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.





Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.