Skip to main content

Uncommonly capacious rump on the cherub.

Mr. Turner
(2014)

Perhaps Mike Leigh’s latest period picture (three of his last six films have strated from the present day) is indicative of a director who is increasingly comfortable with casting his net wider for material as he approaches his dotage. Perhaps. Mr. Turner, a rambling, unfocussed account of the last third of the artist’s life, is readily identifiable as a Leigh picture, only with its patronising treatment of working class characters slightly lidded under the mores and speech of more than a century and a half hence.


I invariably enjoy Leigh’s films, but his tendency to caricature has always been a bugbear, along with his appetite for letting sentiment swell forth from the melodrama. Here, we see the former exemplified in the one-note comedy nag that is Turner’s ex-mistress Sarah Danby (Leigh regular Ruth Wilson) and his inevitably crude dig at the upper classes as personified by Joshua McGuire’s twittish art critic John Ruskin. Nevertheless, the actual satire of art criticism in the Ruskin scenes is quite amusing; Turner’s interrogation of Ruskin, in which he asks him to which he is more partial, a steak and kidney or a steak and ham pie, makes for a highly satisfying demolishing. I guess my problem is, I’ve seen Leigh essay this sort of posh prat one too many times before.


Mr. Turner is frequently very playful, much of this down to Timothy Spall’s spirited (and Oscar nominated and Cannes Best Actor-winning) performance. Turner is frequently characterised by a collection of grunts or bronchial wheezes, registering unverbalised contempt or disagreement. However, when he does speak his language is invariably laugh-out-loud funny, a compendium of Dickensian erudition (“conundrous” indeed) and deadpan humour.


Cinematographer Dick Pope (or Poop, as he is also known), Leigh’s regular collaborator, furnishes the film with some stunning digital landscapes. If the interiors don’t really impress, except when lit from without, as a means to view a scene from a window, this is more than made up for by the vistas, and the creation of painterly light. Seaside Margate, sunlit rivers, cliffs, mountains, and skies are lensed in transportative fashion.


This is understandably the most exacting of Leigh’s films when it comes to the image itself, a means to appreciate the eye of the artist. Leigh is also careful to comment on the changing landscape of art. Mr. Turner takes in the mockery that greeted Turner’s transition from figurative to impressionistic, which involves his improvising foodstuffs as painterly materials. The satirised form of this, whereby the wealthy and foolish will buy anything masquerading as art is summed up by the stage recital “It is the latest thing in art, it looks like bits of old jam tart”. Such a response might be compared to modern artists like Hirst and Emin. There’s also Turner’s guarded reaction to the new medium of photography. Learning that colour remains a mystery, he mutters “And long may it remain so”.


The depiction of the artistic establishment is also effective, from miserablist debtor Haydon, played by Martin Savage (“Mr Haydon, you’re exceedingly tiresome”; Haydon later rejoinders “Do you not tire of boats and the fiery firmament?”), to Turner’s feud with Constable and the bizarre varnishing day in which artists would competitively apply finishing touches to their work.


But much of the picture concerns itself with Turner’s personal life. It’s not quite a portrait of the artist as a shagger, but his mistreatment of housekeeper Hanna Danby (Marion Bailey), niece of Sarah and his neglected sexual vassal, and affair with Sarah Booth (Marion Bailey) take up much of the running time.


The plus side of Leigh’s approach is that he eschews the typical biopic treadmill of “This happened then this happened” for a less precise, more anecdotal affair. The downside is that he cannot escape the structural curse of the biopic; we still finish up with him snuffing it. Mr. Turner is leisurely in the extreme, which isn’t a problem per se, but it has little glue holding its parts together, relying on the audience’s goodwill towards its characters. 


Individual scenes are nice-and-all (the encounter with Lesley Manville’s scientist Mary Somerville and her insights into magnetism, where she is given the appealing line "The universe is chaotic and you make us see it") a bawdy song sung at a respectable gathering and the gasps it gathers) but they’re indicative of the wilfully meandering decisions Leigh has made. He hasn’t so much unfurled a broad canvas as leapt about all over it with little clear design.


