edited by Jonathan Doyle

Cloverfield [BLU-RAY] (Paramount Home Entertainment, 6.3.2008) Disguised under deliberately goofy, yet deliciously edible-sounding, aliases such as Cheese and Slusho, Matt Reeves' Cloverfield was produced and rushed into theaters under an equally appetizing shroud of secrecy. From last year's incredibly elusive Super Bowl ad to the film's viral marketing campaign, Cloverfield had everybody scratching their heads and drooling in anticipation. Aside from the as-yet untitled title and the Blair Witch-ian visual style, the film's biggest appeal was the enigmatic creature who was last (un)seen hurling the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty onto the crowded streets of New York City. All we knew about the mysterious beast was that it was big and angry. Now that the highy-anticipated project has come and gone, one question has fortunately been answered: Cloverfield was a major success. (continued)

Upcoming

December 31

Defiance

Good

January 2

Cargo 200

January 7

Silent Light

January 9

After Dark Horrorfest 2009

Bride Wars

How About You

Not Easily Broken

The Unborn

Yonkers Joe

January 16

Chandni Chwok to China

Cherry Blossoms

Hotel for Dogs

My Bloody Valentine 3-D

Notorious

Paul Blart: Mall Cop

January 21

Of Time and the City

Blindness

email this story
read comments (23)
post a comment

The problem with Fernando Meirelles' Blindness, which screened this morning at the Cannes Film Festival, is that the milieu of the story, which is based on a novel by Jose Saramago, is bleak and confining. It's more than just the milieu, actually. The second and third act of this film delivers a kind of lockdown vibe.

A darkly emotional mood piece about of an outbreak of mass blindness, Blindness constitutes a blunt metaphor about how a pervasive lack of sight (i.e., perception, understanding) makes beasts or slaves of us all. Yes, agreed, of course...but this is basically an insane asylum drama -- most of it taking place in a squalid prison in which the victims of said blindness plague have been quarantined -- and as such produced, in me, a deep hunger to escape. Imagine a melodrama about blind people set inside the New Orleans Astrodome after Hurricane Katrina, after the toilets stopped working.

Not having read Saramago's book (or even having taken the time to to read reviews), I had gathered -- presumed -- that Don McKellar's screenplay adaptation would be about the widespread societal effects of a blindness epidemic. I was envisioning a kind of docudrama-like portrait of what happens when sight goes. Some kind of capturing of the logistical, political and even mundane results. I was hoping especially for a film that would rigorously avoid any attempt at pushing metaphor into viewer's faces. That is precisely what this film does by way of a narration voice-over by costar Danny Glover. This is mistake #1.

Mistake #2 is setting most of the film inside the "blindness prison," as it were. I know, I know...we're all living in a prison because we can't or won't "see," but I really, really didn't want to be stuck in this filthy hell-hole, and particularly being forced to witness the cruel and tyrannical thug behavior of the blind brutes (led by costars Gael Garcia Bernal and Maury Chaykin) as they humiliate and brutalize the reasonable blind people (opthomologist Mark Ruffalo, his wife Julianne Moore, call girl Alice Braga, random victim Yusuke Ilseya, old man Danny Glover and so on).

It's well directed as far as it goes, although I found the constant depictions of "white-out" blindness irritating. In actuality as well as generic cinematic depictions, blindness is a state of darkness -- blackness -- and so Meirelles and cinematographer Cesar Charlone , looking for a little stylistic intrigue, have gone in the other direction. I understood the why of it, but it began to tick me off after the eighth or ninth white-out.

Two or three people clapped at the end of the press screening. The reception at the press conference was on the muted side. The movie, I fear, is going to be generally "meh"-ed when it opens, and audiences are almost certainly going to steer clear. I respected Blindness -- I certainly agree with what it's saying -- but it didn't arouse me at all. Opening-night films at big festivals are often underwhelming on this or that level -- bland, suckish, so-so. I'm sorry to be saying what I'm saying as I worshipped Meirelles' City of God and very much admired The Constant Gardener. But the truth is that Blindness is more than a bit of a flub.

