No Such Thing

I enjoy Hartley's work. I found _Trust_ absolutely fantastic. I am also thoroughly disenchanted with the media and the society that it greats. What I'm trying to say here is that I wanted to like this movie. However, after sitting through it not once but twice in the same evening, I'm afraid that _No Such Thing_ is subpar at best.

My biggest complaint comes from the script, which feels clipped and constrained in the 100 minutes or so the movie takes. Too often, the story moves us and the characters from one locale or situation to another with little or no explanation how we got there (for example, when the monster is first in an experiment room and then in a filthy alley with no connection between the scenes). The dialogue, usually razor sharp and the highlight of Hartley's films, often falls flat and stops short of articulating the meaningful points that Hartley no doubt understands and desperately wants to communicate. The characterization suffers either from being much to heavy handed (as with Beatrice's boss, who goes so far over the top even satire is offended) to choppy and uneven (as Beatrice herself, who flucuates from nice girl to martyr to party animal to nice girl to martyr without a breath. At least one character (Artaud) had an accent so thick that it was nearly impossible to tell what he was saying (see: _Cold Mountain_), and I get a feeling from what I understood that his character was central to the message of the film.

There were some high points. Burke is fantastic as the monster and provides the most enjoyable moments in the film with his cynical, resigned brand of dark humor and philosophical undertones. I've never met an immortal monster that existed since time began, but if I did, I'd be willing to bet that it would be a lot like this guy.

Polley also does a good job with the bizarre material she's given, especially in the beginning and the end of the film. It is to her credit in the middle that she does not make the script seem ridiculous at all, even though objectively it is.

For the part she gives us, Mirren is also wonderful as Beatrice's cold hearted boss. She's obviously having the time of her life in this role.

Final analysis: this is for Hartley or Polley completists, and not really for anyone else. Another entry in the book of disappointing films.

The plot of No Such Thing is the kind that dreams are often made of, it is weird yet it has something in the way of a narrative.

Sarah Polley flies to Iceland in search of her missing fiancée only to discover beast dressed in a 17th century outfit, drinking his life away from depression. He wants to die, but he cannot, because he is indescribable. The forces of man's world cannot harm him. Polley, offers to help him by brining him back to civilization. They are searching for a famed doctor who has managed to manipulate the law of physics to create a force that 'may' be strong enough to break this unbreakable monster, but first, the monster has to clean up his act.

I have always liked Sarah Polley, I think that was why I was drawn to this film. The idea was intriguing, and the film certainly is, but that does not necisarily make it good. No Such thing has no such idea of what it wants to be. Sometimes it is happy, sometimes sad, sometimes cute and sometimes grim. One thing that is consistent is it's inconstancy.

Perhaps the best way to look at No Such Thing would be to call it a twisted take on Beauty and the Beast. Even if watched this approach, it is not so easy to fall in love with the movie. Polley and her large warty co star make a poor screen couple, and they have very little to say to each other. The screenplay is mostly dialogue for the sake of dialogue.

The film keeps you going, so I wouldn't call it disappointing, but the climax is way too short and contrived, and it is followed by an almost non existent ending. It the kind that wakes you wanna ask, 'What was this all about?'

I would imagine most people who have viewed No Such Thing have asked that very question when it ended. If you wanna join the list be my guest. For better or worse, it is a very weird tale.

A thoughtful, intelligent film about science, human nature and the need for the dichotomy of good & evil. The "monster" is something we have made in which to lock up all the evil of which we humans are capable. Science and human kindness are the saviors, the forces that can eradicate the need for such symbols.

In order to tame "evil", the good have to endure suffering, symbolized by the young ingenue who is injured and healed : a Christ-like character.

This movie is gentle, sensitive and moving as well as filled with delicate humor. I have my own copy so I can watch it occasionally.

Hal Hartley's strange tale opens with a monster giving a soliloquy in the vein of the sad reflection that Count Dracula makes on his condition, while Jonathan Harker listens, in Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu". The story alternates between modern settings of a television network and the home in Iceland of a legendary monster that -as in "King Kong"- will become a victim of the manipulative methods of the communication media (with Helen Mirren in charge.) The scenes dealing with the reserved journalist (Sarah Polley in an outstanding underacted performance) surviving a plane crash, meeting a community of weirdoes in Iceland and finally facing the monster, are the most attractive; the following is rather clichéd, though this endearing monster (who looks like a rock star) keeps making until the end, insightful comments on human beings, when we were still creeping "to reach the shore", and our destructive ways. 8/10.

No Such Thing (2002) was my first Hal Hartley's movie. Checking its site on Netflix when I ordered the DVD, I was intrigued by the viewers' reviews on the very first page that differ from one star to four, and by the Top 10 Lists of the viewers who had seen the film already. The lists included "Independent does not mean good", "Don't Waste Your Stamp", and the most sincere "What the heck am I watching?" I knew that I was going to see a different, controversial, and interesting movie. After I saw it, I was very impressed. I know that I will look for more Hartley's works.

As far as the story goes, like many directors before and after him Hal Hartley re-tells the old but immortal legend of Beauty and the Beast which is set in the modern, post 9/11 (even though the movie was made before September 11, 2001) world. The film is worth watching for many reasons. First, it is visually beautiful and poetic especially the scenes shot in Iceland, mysterious far-away country. It did not surprise me that the monster made the remote Iceland his residence. Second, the music score that Hartley wrote himself was appropriately gripping and disturbing. Third (and very important for me), any movie that would place in one scene two of the greatest actresses of older generation, Helen Mirren and Julie Christie, and young but enormously talented and charismatic Sarah Polley and let them do the magic of acting together, is a remarkable movie in my book. And the last one, it is the interesting and compelling, satiric and biting retelling of Beauty and the Beast dropped against the frenzy of the modern media hunger for sensations at the time when terrorism is omnipresent. The film explores the nature of the beast in original, ironic, and clever manner. I guess I can call it a Hartley way. The bitter, cruel, deadly tired from eternal insomnia and scornful (quite often for good reasons) to human race monster as played by Robert John Burke, is sarcastic, scary, observant and strangely sympathetic. I would recommend the film and I am sure in case of No Such Thing, independent does mean good.