One review referenced how appropriate it was that Leigh didn’t win any big prizes (apart from Cannes, of course) for Mr. Turner, as both he and his subject were anti-establishment figures. That seems to be blindly ignoring Leigh’s frequent BAFTA wins and regular Oscar nominations. Not that the academy(s) are particularly prone to bestowing deserved prizes on the best and brightest, but the lack of garlands for Mr. Turner may be more of a recognition that a great performance and spellbinding cinematography don’t necessarily make a masterpiece.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You killed my sandwich!

Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020)
(SPOILERS) One has to wonder at Bird of Prey’s 79% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I mean, such things are to be taken with a pinch of salt at the best of times, but it would be easy, given the disparity between such evident approval and the actually quality of the movie, to suspect insincere motives on the part of critics, that they’re actually responding to its nominally progressive credentials – female protagonists in a superhero flick! – rather than its content. Which I’m quite sure couldn’t possibly be the case. Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) isn’t very good. The trailers did not lie, even if the positive reviews might have misled you into thinking they were misleading.

Afraid, me? A man who’s licked his weight in wild caterpillars? You bet I’m afraid.

Monkey Business (1931)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers’ first feature possessed of a wholly original screenplay, Monkey Business is almost brazenly dismissive towards notions of coherence, just as long as it loosely supports their trademark antics. And it does so in spades, depositing them as stowaways bound for America who fall in with a couple of mutually antagonistic racketeers/ gangsters while attempting to avoid being cast in irons. There’s no Margaret Dumont this time out, but Groucho is more than matched by flirtation-interest Thelma Todd.

Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honour – which is probably more than she ever did.

Duck Soup (1933)
(SPOILERS) Not for nothing is Duck Soup acclaimed as one of the greatest comedies ever, and while you’d never hold it against Marx Brothers movies for having little in the way of coherent plotting in – indeed, it’s pretty much essential to their approach – the presence of actual thematic content this time helps sharpen the edges of both their slapstick and their satire.

You’re a disgrace to the family name of Wagstaff, if such a thing is possible.

Horse Feathers (1932)
(SPOILERS) After a scenario that seemed feasible in Monkey Business – the brothers as stowaways – Horse Feathers opts for a massive stretch. Somehow, Groucho (Professor Quincy Adams Wagstaff) has been appointed as the president of Huxley University, proceeding to offer the trustees and assembled throng a few suggestions on how he’ll run things (by way of anarchistic creed “Whatever it is, I’m against it”). There’s a reasonably coherent mission statement in this one, however, at least until inevitably it devolves into gleeful incoherence.

To defeat the darkness out there, you must defeat the darkness inside yourself.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
Easily the best of the Narnia films, which is maybe damning it with faint praise. 

Michael Apted does a competent job directing (certainly compared to his Bond film - maybe he talked to his second unit this time), Dante Spinotti's cinematography is stunning and the CGI mostly well-integrated with the action. 

Performance-wise, Will Poulter is a stand-out as a tremendously obnoxious little toff, so charismatic you're almost rooting for him. Simon Pegg replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep and delivers a touching performance.
***

Bad luck to kill a seabird.

The Lighthouse (2019)
(SPOILERS) Robert Eggers’ acclaimed – and Oscar-nominated – second feature is, in some respects, a similar beast to his previous The Witch, whereby isolated individuals of bygone eras are subjected to the unsparing attentions of nature. In his scheme of things, nature becomes an active, embodied force, one that has no respect for the line between imaginings and reality and which proceeds to test its targets’ sanity by means of both elements and elementals. All helped along by unhealthy doses of superstition. But where The Witch sustained itself, and the gradual unravelling of the family unit led to a germane climax, The Lighthouse becomes, well, rather silly.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…