She’s back! The murderess is back!

The Dressmaker

(2015)

(SPOILERS) A gleefully warped, jet black comedy from Jocelyn Moorhouse, one that, for the most part, manages to juggle its potentially jarring shifts in tone and plot. The Dressmaker is a revenge drama, a murder mystery, a comedy of small town jealousies and a morality play concerning dark secrets, in which Kate Winslet’s pariah arrives home and, like a vindictive version of Juliette Binoche in Chocolat, transforms lives through her special gift of seamstressing. But Moorhouse’s approach is closer to Joe Dante’s The ‘Burbs, such that the outback settlement of Dungatar is populated by larger-than-life grotesques and crazies, and is fuelled by a vibrant stylistic approach that veers to the cartoonish.

In 1951, Myrtle Dunnage (Winslet) returns to the town she left a quarter of a century earlier, announcing “I’m back, you bastards”. She has revenge on her mind, and questions she needs answered (“Am I a murderer?”) Myrtle immediately causes a stir, rousing her caustic mother Molly (Judy Davis) from her bed and showing up at a football game in a provocative red number. She proceeds to engineer startling couturial changes on the townsfolk, in particular the fortunes of Gertrude (Sarah Snook), who attracts the attention of hot catch William (James Mackay), much to the disgust of his rich mother (Caroline Goodall). Myrtle has both a staunch defender, the cross-dressing police sergeant (Hugo Weaving) who sent her away all those years before, and a captivated admirer, rugged Teddy (Liam Hemsworth), and the picture unfolds in an unhurried and ramshackle fashion, frequently diverting into character cul-de-sacs when it isn’t picking up the threads of the did she/ didn’t she murder plot.

Indeed, at two hours, The Dressmaker is possibly a little on the over-extended side. Since this is a spoiler review, I’ll note that I assumed something of note had to happen in the last half hour, because by the 90-minute mark we had reached a “happily ever after” point with Teddy that seemed entirely out-of-sorts with the film’s deliciously unsentimental premise. So, while some may be distressed at Teddy’s demise in silo of sorghum, I felt it entirely appropriate. Indeed, the succession of deaths that follow run the gamut of tragic (Molly), hilarious (Barry Otto’s no good, wife-beating, paedophile hunchback local chemist) and appropriately gruesome (Shane Bourne’s malignant rapist), but all are in sync with a picture that has unfurled a broad, quirky canvas; it’s only the romance, as well-played as it is, that doesn’t feel built to last.

I admired Moorhouse’s Proof, but she rather lost me when she departed for America, so it’s encouraging to see her back on her own turf, delivering something so distinctive (Moorhouse adapted Rosalie Ham’s novel with her husband PJ Hogan). Of course, the eccentricity inevitably suggests other films and filmmakers. I was particularly impressed with how reliant (in a good way) the picture is on its score, a wonderful piece from David Hirschfelder, to carry the shifts in tone; playful (he gets on board with the western element, Winslet as the gunslinger returning to town to right wrongs), emotive, with just the right kind of complementary verve (such that when the picture occasionally seems unsure of its path, Hirschfelder is there to guide it). Coming across like Michael Nyman by way of Carter Burwell (there’s definitely a Coen Brothers feel to the pitch black humour), but as if applied to a Jeanne-Pierre Jeunet, it’s one of the best soundtracks I’ve heard recently.

Moorhouse has also assembled a quite superlative cast. Winslet and Davis are at the centre, exhibiting marvellous chemistry as the feuding/loving mother and daughter, the latter taking full advantage of her frequently hilarious, outrageous/outspoken dialogue to steal the show. Weaving’s sensitive sergeant is adorable, while Snook who can do no wrong in anything, essaying a transformation from dowdy to gorgeous while transitioning from vaguely sympathetic to callous and horrid and remaining recognisably the same character throughout.

Goodall is also great, and Kerry Fox, in a far cry from Shallow Grave, is the despicable, Machiavellian school mistress. Moorhouse even elicits a memorable performance from Liam Hemsworth, something I scarcely thought possible. Maybe it’s because he’s using his own accent, or simply because his Hollywood roles are so indifferent, but this is the first time he’s made any kind of impression in anything I’ve seen. It’s difficult not to note the age gap between Winslet and Hemsworth/Snook, since they’re intended to be of the same generation, but it’s never something that feels like a deal breaker.

