Something's weird on Gilead Road - Carolina Weekly Newspapers

thereeldealby Sean O'COnnell‘The Lovely Bones’One scene kept “The Lovely Bones” off ofmy year-end “Best of 2009” list. It’s not long; atwo-minute, comedic montage plopped in themiddle of a moving discourse on mortality. Butcompetition’s tough, and an ill-fitting sequencecan mean the difference between “Bones” andmy eventual No. 10, Robert Siegel’s consistentlyoff-kilter sports drama, “Big Fan.”Outside that lone scene (which we’ll touchon in a moment), director Peter Jackson nails –and, in some places, improves – the suspenseful,unnerving mood of Alice Sebold’s disturbingbestseller about a murdered teenager whowitnesses the aftermath of her grisly deathfrom the Day-Glo confines of her personalized,girlie-girl limbo.The deceased is Susie Salmon (“Atonement”star Saoirse Ronan), a Pennsylvania teen withan avid interest in photography who takes thelong way home from school one afternoon andpays the ultimate price. “Bones” isn’t a whodunit.We witness Susie’s murder at the handsof George Harvey (Stanley Tucci), the Salmon’spredatory neighbor, and accompany her soul –in a jarringly creative scene – to a vast landscapeSusie calls “the in-between.”“Bones” does work quite well, however, asa taut, will-he-get-caught kind of mystery, asSusie’s father (Mark Wahlberg), younger sister(Rose McIver) and a concerned local detective(Michael Imperioli) follow thin leads andthreadbare clues they hope will point to herkiller.While traditionally suspenseful, Jackson’s“Bones” also touches our hearts by emphasizingthe need for acceptance. Susie’s family mustcome to terms with her murder, and the victimmust let go of her previous existence so she canreach her ultimate destination: Heaven.Ronan proves mature enough tohandle Susie’s difficult emotionaljourney, her icy-blue eyes effortlesslyconveying pain, anger, fear and love.Back on earth, however, Jacksonmakes a major miscalculation, leadingto the afore mentioned, unforgivableScene. It involves a showboatingSusan Sarandon as the Salmon’sboozy, rebellious grandmother, arule-ignoring matriarch who arrivesready to whip order from the family’sgrief-addled chaos. We endurea silly musical montage that tries tolighten the mood, yet only disruptsthe picture’s flow. It doesn’t belong. Itis, quite literally, the turd that’s beendropped, unceremoniously, into aserene punch bowl.Jackson’s film recuperates in the vibrant inbetween,where the director’s able to flex hiscreative muscle by using state-of-the-art specialeffects to enhance Sebold’s vision. Thenovel left itself open to interpretation, andSusie’s on-screen limbo mirrors a teenage girl’simagination, with reflections of her boyfriend(Reece Ritchie) in shimmering pools of wateror gargantuan model ships (built by her father)drifting to unblemished, sandy shores. There’ssymbolism in every corner of Jackson’s “Bones”– a second viewing only unveils the vast amountof references crammed into the scenery, fromicicles and lighthouses to tiny items Susie willeventually carry with her to the afterlife. Theteen creates a comforting shire that’s pulledfrom a secret diary of references, and it’s beautifullyrealized by Jackson’s effects team, thewizards who imagined Tolkien’s “Lord of theRings” trilogy and resurrected “King Kong” fora tech-savvy generation.Speaking of, “Bones” acts as a welcome returnto form for Jackson after his dreadful monkeymovie. This adaptation is taut, suspenseful and,for the most part, well crafted. I’ve seen “Bones”twice so far, impressive only when you considerSebold’s graphic depictions of senseless violencechased me away from her novel before I’d evenreached the halfway point. Part of it was timing.We’d just welcomed our first child into theworld when I picked up “Bones,” and plowingthrough the gut- wrenching story of helplessparents grieving their murdered offspring wasn’tatop my “to do” list.But I also appreciate Jackson’s decision –made with co-screenwriters Fran Walsh andPhilippa Boyens – to soften Susie’s murder(eliminating her rape, for starters, and