Sometimes the inner workings of my brain are a mystery, but I can see how I made the connection. At first glance, and with about twenty more looks, you might not see any similarities between Sophia Coppola's new film & John Schlesinger's classic. But they are tied with parallel themes (youth searching for connection in a world of loneliness) and have directors who take familiar settings (New York City's gritty streets for one and European costume drama for the other) and break all expectations. Both films are also visually exciting and are more interested in character development than plot.
At their most basic level, the plots are essentially about people trying to assimilate and succeed in a strange and hostile place. Midnight Cowboy & Marie Antoinette both show the catastrophic dangers of the arrogance of youth. There’s the risk of aiming for glory and winding up destitute. Then there are the perils of flaunting your fortune and winding up without a head.
Except there is one big difference between the films.
Midnight Cowboy immersed you right into the skin of Joe Buck and Ratso Rizzo. Through dialogue and action you felt you knew everything about those characters. They may not have been sympathetic (which is hard for a gay prostitute wannabe and a squirrelly homeless guy), but by that last frame you had fully bonded with them. You desperately wished they could make it to Florida and start a new life, even if you knew it was impossible.
In Marie Antoinette I felt you were always kept at a distance from the inner workings of the title character. Yes, you felt her loneliness and her despair and confusion and you could understand why The Teenage Queen turned to a life of decadent frivolity. She was a kid, she was rich, and she wanted to have fun. All of that was expressed wonderfully and gave great insight to a historical person that is well known for only one thing- getting her head removed from her body. But I still felt as if I was kept just out of reach from Marie Antoinette, never getting the full depth of her character. And that would have been fine if a compelling plot was driving the film. But there wasn't. Marie Antoinette is a study of character and mood and setting. It succeeds brilliantly with numbers 2 and 3 of that equation, but falls short with the first and most important. I never bonded with Marie and thus there was never any tension over the conclusion. And I think I know why.
In Lost in Translation, Charlotte had Bob. In Midnight Cowboy, Joe had Ratso. But Marie Antoinette doesn't have anybody to truly confide in. Several characters occupy that role fleetingly throughout the film, but essentially Marie is alone (and without even voiceover). And as amazing as Kirsten Dunst is with her performance, you can only push looks and reactions and ambiance so far. It's tough to act in a vacuum. You need interaction and action. And Marie Antoinette is lacking in both those qualities.
But there is so much to like about the film. Dunst is wonderful, the cinematography will entrance you, the soundtrack hooks perfectly into the film’s mood, and Sophia Coppola is the real thing, a sincere director with immense talent and not a trace of pretentiousness. Marie Antoinette, despite its flaws, is original and entertaining and I definitely recommend it.
Midnight Cowboy is a near perfect film, and I will pop it into the DVD player tonight to complete this random double feature.
In Marie Antoinette I felt you were always kept at a distance from the inner workings of the title character. Yes, you felt her loneliness and her despair and confusion and you could understand why The Teenage Queen turned to a life of decadent frivolity. She was a kid, she was rich, and she wanted to have fun. All of that was expressed wonderfully and gave great insight to a historical person that is well known for only one thing- getting her head removed from her body. But I still felt as if I was kept just out of reach from Marie Antoinette, never getting the full depth of her character. And that would have been fine if a compelling plot was driving the film. But there wasn't. Marie Antoinette is a study of character and mood and setting. It succeeds brilliantly with numbers 2 and 3 of that equation, but falls short with the first and most important. I never bonded with Marie and thus there was never any tension over the conclusion. And I think I know why.
In Lost in Translation, Charlotte had Bob. In Midnight Cowboy, Joe had Ratso. But Marie Antoinette doesn't have anybody to truly confide in. Several characters occupy that role fleetingly throughout the film, but essentially Marie is alone (and without even voiceover). And as amazing as Kirsten Dunst is with her performance, you can only push looks and reactions and ambiance so far. It's tough to act in a vacuum. You need interaction and action. And Marie Antoinette is lacking in both those qualities.
But there is so much to like about the film. Dunst is wonderful, the cinematography will entrance you, the soundtrack hooks perfectly into the film’s mood, and Sophia Coppola is the real thing, a sincere director with immense talent and not a trace of pretentiousness. Marie Antoinette, despite its flaws, is original and entertaining and I definitely recommend it.
Midnight Cowboy is a near perfect film, and I will pop it into the DVD player tonight to complete this random double feature.
No comments:
Post a Comment