sugar and blood

Continuing on with my infinite film thoughts: The Jane Austen Book Club and Sweeney Todd.

As an avid Austen fan and lover of Pride & Prejudice, I've wanted to see The Jane Austen Book Club for a long time, actually hoping that there would be semi-intelligent conversations about her various works. Of course, I toned down my expectations once I saw the trailers and read the 100 or so reviews on mrqe. I also have to admit that half of my enthusiasm comes from the fact that Hugh Dancy is in the movie. I've passed out of the Hugh Dancy phase, who has Orlando Bloom's good looks plus some talent thrown in.

This movie did flow very well, but there was no passion or inspiration in its presentation. The acting was solid if slightly rigid. Emily Blunt was the undisputed shining star in her role as a repressed and misunderstood snobbish French teacher who's never been to France. Although all of the characters are likable, the main question is, "Who cares?" Obviously, every woman is going through emotional turmoil in the movie. However, it was impossible to convey any depth because the screen time had to be split between six people. Of course, the one story that did get some screen time had to be between the cold man-hating Jocelyn and the affable computer geek Grigg. Emily Blunt's story was also done well until the ending, where it was killed by one completely unrealistic and sappy scene.

As for the book club itself, there were very few discussions of the book before some member of the club goes out sobbing about her failed marriage or Jocelyn and Grigg getting into a catfight. Considering how understated the drama was in Austen's novels, this movie's strange combination of unsympathetic melodrama seems inappropriate at times. Yes, we understand Jane Austen wrote about relationships. However, she wrote more about the intellectual component of relationships (It was the nineteenth century). If the movie had only followed along those lines and tried a bit harder at wittier and less at the emotional, it would have been much better. And even less moviegoers would have gone to see it.

Sweeney Todd, which I hadn't planned on seeing (although seeing Johnny Depp is always worth something, as well as Helena Bonham Carter), was good despite my aversion of horror. I've only seen three horror films in my life, and they weren't even scary by normal standards. No one but a child would possibly think of I know what you did last summer, The Blair Witch Project, and The Sixth Sense as scary movies. It's the suspense that makes me unable to sleep for a week and close my eyes in the shower.

Like all Tim Burton movies, Sweeney Todd is done with its own set of flourishes and eccentricities. Johnny Depp is excellent (as usual) as the demon barber. Helena Bonham Carter also turns in an excellent performance and almost threatening to hint at upstaging Johnny Depp (no one could upstage Johnny Depp). Together, they make a most wonderful neurotic, ugly, and dirty couple. Alan Rickman is not bad either, being his usual unsmiling, drier than sandpaper self. What I enjoyed about Sweeney Todd was that all of the characters seemed a bit off, from a lot off (Sweeney Todd) to the slightly disturbing (his daughter with her white-blond hair and huge and unblinking porcelain china-doll eyes).

I do think that this movie worked as a musical. While the lead actors didn't exactly sound like Pavarotti, they didn't sound half bad. I'm at least grateful that they made the effort. The songs were droll and dark, and the hearty sentiment was there. The throat slashing was also artistic and done well (the few scenes that I didn't cover my eyes for). One character that I didn't appreciate was Sascha Baron Cohen as a rival barber. It's terrible because I only see Borat whenever he comes on screen, and Borat is in an entirely different universe than Sweeney Todd. Despite the fact that I didn't care for the suspense, the movie wasn't terrible.