For what it's worth, the pacing, performances and tech credits are first-rate.

Bashir trailer<< previous | next >>Strong Storm

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on May 14, 2008 at 3:50 AM

comment #1

Rich S. says ...

Sounds like Day of the Triffids did it first, and better. Probably because it had giant, mobile carnivorous plants eating the hapless blind people.

Posted by Rich S. at May 14, 2008 5:39 AM

comment #2

TJ Smoov says ...

Obviously, I can't comment on the flick, but the choice to go "white" with the blindness depiction isn't "stylistic intrigue"---it's taken straight from the book, where the opthomologist describes the blindness as white blindess, like opening your eyes while submerged in milk.

Posted by TJ Smoov at May 14, 2008 5:40 AM

comment #3

Krazy Eyes says ...

Every time I read about this film I also immediately think of Day of the Triffids. Also, as a heads up for fans of DotT, the early 80s BBC miniseries adaptation of the novel is now available on DVD in the US. If you can look past the typically cheapjack BBC production values and outdated styles you'll find easily the best adaptation of the novel to date.

Posted by Krazy Eyes at May 14, 2008 6:29 AM

comment #4

rockne says ...

What I wish you would have talked about was why Julianne moore needs to pretend she's blind to be with her husband...(before you all knee-jerk me to another state, READ IMDB...it's right there in the synopsis)...why, in a world of blind people, does it matter if she can see or not? Never understood that convention...but maybe that's why there's drama...didn't much like the book...read his "All The Names" and enjoyed it...just didn't like Blindness...but I don't understand the conceit or why it's like that. Just wondering, but like I said, maybe that's why you couldn't say...some big spoiler.

Posted by rockne at May 14, 2008 6:43 AM

comment #5

gruver1 says ...

Wells to T.J. Smoov: Of course -- it's a line of dialogue in the film also -- but movies are never obliged to follow the source material chapter and verse. Meirelles and his dp obviously could have done anything they cared to do, and I, for one, found it irksome. That high-contrasty, close-to-monochrome-y color scheme has been fashionable among cool directors or a good decade or so, including using the white-out thing from time to time, so don't tell me. Burt Lancaster to Mickey Saughnessy in From Here to Eternity: "I ain't tellin' you -- you're tellin' me."

Posted by gruver1 at May 14, 2008 6:56 AM

comment #6

Mgmax says ...

Blind people tormenting each other while trapped in an insane asylum. That's a 60s play, not a 2000's movie.

Posted by Mgmax at May 14, 2008 7:09 AM

comment #7

actionman says ...

Can't wait to see this. The book was phenomenal. It's certainly a tricky narrative, but Wells, I am shocked you didn't love this film, as I really figured you would.

Could your terrible travel day have played any part in your relative lack of enthusiasm for the film? How was Ruffalo and Moore? They're perfectly cast in my opinion.

Posted by actionman at May 14, 2008 7:23 AM

comment #8

btwnproductions says ...

BLINDNESS didn't work any more as a play, either. Audiences will be deaf and dumb to the film.

Posted by btwnproductions at May 14, 2008 7:29 AM

comment #9

Ponderer says ...

I won't comment too much on the execution of the white blindness, but the necessity of it is unquestionable - it makes the prospect of blindness that much more alien and inconceivably difficult to deal with, as well as providing some semblance of hope that the condition might be something that just goes away.

I take you at your word that how they accomplished this might come off as gimmicky, and it's something I worried about when reading the novel. Still, I would've been uncomfortable changing the source material too much, especially when it comes to an utterly vital aspect of the story. I mean, good Lord, you don't get to play with a friggin' Nobel winner THAT often.

Posted by Ponderer at May 14, 2008 7:44 AM

comment #10

Roman says ...

There is an excellent Japanese Animated movie called "A Wind Named Amnesia" which could provide an interesting companion piece to this movie.

