One negative can overshadow one hundred positives,
and so proves Mike Nichols’ Closer, a movie which
contains some of the most contrived dialogue in years.
It is packed with terrific performances, with those of
rising star Natalie Portman and the popular Jude Law
being the best, in addition to some very provocative
direction. However, when the characters converse—one of
the things they do for most of the movie’s duration—the
film comes across as more of an over-the-top and
laughably stupid cinematic exercise than an intelligent
and observant character study. Sex and affairs are
serious business, but when described in the graphically
overblown light of Closer, they seem profoundly
silly. The movie could seriously qualify as a classic
dark comedy.
The opening sequence of the
film serves as case-in-point that Closer would
probably be better off with its dialogue tracks muted.
Amidst the apocalyptic title song, which works immensely
well, at first, but becomes increasingly annoying as the
film progresses, Dan (Law) and Alice (Portman) face each
other as they each walk along a London street, thinking
that they will soon intersect and never look back on the
moment in time again. But, the audience, of course,
knows otherwise. Dan stares at Alice and Alice stares at
Dan, both of them hypnotized and flirtatious, as Nichols
uses a cooling slow-motion-like technique. Consumed and
distracted by her vision of him, Alice is hit by an
approaching taxi. Quick to help her, Dan rushes to the
scene, and as she comes out of unconsciousness with only
a few minor scratches, seconds later, the words “Hello,
stranger,” pour carefully and vulnerably from her lips
and into his eardrums. Law and Portman share chemistry
and the style they immerse themselves in is
accomplished, but let’s be honest with ourselves, here.
Sure, the comment is made in a partially tongue-in-cheek
way, confirming that Alice and Dan have been
communicating through body language for the entire scene
long, but, seriously, “Hello, Stranger”? “Hello,
Stranger”? “Hello, Stranger”?
After a trip to the emergency
room, Alice and Dan develop a serious, albeit ambiguous,
relationship. Later, they meet Anna (Julia Roberts), a
photographer who takes both of their pictures, and
eventually her fate-sprung husband, Larry (Clive Owen),
a dermatologist. During Closer’s duration, each
of the four cheats on the other; cross-cutting affairs
within the quadrangle become commonplace in their lives.
Not to mention that, in the interest of keeping their
relationships “truthful”—which here really means more
extensively backstabbing one another—questions about
partners’ sexual habits, when cheating, often arise. If
dealt with realistically, scenes containing these
exchanges could’ve been heartbreaking and revelatory.
However, in the hands of writer Patrick Marber, who
adapted the screenplay from his own play, they only seem
artificial. In particular, a conversation between Larry
and Anna, which includes a detailed account of a session
of intercourse she has with Dan, is an eye-roller of
catastrophic proportions.
The reason why the lines that
the characters recite are so inept is because they are
written for the sole purpose of sounding pleasant to the
viewer’s ear. With them, Marber creates a rat-tat-tat
rhythm with a stunning command of the English language.
In this, he sacrifices any hope of exposing real, raw
emotion, which is essential to this type of film’s
success. How many real people who behave in as
despicable a nature as the characters in Closer
can actually speak so eloquently? Not many, if any. I’m
not even prepared to ponder how all four of them just so
happen to be brilliant, deep thinkers, and express such
amazingly well. If it was written in a novel, maybe the
clever, talky dialogue of Closer might make for
an imaginative experience. However, when coming from the
mouths of actual actors, it just seems stupid. As a
result of this, I didn’t feel motivated to even attempt
to understand the characters’ various motives and
feelings, rarely allowing me to become involved in the
movie. For much of the duration, I sat back in my chair
and thought about how anyone, character or living
person, could become as big of a loser as one of the
four central figures in Closer.
Marber certainly has some great ideas, but his dialogue
misrepresents them.
I can admire the achievements
of certain individuals in Closer (mainly
Portman’s, Law’s, and Owen’s), but cannot help
but wonder why they chose to participate in the making
of a movie that was, essentially, dead on arrival. Did
they not read the script before signing onto the
project? Perhaps they simply wanted to participate in a
film that had the “courage” to discuss issues that are
seldom talked about in pieces of the medium, not
realizing that Closer’s explicitness would
ultimately only add to its ridiculousness? Whatever
their motives, they have wasted their precious efforts
on a blatant and puerile attempt at exploring sex and
deceit, which will only be remembered for its repugnant
dishonesty towards a touchy subject.
-Danny, Bucket Reviews (12.28.2004)