free counter with statistics Evening | Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

meryl_streep9.jpg

O Jordan Catalano, Where Art Thou?

Evening / Agent Bedhead

Film Reviews | June 29, 2007 | Comments (44)


Hollywood has a made a long habit of bastardizing decent books for adaptation to the big screen. In some cases, this works out well, and in others, not so much. In The Wizard of Oz, the brilliant Technicolor separates dream from reality, and the least spectacular parts of the book are judiciously omitted. Conversely, most adaptations of Anna Karenina heavily focus on the passionate love story, leave out significant details, and fail to endear the main character to the audience in spite of her deviance. Ultimately, the fate of a book is consigned to the scripting process, and Evening is, sadly, a casualty of it — the result of a failed attempt to adapt a book composed almost entirely of morphine-induced unquoted dialogue and stream of consciousness bullshit. Perhaps Focus Features should have considered whether a good movie had ever come out of a William Faulkner novel before sinking millions into this production.

In Evening, director Lajos Koltai has collected an awe-inspiring cast of capable actresses: Vanessa Redgrave, Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Natasha Richardson, Toni Collette, Glenn Close, and Mamie Gummer. The story is adapted by Michael Cunningham from Susan Minot’s novel — a book that I happened to have read a few years ago after losing a bet to a friend with one major weakness: a love of chick-lit. As a novel, Evening is beautifully written with lyrical prose, but the melodramatic storyline qualifies it as a candidate for the Oprah Book Club. To wit: The relatively occupied theater I sat in was devoid of any men whatsoever. Stealthily, I navigated to the uppermost and least populated row, where only those with ample knee cartilage dared to tread, and waited for all the depressing shit to happen. It didn’t take long.

The main character, Ann Lord (Vanessa Redgrave), is on her deathbed and attended to by daughters Constance (Natasha Richardson) and Nina (Toni Colette), as well as an omnipotent night nurse. Although her money bought a beautiful white room in a huge old Rhode Island house to die in, Ann regrets her waste of what everyone else characterizes as a “full life.” In her drugged-up state, she starts mumbling about her only love Harris, some dude the daughters had never heard of. As Ann drifts on her milky bedspread with gauzy white shades fluttering, the film begins its slow dance of death between the past and present.

The past takes place 50 years earlier in Newport, Rhode Island at a lakeside mansion overlooking lush, green, and craggy cliffs resembling Wuthering Heights. A young Ann Lord (Claire Danes), an aspiring singer from New York City, travels to the weekend wedding of her college best friend, Lila (Mamie Gummer). She arrives at an estate Jay Gatsby could call home — a plush mansion filled with pretentious people — where Lila’s mother (Glenn Close) appears occasionally to scowl disapprovingly at Ann. It is immediately clear that Lila doesn’t want to marry her forgettable fiancĂ©, but since her snobby parents expect her not to stray from within their class, she sees no reason to resist her fate.

Meanwhile, the pheromones launch their assault. Lila’s slightly younger brother, Buddy (Hugh Dancy), has been in love with Ann since their college days. Buddy introduces Ann to Harris (Patrick Wilson), who just happens to be their housekeeper’s son and, despite being a total prick, a close childhood companion of the brother and sister. Buddy loves Ann. Ann loves Harris. Lila loves Harris. Buddy loves Harris. Harris loves no one, but he is willing to have a quick fling with Ann in the tool shed. Ladies and gentleman, we have a winner. Harris is a blandly handsome doctor, who as Ann quickly discovers, has one helluva bedside manner. Soon, Ann and Harris are too wrapped up in their own sport fucking to realize anyone else exists. Buddy seems to be the only one who has a clue about life and love, and despite perpetual drunkenness, he manages to utter the only profound statements in the film. This leads to a pivotal tragedy and several instances of unrequited love that supposedly cause Ann to flee into a series of marriages and otherwise stupid life choices. Despite all of this idiocy, Ann somehow manages to end up with what most would consider a good, full life. However, she seems to lend no significance to any of this as she spends her last moments dwelling on the man she sees as the only love of her life. And you’d think, considering how much Ann obsesses over this dude she had a quick fling with decades ago, some of this great sex would be visible onscreen. Oh, but alas, we do not get to see Claire Danes have sex with anyone, so there must be another reason for this revelation. An explanation exists, but unfortunately, the scriptwriter failed to actually read that portion of the novel.