In it a wind Comes and completely erases the memory of all people, deleting everything, even ability to speak. It effects everyone except a guy and a woman. Something interesting happens though, these two don't try to find a cure to undo this because they understand it's futile, instead....

I can't recommend this film enough and the way it portays the effects on the civilization are really quite profound. Would love to hear anyone's take on this if anyone has seen it.

Posted by Roman at May 14, 2008 9:00 AM

comment #11

JohnCope says ...

What I don't get is why Wells was surprised by the execution of this one. I hated Meirelles' other pictures so of course I'm biased the other way but what about those films would ever give anyone the idea that he could do something subtle?

Posted by JohnCope at May 14, 2008 9:20 AM

comment #12

T. S. Idiot says ...

Is it just this still, or has Moore lost weight?

Posted by T. S. Idiot at May 14, 2008 9:21 AM

comment #13

lipranzer says ...

"What I wish you would have talked about was why Julianne moore needs to pretend she's blind to be with her husband"

Well, she pretends she's blind because if any higher ups found she could see, not only would she be whisked away from her husband, the powers that be would do everything in their power to try and figure out why she was the only one who could see, which may or may not have produced results for them, and probably wouldn't do her much good. And at the prison, it's certainly in her best interest not to reveal she can see.

Posted by lipranzer at May 14, 2008 9:45 AM

comment #14

Rich S. says ...

"In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." -Irish proverb

Posted by Rich S. at May 14, 2008 10:12 AM

comment #15

Ross says ...

Great book... though an extremely tough one to read. There are virtually no paragraph breaks, no separation for the dialogue, and nobody has a name, it's just descriptions of who people are, so he's constantly referring to somebody as the Girl who showed up on Tuesday, which gets old when you're reading it for the 100th time.

The White blindness is a pretty integral part of the book, I'm glad they didn't change it. It gives them hope that it's not normal blindness, and may go away. The entire book is from the perspective of the wife, and she spends much of the book in the prison with her husband, though in the third act, they do go out into the world, where it gets more interesting.

I can't wait to see this!

Posted by Ross at May 14, 2008 10:49 AM

comment #16

Ogami Itto says ...

I can't recommend this film enough and the way it portays the effects on the civilization are really quite profound. Would love to hear anyone's take on this if anyone has seen it.

This is one of my favorite "apocalyptic" anime films, along with Grave of Fireflies. I haven't seen it in years and need to revisit it.

Posted by Ogami Itto at May 14, 2008 11:04 AM

comment #17

K. Bowen says ...

Sounds like it's suffused in literary preciousness.

Posted by K. Bowen at May 14, 2008 12:03 PM

comment #18

Ponderer says ...

Actually, it's not - the novel is very stylized, but I was surprised at what an easy read it was (especially since I've found a lot of Nobel winning books lose me about twenty pages in).

The choices - like not giving anyone a name - really drive home the atmosphere and themes of loss and confusion, like the reader is feeling along as much as the people stricken by the white blindness. Quite remarkable and precious, though not in the way you refer, I suspect.

OTOH, I really couldn't stand the semi-sequel Seeing, which didn't have half the focus or immediacy of Blindness. A real disappointment.

Posted by Ponderer at May 14, 2008 12:12 PM

comment #19

Ross says ...

The name thing didn't bother me nearly as much as the no paragraph thing. My mind needs a break every once and while, and when I was reading pages at a time with no stop, it got to me. Obviously another stylized choice, but one I hope not to run across again. I loved the story and the overwhelming sense of dread. I just love end of civilization stories for some reason.

"Is it just this still, or has Moore lost weight?"

Considering the ordeal they're going through, I'd expect her to have an starved look, probably worse.

Posted by Ross at May 14, 2008 2:11 PM

comment #20

Celtia says ...

Actually Jeff's wrong; white blindness, not darkness, is the more usual experience of being blind.
The frustrating effect of shadow against light is referred to constantly by Milton in Paradise Lost.

Posted by Celtia at May 14, 2008 3:23 PM

comment #21