movingthe rest of the horrific act off screen) and transitiongracefully to the poetic child’s inspiredafterlife. Minor mistakes do peck away at thefilm’s logic, the most glaring being a safe thatshould be way too heavy for one character tolift during a crucial sequence. But fine actingin service of the story overcomes the majority ofthe blemishes. And I agree with several Oscarpundits who claim Tucci deserves to be recognizedby the Academy this year, but I’d preferit to be for his work in “Julie & Julia,” which issuperior to his villainous turn in “Bones.” qGrade: HHH out of 4MPAA Rating: PG-13 for mature thematicmaterial involving disturbing violentcontent and images and some language.Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Saoirse RonanGenre: DramaStudio: Paramount Pictures‘A Single Man’Similar-sounding titles sent audiences into atizzy last year. The alien-infested “District 9” hadnothing to do with the animated sock puppetsof “9,” though shared the common goal of distancingthemselves from Rob Marshall’s off-keymusical, “Nine.” George Clooney, meanwhile,took audiences “Up in the Air,” while Pixar’sdevotees merely went “Up” before coming backdown. And Coen brothers fans who wanted tosee Joel and Ethan’s latest dark comedy weren’tsure if they needed to snatch up tickets to “ASerious Man,” “A Single Man” or “I Love You,Man.”Confused yet? This week, we’re discussinga broken-hearted “Single Man” namedGeorge (Colin Firth) whose lover, Jim (MatthewGoode, much better here than in “LeapYear”), died unexpectedly in a car wreck eightmonths prior to the start of our story. In thewake of the tragedy, George has befriendedgrief, currently drifting through his days as aCalifornia schoolteacher in a senseless fog. Atone point, however, we almost believe Georgeis on the verge of climbing out of the emotionalcoffin, until “Single Man” begins reminding us(repeatedly) of the gun George carries in hishandbag, intending to commit suicide once hisaffairs have been placed in order.With the cards on the table, “A SingleMan” settles in as a well-groomed reflection ofGeorge’s life. Internationally renowned fashiondesigner Tom Ford steps behind the camera forthe project – marking his feature film debut –and shows a distinguished flair for visual compositionand an impressive feel for editing. Hemakes fluid references to George’s past, recallingmemories both fond and tragic but findingways to link it to what might be the protagonist’sfinal day.As George labors through these somberhours, he spends time with random (and handsome)strangers as well as curious (and handsome)male students. His activities, no matterhow trivial, build to a dinner date with best palCharley, a boisterous, comfort-seeking socialiteplayed in showboat fashion by Julianne Moore.Her appearance reveals a handful of details aboutGeorge’s past – his London years, when he andCharley might have had a romantic relationship– but, like too much of “Man,” could be slicedfrom the film with minimal impact.Sadly, beyond Ford’s elegant and hauntingphotography, very little of “Man” lingers. Onecan admire how Ford’s shots are carefully measuredexpressions, or how he adopts an air ofsurrealism that’s usually reserved for DavidLynch films. But Firth’s performance is so internal,there’s hardly anything or us to grasp.Which brings us to Ford’s conclusion, a rugpull of an ending that, also like “A Serious Man,”questions life’s purpose when, in the blink of aneye, we could simply cease to exist. The finalityof Ford’s message might have had greaterimpact had the Coens not beaten him to thepunch. As it stands, “A Single Man” is a beautifulfilm that’s reflective but very cold, a mildgem we feel like we’re admiring from behindthe protective safety of a thick, glass case. qGrade: HH out of 4MPAA Rating: R for some disturbing imagesand nudity/sexual contentCast: Colin Firth, Julianne MooreGenre: DramaStudio: The Weinstein CompanyHHHH Instant ClassIC | HHH Worth Your $8 | HH rental, at Best | H BomBwww.huntersvilleherald.com The Herald Weekly • Jan. 15-21, 2010 • Page 37