b-gaist

I saw this when it came out. All I can say, is I still remember the basic plot, and the cinematography. Walter Faber is paradigmatic as the post WWII individual, still blindly devoted to the goddess of Reason in his personal attitude to life, but beset by the unconscious flood of irrational experience: a real example of Carl Jung's warning that what is not made conscious will be lived out as destiny. It is overall a wonderful, understated film, beautifully directed and shot, representing in a gentle way what European directors (and all directors) should concentrate more on - literature, myth, relationship, culture. It's only fault, if I recall correctly, was that it was not longer and deeper, because it really could have been a great film. Go ahead and watch it!

This film had potential: a beautiful title, lovely cinematography, slow and unrushed performances from good actors. What I think was missing, was the 'oomph' factor which characterises truly great works of dramatic art. It is as though it was trying to be profound - about the complex nature of human relationships, about the grey areas of personality - but somehow it failed to deliver what it promised. If Ingmar Bergman had made this film, it would have been harrowing and haunting, just like our relationships to our real parents continue to be throughout our lives; but as it is, it simply verges on the pretentious and boring.

Despite my best intentions, I fell asleep towards the end, and I don't normally do this. The good thing is that Hollywood is still trying - albeit very infrequently - to create high quality films without car chases or gratuitous sex scenes; the bad news is, I would have had more fun at "The Return of the Mummy".

This film is really something of a curate's egg, good in parts. In contrast to other reviewers, I found that the main fault with it is its inability to draw in the viewer's interest in the characters and the plot. I sat through it because I'm interested in rock'n'roll and the dynamics of bands, but if I were to evaluate it purely on the basis of its merit as a movie, I would have to give it the thumbs down, with a few caveats: Jason Behr is good in the part of John Livien, and quite convincing as a rock singer; the narrative regarding his childhood trauma is unclear, although we are given hints in Livien's well-acted relationship to his parents, but his behaviour is ultimately bizarre to the viewer (which it shouldn't be). Nevertheless the idea of using a stage persona to solve inner conflicts is interesting, albeit not novel nor fully explored as a theme in this film. The allusions to John Lennon were irritating, but I confess I'm not a Beatles fan. At any rate, Livien and his band reminded me more of Oasis than the Beatles, in the sense that there was something derivative about them. Another frustrating thing about the movie was the way it opened up with some interesting - albeit middlebrow and high-school level - philosophical musings of the lead character, but left the threads of his thinking there, only to pick them up again in the middle of the film very briefly, when Livien says, "before God, there was music" (ever seen that ad for Tia Maria in the 1990s, "Before time, there was Tia Maria"? That's what sprung to mind anyway); it seems an idiotic conclusion, and the viewer has no idea how he reached it, but he's entitled to it. Fortunately his bassist and friend, played ably by Dominic Monaghan, seems to acknowledge the fallacy of this thinking when he responds "You don't know that".

In all, the limited strengths of the direction and the plot could go either way on future projects, into pointless banality or into an interesting and more mature perspective.