The worst prejudices are often your own, as they're the ones you should really be able to do something about. As part of Film Bin we've recently done a commentary for 'The Birdcage' and I have to admit that it was a big struggle to make myself watch it. I don't hate anyone or wish social groups ceased to exist, but I can be a little unsettled by effeminacy and sexuality in general and was just unwilling to put myself through it. I did watch it though, as new experiences and open minds are partly the purpose of Film Bin. Oddly I ended up being bored more than anything. Weird, isn't it? My prejudice could have been blocking me, but it didn't feel like there was someone to connect to in the movie for me personally.
So, against this reluctant backdrop I watched this movie and my main fears were unfounded as they normally are. Sure, I was a little put off by house-boy Agador and Nathan Lane but they weren't major problems at all. Actually I've skipped ahead a bit. Let's talk about the plot a little. Val (a boy, to ease name confusion) and Barbara are a young couple who want to get married. Barbara's dad is a super-conservative Republican senator (Gene Hackman) while Val's dad Armand (Robin Williams) owns a gay club in Miami and lives with his drag queen partner Albert (Nathan Lane). Val manipulates Armand into pretending to be non-gay when he meets Barbara's parents and therein lies the plot of the movie.
Technically the film is excellent, the casting is well done with every important role thought out and filled wonderfully. The excellence that is Gene Hackman feels wasted in a role that is underwritten. The sets and colours and costuming is all appealing and comparatively simple. Where I think that the movie falls apart is that it doesn't fall into being either a screwball comedy or a gushy Robin Williams movie. Williams is excellent in this film, held firmly in check, and driving every scene he's in with his huge manly moustache. I think the director may have had him in a virtual headlock the whole movie. It's also a little set-bound, which is fitting as it's a remake of a Franco-Italian movie that was itself an adaptation from a French play. Some more scenes could really have been moved outside, but perhaps they didn't have the budget? And finally the character Val is not particularly likeable so you never feel behind this plan of pretence that should power the film until the moral message at the end.
It's strange to not be able to connect to such a good movie. The performances are in the main excellent. Nathan Lane is wonderful as Albert and probably could not be bettered but the Hackman character is simply a caricature and never makes it to full depth, even after the final reveal of Val's parents. Perhaps it's okay to be a warm-hearted mildly funny movie with no message but I would have loved it to be screwball. Instead it does reach a level of farce in the closing half without ever reaching for the sky and is a bit muddled. I don't know what to make of it except that maybe I missed the point? Did the Senator overcome his prejudices or was he a jerk to his daughter and son-in-law thereafter? Did Val learn anything. Was there a consequence beyond that they did get married?
Ultimately I see where it's funny to other people and can see how good it is technically, so I say it's a good comedy drama that's just a bit too long and insufficiently motivated through the young couple being fairly unsympathetic.
Prejudices can be overcome, but it's hard if you don't you have them!
O.
No comments:
Post a Comment