![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Movie review
Mar. 14th, 2004 04:55 amStrange little movie.
Went to see "Secret Window" late Friday night. Was sufficiently intrigued, given the story does not go the same way as the book, at all. For one, the ending is different; for another, Mort Rainey's motivation isn't the same at all.
( Spoilers comparing book and movie motivations and ending )
As for evaluating the film on its own merits, let me get the drawbacks out of the way. The plotline as vehicle for the motivations and such is pedestrian. It was pedestrian when King wrote it, and Koepp kept it that way, whether out of conscious effort to stay close to the source material or of a desire to see it remain that way, I don't know. I expect if you're going to make a movie based on a story someone else has written, it behooves you to stay close to the material - otherwise, you could just make up your own story and not have to pay royalties. And when I refer to "plotline as vehicle," I mean the whole tortured-writer motif, not the motivation of the lead character. (As I say in the above spoilers section, I actually liked Mort's motivation in the story than in the movie.)
The last two seconds of the movie, right before the credits, are just way too cheesy for me. I don't care how much relish Johnny put into doing it, it took away from it all somewhat for me. (Then again, I seem to have an inexplicable aversion to repetition of the phrase "steaming bowl of corn." Just don't like it, I don't really know why.)
Now, those said ... let's move on to the several things good about this movie. First of all is the camera work and director's choices for storytelling. ( More spoilers herein. )
Second, of course, is The Man himself. This is a two-person movie, frankly - Depp and Turturro - with Johnny having the most screen time and, arguably, the best interpretation of his character. What in any other actor's hands would have come off as common and, yes, pedestrian, a character *coughbenaffleckcough*, was in Johnny's hands a quirky, fun character. I love that he's such a slob that he'd rather wave his hands around than use the energy to dry them off; that he brushes Dorito dust off his hands the same way I do; that he grabs a soda and hunkers down over it on his couch to slurp it. I even love the way he goes to sleep on that damned couch - any other actor, conscious of how he looks, of the screencaps to be taken for publicity stills, would have thrown himself onto his back, crooked one knee up and laced his fingers across his chest to look manfully weary. Not Johnny; he trundles right into that couch the same way we all do when nobody else is around, turning toward the back of it, pulling his knees up a little and sticking his backside out to curl into the cushions (*"Coupling" sofa-cushion-rant flashback ...*). And I love how through the entire movie, he doesn't once make an effort to actually look presentable. He schleps around in his socks and ratty robe, his messy hair, smudged glasses, and bad attitude toward life and the wife.
And is there any writer among us who didn't appreciate the whole action of deleting the crap paragraph, followed by a triumphant, "See? No more bad writing."
I even liked the other actors in this. I was surprised to feel sympathy for Ted, but Timothy Hutton played a cuckolder who is out of his element pretty well - bit arrogant, officious, but always undercut by a nervousness due to the fact he KNOWS he did something wrong to Mort.
( One final spoiler for a chuckle )
Overall, I think I'll probably go see it again once or twice. It's not worth several viewings in the theater, at full price, as was POTC, but it's worth further study.
Went to see "Secret Window" late Friday night. Was sufficiently intrigued, given the story does not go the same way as the book, at all. For one, the ending is different; for another, Mort Rainey's motivation isn't the same at all.
( Spoilers comparing book and movie motivations and ending )
As for evaluating the film on its own merits, let me get the drawbacks out of the way. The plotline as vehicle for the motivations and such is pedestrian. It was pedestrian when King wrote it, and Koepp kept it that way, whether out of conscious effort to stay close to the source material or of a desire to see it remain that way, I don't know. I expect if you're going to make a movie based on a story someone else has written, it behooves you to stay close to the material - otherwise, you could just make up your own story and not have to pay royalties. And when I refer to "plotline as vehicle," I mean the whole tortured-writer motif, not the motivation of the lead character. (As I say in the above spoilers section, I actually liked Mort's motivation in the story than in the movie.)
The last two seconds of the movie, right before the credits, are just way too cheesy for me. I don't care how much relish Johnny put into doing it, it took away from it all somewhat for me. (Then again, I seem to have an inexplicable aversion to repetition of the phrase "steaming bowl of corn." Just don't like it, I don't really know why.)
Now, those said ... let's move on to the several things good about this movie. First of all is the camera work and director's choices for storytelling. ( More spoilers herein. )
Second, of course, is The Man himself. This is a two-person movie, frankly - Depp and Turturro - with Johnny having the most screen time and, arguably, the best interpretation of his character. What in any other actor's hands would have come off as common and, yes, pedestrian, a character *coughbenaffleckcough*, was in Johnny's hands a quirky, fun character. I love that he's such a slob that he'd rather wave his hands around than use the energy to dry them off; that he brushes Dorito dust off his hands the same way I do; that he grabs a soda and hunkers down over it on his couch to slurp it. I even love the way he goes to sleep on that damned couch - any other actor, conscious of how he looks, of the screencaps to be taken for publicity stills, would have thrown himself onto his back, crooked one knee up and laced his fingers across his chest to look manfully weary. Not Johnny; he trundles right into that couch the same way we all do when nobody else is around, turning toward the back of it, pulling his knees up a little and sticking his backside out to curl into the cushions (*"Coupling" sofa-cushion-rant flashback ...*). And I love how through the entire movie, he doesn't once make an effort to actually look presentable. He schleps around in his socks and ratty robe, his messy hair, smudged glasses, and bad attitude toward life and the wife.
And is there any writer among us who didn't appreciate the whole action of deleting the crap paragraph, followed by a triumphant, "See? No more bad writing."
I even liked the other actors in this. I was surprised to feel sympathy for Ted, but Timothy Hutton played a cuckolder who is out of his element pretty well - bit arrogant, officious, but always undercut by a nervousness due to the fact he KNOWS he did something wrong to Mort.
( One final spoiler for a chuckle )
Overall, I think I'll probably go see it again once or twice. It's not worth several viewings in the theater, at full price, as was POTC, but it's worth further study.
