Guy

Home » Archives » 20. April 2005

How Far is London?

April 20, 2005

I saw CLOSER last night. Mike Nichols directed it, and I’ve liked his movies all these years, especially THE GRADUATE (1967) and WORKING GIRL (1988). Both Mike Nichols classics have been influential to me thematically, technically, and socially. But CLOSER wowed me.

It is probably due to the honesty. We haven’t been this privy to the dirty intimacy of pain caused by love and sex and marriage and animal attraction since Stanley Kubrick attempted Vladimir Nabokov’s “Lolita” in the early 60s. Since CLOSER is done 40 years later, when censorship codes are gone and “R” ratings walk a tight rope towards “X,” the language is more real, and the sucking of the soul is more intense. Yet there wasn’t a single sex scene in the entire film.

The movie is set in comtemporary London. A love quadrangle among four great actors, Jude Law, Julia Roberts, Clive Owen, and Natalie Portman displays openly the disaster that love can be. London is still its dreary grey, but the red heat of the four stars melts the winter cold. But then why does the film still leave us cold, not because it failed as a movie? On the contrary, everything about it was totally effective. The problem is we come out of the movie fearing romance. How dare them! This is blasphemy! Haven’t the cinema gods always given us our benchmark for what happily ever after must be?

Mike Nichols has consistently given us a disagreeing last thought. Everyone remembers the blank faces of Dustin Hoffman and Katherine Ross in the end of THE GRADUATE. He says life, not even life in the movies, ain’t a fairy tale. Those who can’t find their “pretty woman” or their “officer and a gentleman” can thus take advice from the one word film fans will forever remember from a Mike Nichols movie. He has from the beginning have said the future is in “Plastics.”

I better see a happy film next.

Posted by Guy S. Concepcion at 9:27 pm | permalink | comments[1]