Well, it seems that I ultimately broke my promise of regular writing on here, but now it's time to remedy that. Last night, I saw a film I badly wanted to see for some time, Spike Jonze's "Her." Jonze directed several great films, yet he is rarely seen as a great director. Part of this problem is because his first two films were written by Charlie Kaufman, a bright and original voice that dominated the films entirely. "Being John Malkoich" and "Adaptation" are much more owned by Kaufman than Jonze. His third film, the dark adaptation of the children's classic "Where the Wild Things Are" drew equal acclaim and criticism, yet I believe it is fairly good. In many ways, Jonze had a lot to prove with "Her," which already gained critical acclaim elsewhere.
It many ways "Her" is very similar to Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master," a film that split opinions yet instantly won my heart. Joaquin Phoenix and Amy Adams star, and are stellar as always. The film deals with heavy topics, such as the nature and the need of human relationships, and ultimately asks what it means to be human.
The difference is, really, that The Master was about something. It had a story that could be understood, and we could relate to, even though we do not understand the inner-workings of a cult. We see the relationship between Freddie and Dodd with clarity, and it makes total sense. The central relationship of Her, does not work. Unlike pretty much every other film relationship, it's not a lack of chemistry, because Samantha, the Scarlett Johanson voiced OS, is seemingly designed to mesh with the nerdy and repressed Theodore. Her just makes no sense in design.
Spike Jonze had the ability to essentially make up logic for the innerworkings of the film, and failed to produce a believable and sensical product. Yes, the film is supposed to raise questions on what it means to be human, but really, he doesn't give any answers. The premise itself is as thought-provoking as the entire film, and at points, it feels like Jonze is making things up as he goes along. You can almost hear Jonze yell "Fuck it!"when Samantha begins to evolve quickly, ultimately becoming a 'greater being or something like that shit.' What the scatterbrained approach to the story and logic indicates is that Jonze just couldn't control the film, couldn't confront his techno-philosophical questions, and really, the film just isn't well written. "Her," could have been great, honestly, and part of it is there, clearly and passionately, but it doesn't come together at all, and crumbles in Jonze's hands, making me really wish someone like Charlie Kaufman could have helped him out with the story.
Her, at the end of the day, just didn't click with me at all, in such a powerful way that I fear it could have just been me not having the right mindset, and in a way that warrants a revisit. The acting was superb, and the cinematography, which is being universally praised, didn't completely work for me either. It seemed much too cold and manufactured, which betrays what I felt Jonze was attempting to do with Samantha and Theo's relationship, another baffling inconsistency that trapped and puzzled me. The nature scenes, with ample lens flares and overexposures reeked of modern indie cliches.
But like most films, Her lived and died with its story, which was unable to get past the logistics of such a complicated premise, ultimately making no sense, and ending with a quick and ridiculous ending that completely soured the entire film. This was Jonze's ultimate "fuck it" moment, and he felt the need to give us a simple analogy to explain Samantha's thought and her need to develop, but not any explanation for whatever the fuck was supposed to happen. Her, like The Master, relied heavily on analogies and symbols for the human experience, but was unable to root its heavy symbolism and overall 'importance' in anything at all, resulting in a film that either falls apart or floats away. Either way, nothing is really there.
No comments:
Post a Comment