ViewGuide

Created Jul 13, 2014 05:17AM PST • Edited Jul 13, 2014 05:17AM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   Very Good 3.5

   Once in a while a different movie comes along delivering a new memory from the theatre, exploring new dimensions of the human experience in a different but refreshing way. Third Person achieves that result. It is a romantic drama distorted by the extremes in emphasis, not enough character development, overkill in the origin of the pain. Its most valuable contribution to the ticket price is that it requires viewing skills dulled by the formulas in Hollywood today. Set in three cities, Paris, Rome and New York, the film obviously bleeds of romance. That we witness the torment and its emotional carnage on Michael (Liam Neeson) in at least three parallel scenarios in a manner that is one part Vanilla Sky, one part The Sixth Sense and one part Memento is a very novel turn of events. But as in life, this effort is flawed. Although former presidents are not transformed into vampires, or not everyone is confused by life’s everyday occurrences, or that a savage bloody death does not occur in a taxi cab, writer-director Paul Haggis still manages to lazily utilize a sledgehammer to kill a fly to deliver the Michael’s central torment. Haggis also fails to connect all the dots to grant enough coherency to the story so that the guys waiting on their dates by the ladies room could even agree on the plot. However, Haggis masterfully delivers a stream of conflicted stream-of-consciousness that arrives with deep, painful emotions by setting several parallel stories of coping, forgiveness and regret. This instrument to tell an otherwise numbing story of loss is so long lost that it feels new. The deep cast is filled with actors who have impressed in the past, and we see glimpses of effort and growth from the supporting cast perhaps in recognition of Haggis’ methods. But in general the cast either mails-it-in or rises from a low base to deliver just enough passion and clarity to allow the moviegoer to relate to the romantic torment on the screen. Just enough is achieved in its 130 minutes to allow this movie to see the photic zone from the abyssal depths of mediocrity.

4. Acting

   Very Good 3.5

   The masterful design of the movie required at least this much talent to tell the story. Neeson as Michael is the central character with whom we travel in his emotional tormented journey. In the end, we learn he had very good reason to be suffering. He and his wife, Elaine(Kim Basinger) have suffered a terrible loss with Neeson requiring time for himself. He goes off to repair himself in a hotel where we witness his stream of obviously distressed consciousness in the form of five, that’s right, five emotionally charged plots steeped with enough symbolism to sort it out in the end, but wrapped in silken sheets to maintain the mystery of the story along the way. Throw in the sparse by welcomed interactions with Basinger, and the viewer has a lot of homework with long deadlines to finally rate the performances of the cast.

5. Male Stars Very Good 3.5

   There are two lead actors, more due to the best performance in the movie (Adrien Brody as Sean) than to the script. Neeson is a great actor capable of adding life to a script, but he is a lousy romantic lead now especially when paired with the girl any guy would want to have in his life. Neeson also is afflicted with the inability to portray pathetic vulnerability which is required and written in this script. Quite the opposite for Brody. His performance melds the false confidence if not arrogance into vulnerability as we do not often see. In his sub-plot, Brody is asked to deliver the realization he has been had over and over again as if each event is new. He does that and is able to portray the superficial belief that cash can buy you forgiveness. He delivers the strongest performance of the movie and raises the overall performance of the lead men from OK to Very Good.

6. Female Stars Great 4.0

   Ah, the women. Olivia Wilde as Anna and Moran Atias as Monica elevate the script as only women in love can do. Wilde is asked to pull double duty in the role of the devilish lover by being involved in two forbidden loves, one of which should be unavailable to all women. It is her forbidden relationship with Michael that we see what this young actress can do in the category of becoming truly irresistible to a man. The men leaving the theatre crave Anna, the women envy her. And finally Hollywood delivers through the nude hotel hallway scene everyone in first class has had. Wilde turns in the adulterous role from Breakfast at Tiffanys.
   Meanwhile, Monica is paired with Sean to unwind Michael’s guilt. Unknown throughout the script, the viewer is permitted to paint the canvas of her character with their own content. Normally in this situation we are left to staring at her breasts, but Atias delivers mystery and arousal and emotional pain the way Audrey Hepburn promised she could allure men, by simple elegant physical acts.

