Skip to main content

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

Popular posts from this blog

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…

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

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…

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

Stupid adult hands!

Shazam! (2019)
(SPOILERS) Shazam! is exactly the kind of movie I hoped it would be, funny, scary (for kids, at least), smart and delightfully dumb… until the final act. What takes place there isn’t a complete bummer, but right now, it does pretty much kill any interest I have in a sequel.

I have discovered the great ray that first brought life into the world.

Frankenstein (1931)
(SPOILERS) To what extent do Universal’s horror classics deserved to be labelled classics? They’re from the classical Hollywood period, certainly, but they aren’t unassailable titans that can’t be bettered – well unless you were Alex Kurtzman and Chris Morgan trying to fashion a Dark Universe with zero ingenuity. And except maybe for the sequel to the second feature in their lexicon. Frankenstein is revered for several classic scenes, boasts two mesmerising performances, and looks terrific thanks to Arthur Edeson’s cinematography, but there’s also sizeable streak of stodginess within its seventy minutes.

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.

Just make love to that wall, pervert!

Seinfeld 2.10: The Statue
The Premise
Jerry employs a cleaner, the boyfriend of an author whose book Elaine is editing. He leaves the apartment spotless, but Jerry is convinced he has made off with a statue.