Pajiba's Privacy Policy



control2.jpg

Atrocity Exhibition

Control / Phillip Stephens

Like the typical high school heterodox, I listened to my fair share of angsty music in my teenage years. Working backwards from Radiohead and Manic Street Preachers to ’80s sad-sack juggernauts The Soft Boys, The Fall, The Smiths, Echo & the Bunnymen, and God knows what else, I listened to a lot of paeans to ultra-seriousness, but when I finally stumbled onto the post-punk bible of Joy Division and Ian Curtis’s haunted warble, I knew I had found someone who really meant what he was saying.

Control, directed by Dutch photographer Anton Corbijn, is the long-awaited biopic of the tortured singer and icon, whose onstage mania mimed the similarly legendary Sid Barrett and whose premature suicide set the stage for Richey James and Kurt Cobain after. It’s a film that seems made for fans already steeped in the Curtis mythos, those who have an extant familiarity with those iconic talking points in his life — the fateful Sex Pistols show, the confrontation with Tony Wilson, the apocryphal blood-contract, the onset of epilepsy, the onstage fits, the affair with Annik HonorĂ©, the Derby riot, and then that harrowing morning. Many of these events were similarly chronicled in Michael Winterbottom’s 24 Hour Party People with something approaching reverence. But unlike Winterbottom’s film, it’s hard to know how those with no inbound appreciation for the Madchester/Factory story will react. Corbijn’s film is almost flawless aesthetically, but his narrative doesn’t delve beyond face value, possibly because he knows what his real audience will want to see; he honors their expectations, but Control loses some of its edge when he doesn’t delve deeply enough.

Despite his career as a music video director, it’s Corbijn’s photographer-eye that steals the show from the admirable performances and plain exposition. I counted no more than three of four times when the camera actually moved; almost every single frame is a static shot meant to evoke classical photography in achingly beautiful monochrome. Indeed, it’s almost impossible to imagine Joy Division inhabiting a world of color; the cinematography of Control couldn’t be more perfect in complimenting the band’s bleak, droning music.

Beginning in the soporific small town of Macclesfield, the film begins its somewhat enigmatic portrayal of Curtis (Sam Riley). Like most adolescents, he feels bored and isolated from the dreary world around him, finding a glimmer of recognition in the music of David Bowie. He’s quietly discontented, but allows the trajectory of his life take him into marriage with a sweet girl, Deborah (Samantha Morton), at the age of 19. When Curtis fatefully stumbles across Bernard Sumner and Peter Hook and starts a band, he finally begins to fulfill some anomalous ambition in his life, but the success he finds in self-actualizing his artistic abilities drives him away from his wife and newborn baby, who begin to feel like an anchor into the real world and a reminder of his personal failures. Perhaps because he married too early, or simply because his newfound life is pulling him away from practical responsibilities, Curtis is driven into the arms of a wantable stranger to whom he admits his marriage was a mistake. But, of course, the love he thinks he feels for this mistress isn’t the simple answer to his problems he hopes for. Love will tear him apart, and all that.

Curtis is, as portrayed by the film, the kind of tortured soul who makes for a perfect icon to disaffected youth, perfectly manifested physically in his epilepsy, but as a real person who fails so thoroughly as a husband and father, it’s hard not to condemn his solipsism. Corbijn and screenwriter Matt Greenhalgh had the disadvantage of working from a thoroughly biased source - Deborah Curtis’s (who produced this film) memoir, Touching from a Distance, which teeters between understandable resentment toward Ian’s enigma and hagiography. Corbijn, to his credit, tries to toe the line between judging Curtis and venerating him; he lets us do either as we please, but the resultant neutrality lacks a real sense of immediacy.

The Ian Curtis of Control is a ghostly, detached riddle, which is fair — no one will likely understand just what made him so compelling unless they put Unknown Pleasures or Closer on the record player and listen to those self-hating lyrics. But in merely presenting Curtis without an attempt at understanding, Corbijn loses something to the myth, and the narrative arc which leads Curtis to stardom and then, one fateful morning after watching Werner Herzog’s Stroszek and listening to Iggy Pop’s The Idiot, to swing from his kitchen ceiling, feels like an afterthought. Still, as an accompaniment to Joy Division’s music, Control is impeccable, featuring some of the most beautiful chiaroscuro photography of the year. For fans, this accompaniment is like a love letter; for everyone else, it’s probably just another riddle.

Phillip Stephens is the lead critic for Pajiba. He lives in Fayetteville, AR, and still listens to Joy Division, though he never wore eyeliner or anything too conspicuous.


