BEFORE: The theme of adultery carries over, as I send Birthday SHOUT-out #48 to Meryl Streep, born June 22, 1949.
THE PLOT: An awkward and fat woman wants revenge on her husband, after he was seduced by an authoress who writes trash fiction.
AFTER: At first this seems miles away from last night's film, and not just because of the years between when they were produced. "It's Complicated" is more of a relationship drama with comic overtones, and this is more of a wild, slapsticky dark comedy. But what they share in common is the feeling that both are female-based fantasy films. Last night Streep played an older woman pursued by both her ex-husband and a new suitor (come on, does that really happen?) and tonight it's a revenge fantasy against an unfaithful husband. Oddly they would seem to have the same target audience - woman who've been cheated on.
In this one Roseanne (ex-Barr, ex-Arnold) reacts with coolness when she first thinks her husband is cheating - like many women might do, she assumes that he's going through a phase and will eventually return. But her demeanor masks some dark thoughts, and a disastrous dinner party is enough to bring everything to a boil.
NITPICK POINT: She blows up their house? How does that constitute a plan? Sure, she's destroyed one of his assets, but now she has no place to live. Wouldn't it be more efficient (though admittedly less cinematic) to see an attorney, maintain possession of the house and get half his money, the legal way? I know, it's not meant to be a realistic movie, because that's not what people want to see.
But she could have sold the house, and then later in the film there wouldn't need to be such a contrived way of her raising the money to start her own business and fund her revenge plan...
My problem here is that the revenge plot is so complicated, and relies on so many elements falling into place a certain way, it doesn't seem like anyone could have possibly predicted the way it shook down. Or was the plan just a rough one, being constantly tweaked along the way?
This touches on another point made by last night's film - when the ex-husband marries his new flame, and she becomes the everyday wife, their romance is less naughty, and therefore less fun, and soon the spark is gone, and the husband is looking for a new romance. With a little help from Roseanne's character, who places an attractive new temp in his office, soon the husband's spending long nights at the office again - and the old girlfriend/new wife gets a taste of karmic justice. That's kind of brilliant, and I can justify that part of the revenge scheme.
But then there are parts of the scheme that seem to go too far - innocent people (and dogs!) get hit with some collateral damage. So the movie never really states outright how far someone should go before the scales are balanced - this is coming sort of close to "War of the Roses" territory. Also, either the ex-wife's revenge is either justifiable, or she's a "devil". Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
So, the message was a little muddled for me. I mean, she got her revenge, but she also had to abandon her children to do so. Is that OK? Plus, watching Roseanne and Linda Hunt repair and decorate an old building, in sped-up "Laurel & Hardy" style seemed like an odd digression.
And what did the characters learn? Roseanne's character seemed to learn that revenge is the best revenge, the ex-husband learned what prison is like, and Streep's character just started writing non-fiction instead of romance novels, so I don't think that constitutes real growth.
Also starring Ed Begley, Jr. (last seen in "Pineapple Express"), Sylvia Miles (last seen in "Midnight Cowboy"), Linda Hunt (last seen in "Stranger Than Fiction"), A Martinez, with cameos from Robin Leach and Sally Jessy Raphael.
RATING: 4 out of 10 aerosol cans
I doubt that the filmmakers were trying to make me cheer for the adulterous husband and the rich, glamorous, and successful new wife. The movie was fundamentally broken.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to work out the problem. At most, the ex-husband and the new wife are guilty of being utterly selfish and thoughtless. Roseanne's character's behavior is the exact opposite: it's all calculated specifically to inflict the greatest amount of misery upon her purported enemy.
A man gets in his car after a three-martini lunch and kills a kid at a crosswalk. A month before the case goes to trial, the kid's father abducts the driver and takes him to a warehouse that's been rigged as an elaborate torture room, where the driver is tortured methodically over a five-day period.
Which of the two is the psychopath?