7. Female Costars Very Good 3.5

   Stereotyped for decades, I don’t know if two blondes in the same movie were ever as effective as they were in this one. Maria Bello and Kim Basinger were the best of the fine strokes on the canvas. It is Bello as Theresa is Sean’s ex-wife who somehow portrays pain, coping and healing the best in her limited time on the screen. We see her at the pool battling pain by only the expression on her face. We hear the pain of her coping in her dealings with Julia (Kunis) in the context of modern life. Bello was great. And look, I have liked Kim Basinger (Elaine) since 9 1/2 weeks enjoying the glimpses of excellence in her intermittent career. Against the backdrop of her passionate personal craziness that any real man seeks in a woman, the scene with Elaine and Michael on the phone captures the hold any woman has on a man in love with her as well as any Hollywood has produced. On the other hand in a movie where not enough time is devoted to the other characters. we get enough of Julia (Kunis). Something went wrong here, her scene in tears with Rick should have been the crescendo to Julia’s story but it wasn’t. The viewer is left wondering what might have become of this movie if Wilde, or Brody, or Franco, or Atias would have had the time to tell us more about their characters.

8. Male Costars Good 3.0

   It’s in the development of the male supporting roles where we see the film breakdown with the challenge of executing a complex story. Anna’s other romance is carried out here and should have been more poignant and relevant to the final portrait of Michael’s anguish. Sadly it was a queer moment of spooning and text messages. James Franco as Rick portrayed another dimension of Michael’s pain. Franco and his sub-plot was underutilized. If ever there was a need to extend the movie, it was here in Rick’s story. Sadly it was wasted on Julia, Rick’s counterpart in suffering. Likewise, Jake (David Harewood) left us wanting, fully capable of extracting the damage to Michael’s career but untapped in that regard. It was Michael’s exchange with Jake demanding the straight skinny that reminded us of Neeson’s brilliance. We could have used Jake more in this movie.

10. Film

    Very Good 3.5

    The film succeeds in surprising ways. The hotel room is given larger dimensions than ever before. This is a good thing since it is used for ambiance heavily in the movie. The tried and true capitals of romance deliver. Everyone is in love or wants to be throughout the movie set in Rome, Paris and New York. The use of motorcycles and street width do no harm to Sean’s perilous journey. The director showed passion vividly with the absence of make-up, the presence of elevators, flowers and sheets as well as it can be portrayed. These things simply saved the film from itself it seems.

11. Direction Good 3.0

    You get the sense that Haggis batted two for three in his choice to use Wilde, Atias and Kunis as vessels of Michael’s pain. The use of the fade out at the end of the movie is as brilliant and needed as its use has been. But the use of the hotel is the most brilliant choice The winding path in the hotel connecting Julia to Anna, Rick, Theresa and Michael is extraordinary befitting the complexity of this movie . The symbolism of Anna’s red dress is also well placed in the movie.

12. Play Very Good 3.5

    More time and/or script was needed to learn about these characters.

13. Music Good 3.0

    The music choice for the dance between Michael and Anna would have required most modern day directors to take the scene immediately to intercourse on the dance floor, but in the spirit of delayed gratification we see and learn more about it later.

14. Visuals Really Great 4.5

    The red dress, the white flowers, the mid-level balcony views capped the effort.

15. Content

16. Edge

    Risqué 2.0

17. Sex Titillating 2.5

    The Anna – Michael relationship provides almost all of the sexual stimulus and again the director allows the viewers to take the story where they want to go with it. The hallway scene to Michael’s dominance over Anna.

18. Violence Gentle 1.5

19. Rudeness Salty 2.0

21. Reality

    Glib 1.4

    The movie is somewhere between natural and glib mainly due to the foreign sense of European misogyny, otherwise it is quite a normal story of pain and healing.

22. Circumstantial Glib 1.4

23. Biological Glib 1.4

24. Physical Glib 1.4