It Was a Pajiba-Hole, and That Means Comfort | | Dexter Finale



Comments

Even with Corbijn's dearth-of-depth approach, I can't help but be wetting my pants to see the movie. He and the band's conjoined aesthetic will be enough of a spectacle for me not to miss the insight.

Posted by: Amanda H. at December 20, 2007 2:58 PM

I think that not even fans can actually love ian curtis portrait in this, I mean I'm a fan myself and for half and more of the movie I was just waiting for that awful selfish prick version of him to off himself. I actually would have liked a new made up ending where he kills every useless character in the movie. I doubt that any of them was that uninteresting and annoying in real life.
Never trust a man that got his brain sucked by Bono. ok ok, it was back when U2 didnt suck but still, Bono has always been pure evil, he just masked well.

Posted by: rio at December 20, 2007 3:15 PM

I loved this film. I think you're totally right about his anchor-of-reality, his wife, tearing him apart. Sam Riley was brilliant, especially when he started dressing like Bowie, as so many British youths did so long ago.

Posted by: matt at December 20, 2007 3:21 PM

This came and went recently in theaters in the area, I missed it. I'm going to get it on DVD and watch it w/ the fact that the story is largly slanted from his wifes point of view in the forefront of my brain.
I love Joy Division, so anticipate enjoying the movie. Thanks for the review!

Posted by: JB at December 20, 2007 3:31 PM

Wait a minute! I've seen you in eyeliner! In fact, I put it on you!

Posted by: Pamprin at December 20, 2007 3:35 PM

I could read a million bad reviews for this film and I would still go to see it. I am just that starved for a time when music was that good.

Posted by: PaddyDog at December 20, 2007 4:21 PM

I saw this in France when it came out back in October and thought it was fantastic. Your point about the brilliant photography is spot-on. The black and white is perfect to show both the bleak and the iconic, making 1970s working-class Macclesfield look poetic.

Interesting that while I agree with you about the lack of judgement in the film, the person who I saw it with thought the exact opposite- that Corbijn was too attached to the subject matter to give an unbiased, apathetic portrayal (hence the final scene of a half-paralysed half-hysterical Samantha Morton).

Oh, and I'll admit that I didn't know much about Joy Division before I saw this film, which made me even more blown away.

Props to Samantha Morton and Sam Riley, who were terrific, as well as Toby Krebbel in his hilarious turn as their budget manager.

Posted by: reesy at December 20, 2007 6:02 PM

I see maybe one new-release movie per year at most, mainly because so few are worth the cost or the bother. I'm almost desperate for this to open near me and I'll drive as far as I have to for it.

Posted by: jules at December 20, 2007 6:17 PM

Wow, this sounds GOOD. And the still of Sam Riley up top reminds me of Jack Kerouac just enough to seal the deal.

Posted by: christine Bowers at December 20, 2007 6:28 PM

When I saw "24 hour party people" all I could think of was how intense these guys were, and how they deserved a film of their own, instead of a 25 minute interlude in a movie whose centerpiece was to be the Happy Mondays, who sucked. Can't wait to see it although in all likelihood, it'll be on DVD.

Posted by: summerteeth at December 20, 2007 7:05 PM

I agree with some of your criticism, but I'll also say that I really enjoyed the film. Well, maybe "enjoyed" is the wrong word (it's not exactly a madcap romp, is it?), but I thought it was very well done. I'd seen "24 Hour Party People" though, so I have no idea if people who hadn't seen/read anything else would be confused by some of the subtler bits. Anyway, excellent review!

Posted by: docsmartypants at December 20, 2007 11:20 PM

long time lurker, first time commenter, kudos for the Manic Street Preachers reference, although it's Richey not Rickey James.

That being said, I cannot wait to watch this.

Edit -- Noted and corrected, thanks.

Posted by: evstrike at December 21, 2007 12:29 AM

I just cannot wait to see this movie.

And actually it's Richey Edwards. James was/is(?) his middle name.

Posted by: Sam at December 22, 2007 7:33 PM

um I don't get some of this review? did you mean 'thoroughly unbiased' to be 'thoroughly biased'? it was a bit confusing regarding his wife's involvement. i thought it was quite objective, considering.

the cinematography for this was incredible. one of the only things i found visually jarring about the film was the casting of Samantha Morton as his wife. she is an incredible actress but she's in her 30's and didn't pass as a teenager... don't know if this was meant to make his wife more of an "anchor-of-reality"?

Posted by: rosie at December 23, 2007 9:27 AM

Why do people always worship the pathetic people that kill themselves?

Posted by: MRod at December 28, 2007 4:20 PM