Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | August 04, 2005 | | Summary | painful, just like the book | Content
 | Not a good film for a first date, that's for sure, but it is very successful as a work of art. The book, like most of McEwan's, is uncomfortable and painful to read. The movie differs from the book but is in some ways more painful. Rhys Ilfans is just terrifying and it is easy to put yourself in the humanities professor's place (it is sort of unclear what the guy is supposed to be teaching; he holds forth about love to a bunch of rapt undergrads but doesn't cite literary sources; in the book the character is a science journalist).
Watch it with your dog (there is a good Labrador Retriever at the end). At least you know that you can count on him. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 10, 2005 | | Summary | After A Brilliant Opening Scene - A Major Letdown. Sad. | Content
| Whenever I've heard anyone discuss "Enduring Love," or read a review of it, there's always a vivid description of the first scene involved. And, usually there's mention of how the film was a letdown - not 100% of the time, of course, but often enough to take note. And people don't just say, "I didn't like this movie." - plain and simple. They use the words "letdown," and "disappointment," as if they had been expecting so much more. I read Ian McEwan's excellent novel, upon which the movie was based, and was certainly curious to see what one of my favorite directors, Roger Michell, ("Persuasion"), had done to bring the literary work to life. I so hate being one of the crowd....but:
It's a warm, windy summer day. There's a sunny meadow, surrounded by hedgerows - all green and earth tones. A couple, Joe, (Daniel Craig), and his girlfriend, Claire (Samantha Morton), are on a picnic. As he opens a bottle of "posh" champagne, she stares over his shoulder as a beautiful red-colored helium balloon floats by, low to the ground. Then there's a shout and it seems as if the balloon is out of control, tilting oddly, dragging. The beauty of the bright red contrasted against the pastoral greens and browns is suddenly gone. One feels jarred. Joe and Claire rush toward the balloon, as do four other men who seem to come from nowhere - laborers from nearby fields, people in a passing car. The men grab on to the balloon. The pilot catches his foot and hangs from the line. The only passenger, a boy, is too afraid to release the cord or jump out. The wind picks-up and the balloon ascends, the men still holding on. As it rises, all the men let go, all but one. He manages to hang on until it's too late to drop safely.
In the span of those few moments everything changes for Joe. The accident plagues him. It has become a terrible intrusion into his once happy existence. Filled with guilt and remorse, thinking that a life could have been saved if he had somehow acted otherwise, his behavior and perceptions become distorted. He sketches hot air balloons, cuts out photos of them, blow up small balloons for models. Enough already!! Joe doesn't understand what is happening to himself and refuses to seek help for post-traumatic stress, as live-in lover Claire suggests. His long-term relationship with her begins to deteriorate. And, oddly, one of the men who tried to help that day, one of the four strangers who attempted to weight down the red balloon, contacts Joe. Scruffy-looking Jed Parry, (Rhys Ifans), attaches himself to Joe and begins to demonstrate extremely obsessive behavior. Jed believes everything happens for a reason. He thinks the entire purpose of the balloon accident was for Joe and him to meet - that they're soul mates - connected in some deep, inevitable way. Is this a sexual attraction? Is Jed a religious zealot? He wanted to pray with Joe after the after the incident.
Whatever else he might be, Jed is a stalker. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the level of Glenn Close's character in "Fatal Attraction," Jed is a perfect 10! He writes to Joe; shows up in his classroom; watches from the park across from Joe's and Claire's flat on sunny days and in downpours. At first Joe appears enraged, then sympathetic, but the psychology behind whatever is happening is obscure. What does Jed want? How far will he go to get it? And why in heaven's name doesn't Joe do something about it?? What does Joe want - what are his fantasies? Call the police, Joe?? Take a long vacation to Australia, New Zealand or Chile with Claire. How engaged is Joe in this warped relationship? It is never made clear. That's a problem.
I think the movie's initial scene is mentioned so frequently because it is so visually striking, and emotionally charged - really outstanding and unsettling. Unfortunately, the film, like the balloon, goes off course after that brief glimpse of brilliance. Director Michell promises so much in the first few minutes and does not deliver. The actors are outstanding. I must give them credit for making the most of what they were given. So, why does the film never live up to its potential? There's too much ambiguity. You need to read the book to understand what's going on in the movie. Isn't it usually the other way around? Jed's repetitive activity, along with Joe's repetitive passivity, are boring. And Joe's failure to act, even his seeming lack of clarity of purpose during a most critical scene at the end, is the film's failure.
