Skip to main content

I don't want to be in that bubble for my entire life.

The Souvenir
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Joanna Hogg’s autobiographical drama has been appearing on many best of 2019 lists, but I found myself resolutely unpersuaded by The Souvenir and her low-key, interior approach to “herself” as a young woman and the dependant relationship she gets into with an older man.

Hogg’s style is simultaneously docu-drama in its naturalism – the photography is so flat, you sometimes wonder if it might have been shot on video - and lacking in the immediacy and intimacy of character that might bring. That’s clearly intentional, part of the milieu she is depicting, but it means it’s very difficult to engage other than passively with her characters. I never felt as if I was watching a whole person on screen, so uninterested is Hogg in digging beneath the upper-middle-class veneer of form and behaviour she finds in herself.

I’ve seen complaints made about The Souvenir purely on the basis of the class status of Julie (Honor Swinton Byrne, Tilda’s daughter) and how her privilege is further distancing, but that kind of inverse snobbery really indicates more about the viewer’s prejudices than the picture itself. There’s a meta discussion going on in the film, of the artist as a young (naïve) woman feeling she should be making a film about Sunderland dockers, “ashamed of her own privilege” as she is and told she should “make a connection between your experience and the experience you’re trying to film”, and her adult self, Hogg recognising that the only way she can be true to who she is an artist is to discuss those experiences that are her own, even if they run the risk of appearing exactly what they are (privileged, elitist, exclusionary).

I don’t think any of that’s a problem with The Souvenir per se; the likes of Whit Stillman and Woody Allen has been accused of such remote self-indulgence and still produced highly engaging films. The Souvenir’s problem is that, as a film, it feels as ineffectual and unassuming as Julie herself when her “muse” (in terms of this film) Anthony (Tom Burke) isn’t the focus.

He, at least, in all his unvarnished assuredness and assumed sense of insight, is a magnetic presence, in no small part due to Burke’s marvellously measured, persuasively commanding monotone. We see clearly how he gives off the confidence of “knowing” and so imbues a sense of self-worth in others (Julie); “You are lost and you’ll be lost forever” he tells Julie after informing her how special and fragile she is, much to her doubt that she is anything other than unexceptional (in response to which we, as viewers, find ourselves nodding vigorously). Anthony works – he says – for the foreign office, and there are engaging vignettes when he’s on screen in all his airy pomposity, such as a conversation with Julie’s parents (one of whom is Tilda herself) about the IRA. On the other hand, Richard Ayoade’s cameo as a vaguely obnoxious filmmaker is too broad and self-conscious for the picture Hogg has fashioned.

And the “reveal” (it’s only a revelation to Julie) that Anthony is a junkie serves to underline the impasse of unspoken normalcy that precedes any real interaction in the picture. This distance, I suspect, is intended to resonate with the viewer, whereby one reads deeply into what isn’t said, isn’t shown and the lingering intervals where nothing much at all happens, but my response was mostly that this lack was all Hogg had to say. The kind of lack of anything to say that leads to a deeply autobiographical tale of how one doesn’t have anything to say (and only gets that through the influence of another, larger than life persona). The frame of The Souvenir is one of the oldest there is, and the only variant Hogg offers is to deflate everything that usually makes such tales of manipulation and addiction and obsession so compelling.

I wasn’t completely down on The Souvenir by any means. I admired the performances, even though I’m not sure if you can tell from this if Swinton Byrne will be a chip off the old block. There is something to be said for the capturing of reserve, particularly combined with an improvised approach, and the film does at least in part offer up some astutely-observed nuggets, but I can completely see why others compare Hogg’s films to watching paint dry. A film like this shouldn’t so much grip as mesmerise, but Hogg’s is quite resistible.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Big things have small beginnings.

Prometheus (2012) Post- Gladiator , Ridley Scott opted for an “All work and no pondering” approach to film making. The result has been the completion of as many movies since the turn of the Millennium as he directed in the previous twenty years. Now well into his seventies, he has experienced the most sustained period of success of his career.  For me, it’s also been easily the least-interesting period. All of them entirely competently made, but all displaying the machine-tooled approach that was previously more associated with his brother.

Ladies and gentlemen, this could be a cultural misunderstanding.

Mars Attacks! (1996) (SPOILERS) Ak. Akk-akk! Tim Burton’s gleefully ghoulish sci-fi was his first real taste of failure. Sure, there was Ed Wood , but that was cheap, critics loved it, and it won Oscars. Mars Attacks! was BIG, though, expected to do boffo business, and like more than a few other idiosyncratic spectaculars of the 1990s ( Last Action Hero , Hudson Hawk ) it bombed BIG. The effect on Burton was noticeable. He retreated into bankable propositions (the creative and critical nadir perhaps being Planet of the Apes , although I’d rate it much higher than the likes of Alice in Wonderland and Dumbo ) and put the brakes on his undisciplined goth energy. Something was lost. Mars Attacks! is far from entirely successful, but it finds the director let loose with his own playset and sensibility intact, apparently given the licence to do what he will.

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.

So the devil's child will rise from the world of politics.

The Omen (1976) (SPOILERS) The coming of the Antichrist is an evergreen; his incarnation, or the reveal thereof, is always just round the corner, and he can always be definitively identified in any given age through a spot of judiciously subjective interpretation of The Book of Revelation , or Nostradamus. Probably nothing did more for the subject in the current era, in terms of making it part of popular culture, than The Omen . That’s irrespective of the movie’s quality, of course. Which, it has to be admitted, is not on the same level as earlier demonic forebears Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist .

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

I’m giving you a choice. Either put on these glasses or start eating that trash can.

They Live * (1988) (SPOILERS) Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of They Live – I was a big fan of most things Carpenter at the time of its release – but the manner in which its reputation as a prophecy of (or insight into) “the way things are” has grown is a touch out of proportion with the picture’s relatively modest merits. Indeed, its feting rests almost entirely on the admittedly bravura sequence in which WWF-star-turned-movie-actor Roddy Piper, under the influence of a pair of sunglasses, first witnesses the pervasive influence of aliens among us who are sucking mankind dry. That, and the ludicrously genius sequence in which Roddy, full of transformative fervour, attempts to convince Keith David to don said sunglasses, for his own good. They Live should definitely be viewed by all, for their own good, but it’s only fair to point out that it doesn’t have the consistency of John Carpenter at his very, very best. Nada : I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick a

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

I think I’m Pablo Picasso!

Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) (SPOILERS) I get the impression that, whatever it is stalwart Venom fans want from a Venom movie, this iteration isn’t it. The highlight here for me is absolutely the wacky, love-hate, buddy-movie antics of Tom Hardy and his symbiote alter. That was the best part of the original, before it locked into plot “progression” and teetered towards a climax where one CGI monster with gnarly teeth had at another CGI monster with gnarly teeth. And so it is for Venom: Let There Be Carnage . But cutting quicker to the chase.