Mike Nichols directed this drama about romantic entanglements among four individuals: a wannabe novelist who makes ends meet by writing obituaries (Jude Law); a fairly gorgeous young stripper (Natalie Portman); a somewhat older but still gorgeous photographer (Julia Roberts); and a doctor specializing in plastic surgery (Clive Owen). With that kind of cast and director, I expected a lot. Boy, was I wrong.
The movie is set in London, and the two men are English. The two women are Americans, and they bounce back and forth between the two men in a way that seems so arbitrary it might as well be a coin toss. There was even a point near the beginning when I thought the two women were going to start kissing, and the relations between the two guys have some distinctly overtones too (their initial encounter is online, with the writer masquerading as a sex-hungry woman); but none of the same-sex stuff ever blossomed.
Maybe that's just as well. Why add in more relationships, when the ones already there are so awful? Everybody's pretending to be sexually exclusive, and they're all lying; betrayals large and small abound. They all claim to be madly in love with whichever partner they're with at the moment, but they turn it on and off like a faucet. Perhaps this is intended as a cynical view of contemporary relationships, but it just comes across as unbelievable, only-in-the-movies stuff. Likewise the overly cutesy dialogue, which sounds like it was written by Oscar Wilde on an off day.
It's not just the falling in and out of love; in every way, these characters' emotions and statements and actions bounce around unpredictably, like nobody in real life outside of maybe a psych ward.
The title is weird too. Why is this movie called Closer, when none of the characters ever seem to really get close at all? It's a mystery.
With a cast of pros like these, the acting is pretty good. It even garnered some acclaim; Portman and Owen were Oscar-nominated, and won Golden Globes, for their acting. But good acting can't make up for an atrocious script like this one. (Incredibly, the movie also picked up some Best Screenplay and Best Director nominations. I assume these came from people who were so bedazzled by the big names, they couldn't even see the crap in front of them.)
One thing the movie is good for is plenty of eye candy. Playing the stripper, Natalie Portman's body is very much on display. And I gotta say, she has a very cute behind. In fact her derriere is what boosts this movie from a one star rating to two stars.
Long ago, Mike Nichols made some terrific movies. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and The Graduate stand out as classics. But Closer is a strong contender for the Golden Turkey award.
All in all: A shameful waste of solid talent.
The movie is set in London, and the two men are English. The two women are Americans, and they bounce back and forth between the two men in a way that seems so arbitrary it might as well be a coin toss. There was even a point near the beginning when I thought the two women were going to start kissing, and the relations between the two guys have some distinctly overtones too (their initial encounter is online, with the writer masquerading as a sex-hungry woman); but none of the same-sex stuff ever blossomed.
Maybe that's just as well. Why add in more relationships, when the ones already there are so awful? Everybody's pretending to be sexually exclusive, and they're all lying; betrayals large and small abound. They all claim to be madly in love with whichever partner they're with at the moment, but they turn it on and off like a faucet. Perhaps this is intended as a cynical view of contemporary relationships, but it just comes across as unbelievable, only-in-the-movies stuff. Likewise the overly cutesy dialogue, which sounds like it was written by Oscar Wilde on an off day.
It's not just the falling in and out of love; in every way, these characters' emotions and statements and actions bounce around unpredictably, like nobody in real life outside of maybe a psych ward.
The title is weird too. Why is this movie called Closer, when none of the characters ever seem to really get close at all? It's a mystery.
With a cast of pros like these, the acting is pretty good. It even garnered some acclaim; Portman and Owen were Oscar-nominated, and won Golden Globes, for their acting. But good acting can't make up for an atrocious script like this one. (Incredibly, the movie also picked up some Best Screenplay and Best Director nominations. I assume these came from people who were so bedazzled by the big names, they couldn't even see the crap in front of them.)
One thing the movie is good for is plenty of eye candy. Playing the stripper, Natalie Portman's body is very much on display. And I gotta say, she has a very cute behind. In fact her derriere is what boosts this movie from a one star rating to two stars.
Long ago, Mike Nichols made some terrific movies. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and The Graduate stand out as classics. But Closer is a strong contender for the Golden Turkey award.
All in all: A shameful waste of solid talent.