|
|
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An epic tragedy - sprinkled with laughs, 24 Feb 2006
If this isn't the best film ever made, it's at least among the top ten. However, classifying this a "romantic comedy" applies a grievous misnomer to a film of great importance. Only superficially humorous, this film is rather a tragedy in the finest Sophoclean tradition. The "professional" critics, uneasy with the power of the story and Nicholson's performance, have mis-categorized this film in almost every way. It's a story of hubris, an inflated ego and intelligence, challenged by an envious world concerned only with its daily survival.The story concerns a professional writer [Nicholson] living alone in a New York apartment. His gay neighbour dotes on one of those yappy, scruffy dogs "cliff-house" dwellers seem to favour. Melvin Udall, the writer, suffers almost countless compulsive disorders, exacerbated by his urban life. He avoids cracks in the sidewalk, is obsessive about cleanliness and, cloistered by his work, incapable of everyday discourse with other people. Opening with him disposing of the dog, Nicholson sets the tone of the film in its first moments. What seems cruel and inhuman is simply the expression of a man easily perturbed by minor irritations. Which is crueler, disposing of the dog, or keeping one in urban confinement? Although the dog, Verdell, is rescued [to go on to stunning visuals later in the film], Udall is confronted by his neighbour and blurts his aversion to Simon's homosexuality. As a writer who's set himself apart from the world surrounding him, it's not an unexpected attitude. His vehemence is an almost predictable reaction. Offending people, even when he doesn't intend it, keeps that world at bay and protects his own ego. This isn't a particularly unusual condition among creative people, who are usually viewed by suspicious envy by the rest of the world. The models for Melvin Udall are legion. Patrick White and Xavier Herbert of Australia, George Bernard Shaw in the UK, J.D. Salinger in the US are but examples. Aloof, detached from society, they rarely expressed what are commonly termed "human emotions" to their contemporaries. Udall is following an all too-common pattern. What is different, but not unique, is Udall's being forced to come to grips with the aptness of his viewpoints. That this realization comes through waitress Helen Hunt is what gives this film an additional fillip of humanity. Hunt [Carol] chastises him, disciplines him, harries him, but in the last analysis, talks to him - as an equal. She refuses to submit to his overbearing demeanor which gains his grudging respect. Learning of her son Spencer's asthmatic condition, he provides help with the only resource he can give - money. He doesn't do it for altruistic reasons - he's being selfish, wanting her to return to wait on him at the restaurant. But the act opens his world which he tentatively, grudgingly begins to explore. The exploration is fraught with feints, mis-steps and errors, but he continues the effort. He's reluctant; it's a massive challenge for someone who's held himself intact alone for so long. Classifying this film as a comedy is due mainly to Nicholson's ability to deliver stinging one-liners a viper would envy. No-one else in Hollywood could have entered this part with a finer track record in delivering the scathing character assassination, the piercing insult, the scornful rebuke. One can envision other "romantic comedy" couples [to remain unnamed] who might have been cast in these parts. The image is hollow and flat. Nicholson is unmatched at biting wit delivered with facial expressions that a Falstaff couldn't convey. It is, of course, Helen Hunt who emerges as the wonderful surprise as an unexpected talent as the single mother struggling for survival. Caught for years in a stultifying TV sitcom, Hunt became visible to movie audiences through some simplistic roles - until this one. From this film, one can hear the grinding teeth of envious peers who will be hard pressed to match this performance. Suffused with grace even in adversity, she achieves complete mastery of what was needed for the role. One scene alone will reside in your memory. The pressure overwhelms her and she breaks down in a storm tears. "Women's tears" have long been a mainstay of Hollywood gender allotment. Hunt, however, fights the breakdown every step of the way, her conflicting emotions flashing across her face as the camera moves to close-up. Could you do it? Can any other actress match it? Possibly, but not likely. Her Academy Award was richly deserved. She's not been given a proper occasion to display these talents since AGAIG, but we can only hope another opportunity will arise soon. Those who've criticised this film on these pages and elsewhere should sit down in front of their screens quietly and undisturbed and look again. If you're prejudiced by the label "romantic comedy" [which is understandable given how many such films are issued by Hollywood], strip the label from your mind and view this film again. You may join me in saying it will be a long time before the quality of this film is matched. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
|