At one point in "Enduring Love," Jed, a real madman, bangs his head against a wall repeatedly. That's exactly how I felt at that same moment, as a viewer. It would have been so easy to stop - just turn off the DVD player. But I kept waiting for some redeeming factor, something enlightening to happen to make sense of it all. Never happened. And the denouement came with a whimper, not a bang. There is no way I can recommend this film, in all honesty - unless you rent it for the first scene and fast forward to some other moments of pertinence before clicking off the remote. Sad.
JANA |
| Rating | | | Date | June 30, 2005 | | Summary | The Obsessed | Content
| I have to confess that I haven't read the book, which is almost always going to be more subjectively satisfying than absorbing a story through a movie. However, I saw the trailer for this, and after Rhys Ifans's performance in "Human Nature," quickly decided that I needed to see this.
The power of this movie lies in two elements: the idea of an idyllic picnic in the park, suddenly plunged into horrific circumstance. The images of the attempted hot air balloon rescue are indeed haunting(and for me, reminiscent of the ethereal "Picnic At Hanging Rock")as is the scene where Ifans and Craig meet, sit and pray with the deceased; it's vaguely soothing, yet highly uncomfortable.
You'll never look at a hot air balloon again without thinking of this movie.
The other key element is Rhys Ifans. The creeping obsession of his character, the frankness he brings to this role is so peculiarly self assured, so possessed with the power of conviction, that I began to feel as though maybe there really *was* something more to this supposed connection between him and Daniel Craig's character. It's his conviction of heartfelt belief that renders Craig's charcter, his denials, seemingly implausible.
Ifans is stunningly believable in a casual, earnest way, that makes him equally chilling and sympathetic. I was actually disappointed when the story takes a somewhat predictable "Fatal Attraction" twist, although there's a crucial moment in the final confrontation that comes out of nowhere and will really make you squirm, because it's only then that you realize just how psychotic Ifans' character truly is, or has become.
"Enduring Love" is an interesting examination of the blurry line between the elusive elements of love and obsession. As mirrored in the ballooning tragedy, when is it time to let go?
Excellent movie, highly recommended. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 20, 2005 | | Summary | Up, Up and Away | Content
| Roger Michell, adapting Ian McEwan's novel, has directed three of the actors he used in the comedy "Notting Hill" in a disturbing film of psychological depth and daring, an adult movie for mature people who read books and converse intelligently. Thus three quarters of American moviegoers will not not have heard of "Enduring Love" and most certainly not have seen it. And that's probably for the best. This quiet thriller is probably not for them. It subjects its characters to intricately layered themes and just assumes audiences and DVD viewers will understand them.
One (Rhys Ifans) of the men who aids a floundering hot air balloonist, causing an accidental death, begins stalking another, convinced that their shared experience has sealed a loving bond. The object of his affection, a writer and professor (Daniel Craig), ignores him as the creep he clearly is. The professor himself has guilt issues, due to the death, but gets no support at all from the shallow sculptor he loves (Samantha Morton); she dismisses his distress, intuits his post-traumatic stress but can't abide it, and asks him to leave.
That she also dismisses the stalking is a source of sweet audience satisfaction when, at the end, she has a grim encounter with the stalker herself. Long before that sucker punch, however, we have anticipated the danger, held fast by the deliberate pace. The director may not be channeling Alfred Hitchcock but he certainly has seen "Vertigo" once or twice. Michell's movie can be enjoyed as a simple thriller or as a complex case study; indeed, at times it is impossible to separate the two.
McEwan (who gets Executive Producer credit) has had three of his novels adapted to the screen, starting with "The Cement Garden" and including "The Comfort of Strangers" and "The Innocent," all with some artistic success but very few ticket sales. A similar fate has befallen "Enduring Love," so faithful to the intent and spirit of his novel you almost can hear the pages turn. We can only encourage producers who continue to bring his peculiar but award-winning books to the screen as well as they do. One hopes that "Atonement" is next. |
| Rating | | | Date | May 25, 2005 | | Summary | God only knows where I'd be without you... | Content
| Genre: Thriller, Drama
Genre Grade: C+
Final Grade: B+
I thought this movie had a strong Hitchcock feel to it, even if the cinematography was very artistic. I wish they would have made this movie a little more mainstream because I think it had potential to be a classic film. The director (who also directed Notting Hill and The Mother) seemed to be trying some new camera styles during certain that just did not fit this movie at all. However, the first 10 minutes of this film are riveting enough (and suspenseful and disturbing enough) that I will forgive him for falling into some experimental techniques where they didn't belong.
If you enjoy slow but powerful stories and enjoy Hitchcockian suspense, you might like this movie. The part when the psycho character starts singing "God only knows where I'd be without you..." will send chills down your spine. This movie is definitely not for everyone, and it might take a second viewing to understand exactly what is going on, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. |
|
|
|
|
