|
For a writer whose oversized characters, flamboyant invention, bawdy humor, and unabashed sentiment would seem to make him a natural for adaptation, John Irving hasn’t had much luck on the big screen. The World According to Garp (1982), a hit in its day, seems cute, contrived, and sappy in retrospect, a half-baked Robin Williams vehicle with John Lithgow in drag and Glenn Close being creepy. And though The Cider House Rules (1999) had the courage of its pro-choice convictions, the power of Michael Caine’s Oscar-winning performance, and the clarity of Irving’s own Oscar-winning screenplay, at times, it too meandered into melodrama. As for the others, they are best forgotten, or disowned, as in the case of Hotel New Hampshire (1984). What’s the problem? Perhaps it’s girth. Irving’s books tend to the quarter-pounder size and beyond. That hasn’t posed a problem for Charles Dickens, though, with whom Irving has been (generously) compared. Perhaps the problem is that Irving’s work has just enough postmodern self-consciousness and reflexivity about it to dispel the suspension of disbelief an old-fashioned movie requires. His novels, despite the richness of their fancy and the bigness of their emotions, tend to be about novels and those who write them. No fewer than four of the major characters in his 1998 bestseller A Widow for One Year, for example, have literary aspirations. By the end of its four decades and its 500-plus pages and its fugally intertwining sprawl of a narrative, it seems less a fiction on the themes of loss, love, familial tumult, fate, and quirky desire than a reflection on fiction itself. That may deepen the novel but it can spell death for a movie. Fortunately, writer/director Tod Williams has no patience for such tail chasing. To begin with, he chops off two-thirds of the novel, limiting himself to the self-contained first section. Next, he takes to heart the advice that Ted Cole (Jeff Bridges), a boozy, womanizing children’s-book author, gives to his summer intern Eddie (Jon Foster) on the art of writing: stick to the "specific details." The details Williams chooses are most often Irving’s details, but without the genial explanations with which Irving burdens them. Thus, when Eddie is almost caught masturbating in front of a photo of Ted’s wife, Marion (Kim Basinger), you hardly notice the tiny pieces of paper that Eddie has taped over the disembodied feet of Ted’s two sons that intrude into the picture. Irving feels obliged to footnote this detail with a dissertation on the theory and practice of Eddie’s onanistic fantasy life. No need to in the movie; the bits of paper alone are precise, mysterious, and funny enough. They also underline the absence that defines the lives of the film’s characters. The two Cole boys died in a car wreck some years before. They were teenagers around Eddie’s age. Probably no one was to blame, but that never helps. Marion has sunk into perpetual despair; Ted, who was already an asshole, remains one, drinking and creatively humiliating the rich, bored housewives (poor Mimi Rogers, the victim of Irving’s unaccountable fit of misogyny) who are his neighbors. He’s a good father to their moppet daughter, Ruth (Elle Fanning, the Russian doll inside her sister Dakota), who was conceived to fill the void left by their sons. For Marion, though, Ruth is a memento mori. As is Eddie, but he’s also something more . . . This makes for one hot summer in the Hamptons, and Williams, whose only previous film was 1998’s odd, rough-hewn The Adventures of Sebastian Cole, knows enough to let the actors, like the details, speak for themselves. Bridges equals his performance in Fearless as a person who’s attractive and sympathetic but unthinkably twisted. Basinger at once conveys unapproachable tragedy and irresistible sensuality. No special effects, computer-generated or stylistic, compete with the simple truths of their gazes and their silences. The younger performers are no competition either. It’s hard to believe that Fanning’s Teletubbie-ish Ruth will ever grow into the tough and canny author that she does in A Widow for One Year. And the naïveté of Foster’s Eddie, credible perhaps for the 1958 setting of the original, seems unlikely in the present day of this updated adaptation. That change in setting not only compromises Eddie’s character but precludes any possibility of a sequel (maybe a sci-fi version set in 2044?). Which is just as well. I can’t think of any ending more conclusive, any specific detail more terrifying, than when the door in the floor at last closes. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issue Date: July 16 - 22, 2004 Back to the Movies table of contents |
| |
| |
about the phoenix | advertising info | Webmaster | work for us |
Copyright © 2005 Phoenix Media/Communications Group |