Looking back on all of the movie reviews I’ve written for TCP, I’m not sure that I’ve ever said a film is bad. This is something I get accused of a lot around our house. My parents say that there isn’t a movie that I don’t like. Well, this review should prove them wrong. I went to see The Curious Case of Benjamin Button with my mom over the Christmas holiday, and I’ll just be frank: I hated it.
I’d seen the trailers, which prompted me to read the short story (which, by the way, is so much more satisfying than this film), and I was super excited to see the movie. David Fincher directed it, which I supposed was also a good thing, given that he’s done Fight Club, Se7en, Zodiac, etc. Unlike most people, Brad Pitt had no part in luring me to the film, as I think he’s a pretty bad actor, but I thought he could do a decent job; and Cate Blanchett is always amazing. My point is that this movie had a lot going for it, and it could have been fantastic, but it wasn’t. The rest of this review will tell you why.
Benjamin Button was written by Eric Roth, who also wrote Forrest Gump. This connection is fairly obvious when one compares the two. In a nutshell, Benjamin Button is a three-hour, backwards Forrest Gump without emotion, good acting, an amazing score, provocative characters, love, humor, or a plot large enough to justify the huge runtime. The details may be different, but the basic idea remains the same. Both movies comprise a man’s entire life. One of the horrible new reviewers to replace Ebert & Roper on At the Movies may have said it best (in his scripted, robotic style), “if Forrest Gump is the tale of an ordinary man living an extraordinary life, then Benjamin Button is the tale of an extraordinary man living an ordinary life.” Why, again, would you want to watch that? So, my first quip is that the film presents nothing too original and that it drags on for far too long.
The second problem with the film is the plot itself. Basically, it outlines the main character’s—Benjamin Button’s—love life, as he drifts in and out of relationships; and according to the movie, sex is the ultimate goal of any relationship. He goes through no apparent inner struggles or any sort of remorse or guilt. In fact, there isn’t anything that binds the audience to his character. We sympathize somewhat with Daisy (played by Cate Blanchett); but even then, we don’t care that much. At the end of the film, I couldn’t help but wonder: so what? There’s no one to care about.
Finally, I was very disappointed with the acting. I haven’t seen Brad Pitt put on an amazing performance in any movie. He always seems wooden and out of touch. That might have something to do with his character’s lack of interest. Cate Blanchett did a great job, but she wasn’t near enough to save the film. All of the accent actors and actresses did fine but weren’t anything amazing.
I do have to include one paragraph examining what is good in the film—the art direction and cinematography. All of the colors were breathtaking, especially those which take place on the sea. The special effects were quite amazing, as well. Somehow they managed to take Brad Pitt and make him look extremely young in one scene and extremely old in another. These things, however, should be extra flourishes on a piece of art, rather than the only bright spot in a black hole of mediocrity. They cannot carry the dead weight that is the rest of the film.
There was a short clip at the beginning of the movie that showed a clockmaker whose son had gone off to war. He was commissioned to make a clock for the local train station, and he chose to make it run backwards, so that maybe their sons could all come home. To me, this story would have made a much more interesting film than the 3-hour drag that follows it.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
has to be one of the most disappointing films I’ve ever seen. It could
have been so great; but instead of examining the ideas of time and life
(as the trailer deceivingly hinted at), it merely portrays a wasted
life, whose crowning achievement was having sex with the woman he was
with at the time. It doesn’t ponder anything. But perhaps I’m missing something. Other people obviously see something here that I don’t (as it has been nominated for Best Picture). I can see why Hollywood would love it, as it affirms and justifies everything that town believes. There is no hope; there is no ultimate value in a life. Life is best lived for happiness and pleasure; and don’t get bogged down in any complicated questions, because those lead to pain. Ironically, though, this film’s lack of depth led to a most painful experience.
Print
E-mail
