Der Gott des Gemetzels

Having arranged a meeting at their New York apartment, a married couple, whose son was smacked in the face with a stick by another boy in the park, attempts to clarify the situation with the other child's parents, who initially agree their son was at fault but soon begin to argue the point--all relevant (and irrelevant) points, in fact. Director Roman Polanski co-adapted this 'savage comedy' from Yasmina Reza's French play "Le Dieu du carnage" (God of Carnage), yet the material does not lend itself easily to the cinema. It's a character piece in much the same way "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" was a character piece; however, "Virginia Woolf" (as a play and as a film) had at least two compelling characters to lead us through the dramatic wreckage. "Carnage" is about four adults acting like the very same 11-year-olds they're squabbling about, and there's nothing terribly interesting in grown ups engaging in immature mudslinging. Jodie Foster's Penelope, passive-aggressive in her jabs and asides, is probably the least convincing character of the group, with Kate Winslet's put-upon Nancy rating a close second. The two men, John C. Reilly as Michael and Christoph Waltz as Alan, fare a bit better than the ladies; however, once we get Polanski's point--that each one of the characters will, in turn, attempt to devour the others--it's just a matter of time before Michael and Alan become equally ridiculous in their petty arguments. An unpleasant film, but for cinephiles a definite curiosity item because of Polanski's involvement with this talented group. Still, it's no star vehicle; nobody comes out of "Carnage" looking good. **1/2 from ****

Working on a "sense of community," the two couples in Carnage engage in slowly evolving urban warfare, precipitated by violence in the playground between their two sons. This adaptation from the Broadway play, God of Carnage, is a soberer (by a little) version of Edward Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Penelope (Jody Foster) and Michael (John C. Reilly) host Nancy (Kate Winslet) and Alan (Christof Waltz) in their Brooklyn apartment to iron out difficulties coming from their sons' fight, which resulted in Penelope and Michael's son's mangled mouth. What begins civilly escalates to a raw verbal mêlée with all players laying bare their prejudices and weaknesses while the issue of the repentance of Nancy and Alan's child becomes a vehicle for class and culture clash. As in director Roman Polanski's Rosemary's Baby, the action is almost exclusively in the small, one bedroom apartment, resulting in an uncomfortable crowding of bodies and egos. And it doesn't take long for the individual differences to surface as one is conciliatory, another confrontational, another detached, and another bewildered.

Nor does it take long (only an 80 minute production anyway) for alliances to build (and not necessarily in the same couple) with the refrain "Why are we still here?" becoming the battle cry. Yes, it doesn't turn out well, nor would most confrontations except that the civil veneer usually stays intact for most of us.

But when writers Yasmina Reza and Polanski allow the characters to speak their minds, albeit helped by Scotch, the drama gets good and the words become socially lethal. What I like best is the language, not elevated but sassy, smart, and colloquial: "Should we wrap this up?" Yes, it is a film to be wrapped, but there is no real end to the social jousting that goes on in our minds if not our mouths, which are sometimes beaten badly as careless children might do in their play.

Despite it's name, which should imply a very violent movie, this one is a wonderful little movie about social structures and the way its built within us to the point of forcing us to behave in certain ways.

The concept for this movie is simplistic to the maximum level. Just 2 couples discussing terms for their kid's fight. What seems to be a nice meeting to solve the problem soon became a carnage fight (of words only, gladly).

The movie allow us to explore the aspects of each of the 4 personalities, that's it, that's the movie, and it's great, superb, no music, no special effects, no induced drama, no additional details to color the movie. Simple, powerful, nicely done.

From all the movies coming from Hollywood these days, this one is a nice gift, top notch actors, great comedy, nicely put together, what more could you ask.

So, go on, see the movie, what are you waiting for!

Size matters, right? even for Roman, after the brilliantly intricacy-crafted THE GHOST WRITER (2010), the scale of CARNAGE shrinks just like a hors d'oeuvre, no wonder its lukewarm feedback is percolating in spite of the lure of 4 Oscar-bounded leading thespians. Actually the response is par for the course, the film hinges on a more stringent time schedule (literally the exact time audience spends in front of the big screen), which is too featherweight to be considered seriously for the Oscar race (referring to other play-adapted Oscar dearest CLOSER 2004 or DOUBT 2008, both at least possess a decent time span), but which doesn't thwart all the fun one could obtain from a feature film.

The disintegration of these two pairs of parents is intrigued bit by bit with derision, insult and disdain, the initial wrangle of two flatly unfamiliar couples are reflecting everyone's customary procedure of dealing with strangers, the approach of eclipsing others in a restrained manner in order not to break a fragile bottom line "our face of respect", and once Nancy (Kate Winslet's character) has lost her face with a hilarious vomit to all the civil pretentiousness, the battle of matrimony, sex, social supremacy and civil wit is officially instigated, the carnage of verbal assaults prevails and within a compact 80 minutes, the dialogues are drolly sharp and incisive, wounds are acute without bleeding,

The grand cast is beyond any accomplishment, Jodie Foster manifests her excellent curb in melodrama in many years though is a shade over-the-top during the end and Kate Winslet never mislead her devotees albeit being self-conscious in sundry scenes, Christoph Waltz fiendishly holds his introvert nature all the time while being socially authentic; arguably the weakest line, john C. Reilly is in his comfort zone to liberate the venom under his goody-goody disguise.

One big plus is the film ends ideally when the fray starts to become stale, so Polanski is still as crafty as any filmmakers could ever wish for.

it is not a surprise. the cast is great and the script/play gives many opportunities for demonstrate this fact. image of a crisis, simple and powerful, impressive for the precision of scenes,a play who has chance to has extraordinary actors, it is a splendid exploration of characters and society human types. a special film who seems be almost extravagant.because all is different by common recipes. the transformation of masks in aggressive tools, the fragility of existences and marriages, the force of accusations, the frustrations as axis of a form of survive. a bitter comedy, a deep drama. and one of guide movies who reminds the purpose of real cinema - art as subtle reflection of life.