Some of the plot twists (the developmentally disabled brother of Teddy is able to provide the crucial evidence in the murder) seem rather derivative, and there are times The Dressmaker becomes a bit too shaggy dog for its own good, but the general milieu and tone are so inviting that it’s hard to resist. And I admire that the picture sticks to its guns, in terms of attitude, not copping out; next to no one in Dungatar is virtuous or repentant (save Weaving, who must atone for past sins against Myrtle), and Moorhouse is unstinting on the retribution in a way that proves both funny and fitting. A very pleasant surprise, and hopefully The Dressmaker’s director won’t take another 18 years to make her fifth feature.

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

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.

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

Two hundred thousand pounds, for this outstanding example of British pulchritude and learning.

The Avengers 4.18: The Girl From Auntie
I’ve mentioned that a few of these episodes have changed in my appreciation since I last watched the series, and The Girl from Auntie constitutes a very pronounced uptick. Indeed, I don’t know how I failed to rate highly the estimable Liz Fraser filling in for Diana Rigg – mostly absent, on holiday –for the proceedings (taking a not dissimilar amateur impostor-cum-sidekick role to Fenella Fielding in the earlier The Charmers). I could watch Fraser all day, and it’s only a shame this was her single appearance in the show.

The past is a statement. The future is a question.

Justified Season Six
(SPOILERS) There have been more than enough damp squib or so-so show finales of late to have greeted the demise of Justified with some trepidation. Thankfully it avoids almost every pitfall it might have succumbed to and gives us a satisfying send-off that feels fitting for its characters. This is a series that, even at its weakest (the previous season) is leagues ahead of most fare in an increasingly saturated sphere, so it’s a relief – even if there was never much doubt on past form – that it doesn’t drop the ball.

And of those character fates? In a show that often pulls back from giving Raylan Givens the great hero moments (despite his maintaining a veneer of ultra-cool, and getting “supporting hero” moments as he does in the finale, 6.13 The Promise), it feels appropriate that his entire (stated) motivation for the season should be undermined. He doesn’t get to take down Boyd Crowder, except in an incarcerating sense, but as always he is sanguine about it. After…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

You’re only seeing what’s in front of you. You’re not seeing what’s above you.

Mr. Robot Season 2
(SPOILERS) I suspect my problem with Mr. Robot may be that I want it to be something it isn’t, which would entail it being a much better show than it is. And that’s its own fault, really, or rather creator and writer-director of umpteen episodes Sam Esmail’s, who has intentionally and provocatively lured his audience into thinking this really is an up-to-the-minute, pertinent, relevant, zeitgeisty show, one that not only has a huge amount to say about the illusory nature of our socio-economic system, and consequently the bedrock of our collective paradigm, but also the thorny subject of reality itself, both of which have been variably enticing dramatic fodder since the Wachowski siblings and David Fincher released a one-two punch at the end of the previous millennium.

In that sense, Mr. Robot’s thematic conceit is very much of a piece with its narrative form; it’s a conjuring act, a series of sleights of hand designed to dazzle the viewer into going with the flow, rath…

It’s the Mount Everest of haunted houses.

The Legend of Hell House (1973)
(SPOILERS) In retrospect, 1973 looks like a banner year for the changing face of the horror movie. The writing was on the wall for Hammer, which had ruled the roost in Britain for so long, and in the US the release of The Exorcist completed a transformation of the genre that had begun with Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby; the realistic horror film, where the terror was to be found in the everyday (the home, the family). Then there was Don’t Look Now, which refracted horror tropes through a typically Nic Roeg eye, fracturing time and vision in a meditative exploration of death and grief. The Wicker Man, meanwhile, would gather its reputation over the passing years. It stands as a kind of anti-horror movie, eschewing standard scares and shock tactics for a dawning realisation of the starkness of opposing belief systems and the fragility of faith.

In comparison to this trio, The Legend of Hell House is something of a throwback; its slightly stagey tone, and cobweb…

Now In Full Color, with a Happier Ending

Search This Blog