It's no big secret that I'm a fan of Park Chan-wook's work, and I've been waiting for this film since before it was even filmed. When I saw the first trailer, I wasn't terribly impressed. When I learned that this script was Wentworth Miller's first effort, I was concerned. When I sat down to watch the movie and got 30 minutes in and I was still rolling my eyes at the dialogue, I figured the movie would end up being nothing more than a nicely directed bad script. What more can I expect out of a movie with such winning dialogue as "Hey Stoker, or should I say STROKER now... cuz that's what I hear your mom's been doing... to your uncle." I truly believed the script would fall flat through the entirety of the movie.
To my delight, I was mistaken.
Stoker tells the story of India Stoker (played by the astonishing and gorgeous Mia Wasikowska.) On her 18th birthday, she loses her father to a tragic auto accident. At the funeral, she meets her long-lost uncle Charlie (Mathew Goode) who informs her that he's going to be living with her and her mother, Evelyn (Nicole Kidman) for a while. As his stay goes on, she finds herself becoming uncomfortable in ways she has never felt before. Soon enough, people start dying.
The only problem that I had with the movie was the script, which is unfortunately kind of a big problem. The plot itself is more than sufficient once it gets moving, but it takes a while for it to get to that point. In the movie's beginning stages, it seems like a pretty standard "spooky scary relative that we never heard of pops up" story, but as it goes on, the movie adds some really original twists that finally got me invested in the plot. One of these twists was a perverse sexual element that starts to overtake the characters. I won't spoil too much because it's pretty shocking. Be prepared to be appalled.
Enough about the plot though; while it holds its own, that isn't the strength of the movie. The real strength is in Park's directing. Had this movie been made by anyone else, I'm not sure if I would have liked it. Park's inclusion, however, made the film almost brilliant. The protagonist sees the world in an interesting way, and the way Park directs the movie puts the viewer in her world. All of her senses are hypersensitive. She sees things that others can't see, hears what others can't hear. In a particularly striking scene, she drowns out the sounds of women gossiping about her dead father by putting her ear to a table and rolling an egg around, causing the shell to slowly crumble. The sounds of women discussing her deceased father are drowned out to both India and the audience by the sounds of an eggshell crackling at a deafening volume. We as viewers experience what she senses, and it's brilliantly immersive.
Speaking of India, Wasikowska's performance is disturbed, sincere, innocent, and yet surprisingly sexy at times. We feel distant from all the other characters, which perfectly encompasses how India feels. Wasikowska is a joy to watch, captivating from the first time we see her running through a field to the bloody climax and bizarre epilogue. Kidman and Goode are fantastic as well, but Wasikowska brings the real power performance to this one.
In addition to Park's ability to immerse a viewer, he also knows where to point a camera. I saw this movie in a small theater with a low-quality projector, and I was still awed by how beautiful some of the shots were. The bizarre way the camera lingers on characters, the sharpening of a bloody pencil, the gorgeous landscape shots, blood splattering on delicate flowers, it's all very well-shot. You can tell that this movie is made by a Korean director. It feels like a Korean movie. The way it's shot, the way the characters deliver dialogue, the really bizarre choices made all feel very reminiscent of something Park directed in his native country.
If a theater near you is showing this and you don't mind a bit of bloody perversion, check it out. Park has crafted a nearly brilliant film in spite of being weighed down by a script that isn't always great. Rest assured, I probably won't be checking out the next "Written by Wentworth Miller" film unless this genius is behind the camera again. I truly hope that for Park's next venture into Hollywood cinema, he's given a script worthy of his legacy. Don't let my complaints of the script deter you, it really does pick up in the second half, it simply isn't spectacular nor worthy of a director of this calibre.
Beautiful, well-made, and dripping with both innocence and perversion, Stoker manages to overcome an iffy script through its flawless direction, intimate atmosphere, and stunning performances. With such strengths outweighing the weaknesses, it's hard not to forgive this film for its faults.
8/10
(On a much sadder note, the day that I made my first post to this blog, April 4th 2013, Roger Ebert died. A huge inspiration to me. I've been interested in critiquing film for as long as I can remember. The wit that he injects into his reviews rather than a flat analysis played a huge part in the way that I write my little reviews.
This inspires me to get better at reviewing, one of the things I love to do. Mr. Ebert as a whole was an inspiring man. Publishing more reviews than ever last year, despite his illness and handicap. Thank you, Mr. Ebert.
For his sake, I hope I Spit on Your Grave doesn't exist in whatever afterlife there may be.
RIP Rogert Ebert. You mean so much to aspiring writers such as myself.)
No comments:
Post a Comment