|
|
![]() |
|
Goodbye, Lover, and hello, dullard. By Zak Weisfeld APRIL 26, 1999: Roland Joffé is a serious man. Or was. It is a gravity that extends well beyond his Continental insistence on using an accent in his last name. Joffé's filmography is a testament to a man who sees movies as a powerful political and artistic forcea means to educate the masses on the cruelty and horror that lurks in the world, on great evils and personal faith. Both The Killing Fields and The Mission were potent films, beautiful and terrible and gutsy in a conservative way.
Goodbye, Lover is the expectedly twisty tail of a wife, her husband, her lover (her husband's brother), his (the brother's) wife (and other brother's lover), and four million dollars. There's plenty of sex, no shortage of murder, and a wise-cracking cop, which is all as it should be. The one element that is ruinously absent is the fun. Patricia Arquette is wife and femme fatale Sandra Dunmore, a real estate agent given to extremely short skirts and wild sex in awkward places. Arquette is well suited to the short skirts and the sexno current actress, with the exception of Lucy Lawless, is as physically suited to the demands of pulp. She is not, however, terribly strong in the fatale areas. Despite her sexpot looks and a charming toughness, she seems without malice, neither greedy enough nor ruthless enough to kill for money. The failure to cast Linda Fiorentino for the role is exacerbated by Joffé's clumsy touch with actresses in general. Were there any women at all in The Killing Fields or The Mission? As it is, Sandra is given two optionspretending to cry or pretending to seduce, neither of them with much heart. The saddest part is that she is the best character in the film. Mary Louise Parker would disappear from the film altogether if it weren't for the occasional close-up on her lips. And Dermot Mulroney and Don Johnson, as the brothers Dunmore, ably demonstrate why their work is infrequently seen on the big screen. Both seem oddly distant from the demands of the genre, like mud wrestlers afraid to get their bikinis dirty.
None of which, by itself, is enough to doom Goodbye, Lover. After all, the pleasure to be found in a genre film rarely come from originality. Instead they tend to pop out of the tension between irony and sincerity. A good pulp film is not high brow with bad intentions, it's an entirely different beast. The good ones are made with a love of the conventions, and an understanding that they are essentially limitingand desperately need to be broken, or at least mocked. The bad ones come in many forms, one of which is Goodbye, Lover. I would be curious to know what compelled Joffé to take on this project. Was it financial desperation, or an inverse Woody Allen syndrome? Maybe he just got tired of being the genocide guy. Regardless, what comes through in Goodbye, Lover is a condescending distance, a distance that makes this the worst kind of pulp thrillerthe boring kind.
|
![]() |
|
|
Film & TV: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Cover . News . Film . Music . Arts . Books . Comics . Search
![]() |
© 1995-99 DesertNet, LLC . Metro Pulse . Info Booth . Powered by Dispatch |
|