Skip to main content

A drunken, sodden, pill-popping cat lady.

The Woman in the Window

(SPOILERS) Disney clearly felt The Woman in the Window was so dumpster-bound that they let Netflix snatch it up… where it doesn’t scrub up too badly compared to their standard fare. It seems Tony Gilroy – who must really be making himself unpopular in the filmmaking fraternity, as producers’ favourite fix-it guy - was brought in to write reshoots after Joe Wright’s initial cut went down like a bag of cold, or confused, sick in test screenings. It’s questionable how much he changed, unless Tracy Letts’ adaptation of AJ Finn’s 2018 novel diverged significantly from the source material. Because, as these things go, the final movie sticks fairly closely to the novel’s plot.

Usually, when a thriller requires retooling, it’s to muddle up the perpetrator’s identity or add more action. You can find this kind of thing going on as far back as Hitchcock’s Suspicion. Here, however, making the murderer the same character as in the book isn’t doing The Woman in the Window any favours. Amy Adams’ agoraphobic psychologist (yes, that’s right) Anna Fox sees what she thinks is the murder of new neighbour Jane (Julianne Moore) in the house across the street. Turns out Jane is actually Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Moore (Katie) is the biological mother of Jane’s stepson Ethan (Fred Hechinger) and ex of dad/husband Alistair (Gary Oldman). Oh, and that Ethan is a budding psycho killer whose activities are covered for by understanding parents.

The trailer made The Woman in the Window look as if events might be a fiendish plot on the parts of Alistair and Jane to mess with Anna’s head, so it was probably inevitable that the explanation would be something more mundane and generic – in the vein of late-80s to mid-90s “psychological” thrillers, often also featuring female protagonists (The Silence of the Lambs, Sleeping with the Enemy, Copycat, Sliver, The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Pacific Heights, Single White Female, Kiss the Girls). Wright emphasises such inter-referentiality, only with a succession of clips of way earlier and classier movies (Laura, Spellbound, Dark Passage, Rear Window). And of course, there’s inter-referentiality, and there’s being derivative. One of the typical signifiers of derivative entries is an entirely underwhelming antagonist. I’m not suggesting either Wyatt Russell or Oldman would have been the solution to this, but they’re at least vaguely dangerous and giving it some welly; Hechinger’s simply faux-creepy and pathetic.

The Woman in the Window’s also pulling other clichés in its wake as it progresses, such that Anna is an addled unreliable heroine, tanked up on booze and pills and hallucinating conversations with her deceased husband and daughter (Anthony Mackie and Mariah Bozeman). She’s got (white?) guilt, you see, having crashed the car that killed them. There’s a cumulative feeling, what with this, Hillbilly Elegy and Sharp Objects, that Adams is on a roll of intoxicated roles, which was growing old fast at least a movie ago. It would seem Gone Girl kick started this retro-thriller trend, while The Girl on the Train, also with a substance-abusing inebriate as a lead, trod very similar terrain.

One might assume Wright knew this, hence his relentless over direction, but that’s simply a symptom of his over direction of movies generally. If you haven’t seen his Anna Karenina, you might not have been overly conscious of his predilection for pretentiousness in the unsubtlest of ways (hence Anna’s recall of the loss of her family, via walking over to the fatefully crashed, upturned car that suddenly materialises in the snowy adjacent room of her apartment). It’s said audience reactions to The Woman in the Window were no more positive once the reshoots were done (ordered by recent persona non grata Scott Rudin); it may be that changes led to a divvying up of the information establishing the true identity of Julianne Moore’s character between Fred and Wyatt Russell’s tenant; in the book, Fred admits to Katie’s identity, and also that he injured Anna’s cat (he’s been lurking around her house). Although, as a budding serial killer, he surely would have had no compunction in killing it.

Since none of the twists are very original, you’re left looking elsewhere for sustenance. Adams is doing nothing new here, solid as she is at that (going frump). Most of the rest have too little screen time to shine. Russell plays on his fall-back disreputable quality. Moore is good at bringing insincere sincerity. Oldman SHOUTS a lot. Jason Leigh barely registers, aside from sporting a crap blonde wig (if anything were going to save this, it would have been delving more into the motivation of the parents, but their roles are little more than glorified cameos). Brian Tyree Henry is the sympathetic cop, while Jeanine Serralles is the absurdly unsympathetic one.

Letts is in the movie (as Doctor Landy) and previously adapted his plays Bugs, Killer Joe and August: Osage County for the screen. He doesn’t have much excuse for deriding this experience, since he volunteered for it in the first place. A movie based on Finn himself, aka alleged serial liar and plagiarist (Copycat and novel Saving April have been cited) Daniel Mallory, might have been a more rewarding endeavour than this one. If one were generous, one might find in The Woman in the Window allusions to the limits of one’s perception of the world when locked down in one’s abode and reliant on information that may be mistaken or misshapen. But that would be very generous.

Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) (SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocat

You’re the pattern and the prototype for a whole new age of biological exploration.

The Fly II (1989) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg was not, it seems, a fan of the sequel to his hit 1986 remake, and while it’s quite possible he was just being snobby about a movie that put genre staples above theme or innovation, he wasn’t alone. Fox had realised, post- Aliens , that SF properties were ripe for hasty follow ups, and indiscriminately mined a number of popular pictures to immediately diminishing returns during the period ( Cocoon , Predator ). Neither critics nor audiences were impressed. In the case of The Fly II , though, it would be unfair to label the movie as outright bad. It simply lacks that *idea* that would justify the cash-in.