Thursday, January 19, 2006


I went to see Woody Allen's Match Point yesterday. I am still somewhat flabbergasted that both Match Point and Brokeback Mountain managed to get into the top 5 nominations for best movie at the Golden Globes. Never mind that critics everwhere seem to be raving about them. Am I going mad or something? Does no-one else think that they are both decidedly average movies, if not actually bad ones. The only word I could think of after viewing Match Point was 'clunky'. Script, Acting, etc etc. Jonathan Rhys Myers remains well and truly a stage actor, the only emotional work being done by his eyes (teary = emotional, dry = cool/stolid). His voice is deadpan beyond belief. As for the dialogue, well I am reminded of the old Star Wars chestnut that 'You can write this *&^%, but you can't say it'. Really dreadful, not worthy of a student film presentation. Has Woody Allen never watched an episode of CSI?? Does he associate with actual people?

As for Brokeback, well I came out wondering if people would give it a second look if the characters happened to be a man and a woman rather than two guys? I'm guessing not. Simply as a relationship movie I feel it fails on so many levels. Actually, I came out not caring one way or the other. It was the romantic equivalent of the single-plot-spike narrative that has dogged Hollywood in the last 15 years, too simplistic to be interesting, lacking any sort of nuance in the 'complex relationship' stakes. Ooh, frustrated love, let's make a movie. I just didn't care, and I'm tired of going to movies where I don't care about the characters and their emotionally asphixiated lives. The Michelle Williams character in Brokeback was one I wanted to follow up on, but that tangent went nowhere in particular.