The stellar cast of Evening just can’t pull this movie out of the blue-blooded bullet holes. Vanessa Redgrave delivers her usual caliber of performance, and Claire Danes is perfectly suited for the coquettish young Ann whose life previously held so much promise. Natasha Richardson, the real-life daughter of Redgrave, ended up with a poorly written part that doesn’t make the most of her obvious strengths. Toni Collette takes the stage as the far more likable daughter of Ann Lord. Hugh Dancy makes a right excellent lush of a Buddy, whose quick descent into a Fitzgerald stock character is fittingly painful to watch. Lila is played convincingly enough by Mamie Gummer, and predictably moreso by her real-life mother, Meryl Streep. The scene between elderly Ann and Lila seems to be cast as a lifeline meant to save the otherwise convoluted film, and the moment of recognition of her old friend by Redgrave is unmistakably profound. This scene, while stellar, is not enough to save the film from a Michael Cunningham’s misguided scripting session. Besides, the notion that anyone would spend their last moments thinking about a 50-year old fling, well, that in itself is pretty fucked up.

Agent Bedhead lives in Tulsa, Oklahoma and tries to avoid reality at all costs. She also insults Pete Doherty daily at agentbedhead.com.









Ratatouille | Live Free or Die Hard


Comments

Claire Dan........ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZzzZzzzz

*cough* uh!

Sorry, I fell asleep just reading that.

I'll pass.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at June 30, 2007 8:41 PM

Good Lord, no offense to the reviewer, seriously, but this movie sounds like such a snoozefest, I could hardly get through the fucking review of it.

I think I'll pass. When I saw the commercial on TV, I thought "They're re-doing 'The Hours?'"

Posted by: Kathy at June 30, 2007 8:56 PM

"Terminator" 3 ruined Claire Danes for me. Gatsby surroundings sound like a substantial improvement.

Posted by: Flea at June 30, 2007 9:06 PM

Wasn't this film sold as "the greatest actresses of our generation," etc? They can't help a boring script and bland cinematography (from what I've seen in the trailer).

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at June 30, 2007 9:12 PM

I don't want to offend any My So Called Life fans here but, to tell you the truth, Danes is waaaaaaay out of her league here. Her range is, what? Whiny and whinnier, she's been playing Angela Chase for most of her career.

This had Portman written all over it, she was probably doing something else.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at June 30, 2007 9:15 PM

Perhaps Focus Features should have considered whether a good movie had ever come out of a William Faulkner novel before sinking millions into this production.

AGREED.

I had to read As I Lay Dying for a literature class in my senior year of high school. I HATED IT. But I do remember how much of the book was weird stream-of-consciousness delusions, and I don't think it would be possible to translate that into anything comprehensible on film.

It sounds like Evening suffers from the same problems. I'm not really surprised, but thanks for taking one for the team by watching this (so we don't have to).

Posted by: Camille at June 30, 2007 9:19 PM

Wow, I'm surprised that an all star cast, many talented actors and actresses and a Screenplay written by Michael Cunningham actually manages to fail.
I'll really have to read the novel then. And like always, Pajiba manages to write a review for a movie that is more entertaining then the film itself.

Posted by: Ben at June 30, 2007 10:59 PM

I really though that Absolute Power took the cake as far as bastardizing novels went, but this takes the cake. Trying to turn Evening into some sort of celebration of mysterious wonderful women is just embarassing.

It was a lovely book about falling in love with the wrong people and living through those mistakes. To list all the ways the book deviates from this film would be longer than the review itself. Suffice to say, if you want a decent chick flick and need a good cry, rent Steel Magnolias, then watch Moonstruck to cheer up again. It'll be a much better way to spend your time.

Posted by: swimgrrl at June 30, 2007 11:20 PM

See that's just it... people who like these kinds of things are all this detail and that detail and then he said this but everyone means that and they cry and they laugh and then someone says no and then there's a party and she falls in love but he says this and can't manage that and then the baby comes and there's a benefactor but he actually is in love with her.

It's details that, in real life, someone would whack you in the head and say "snap out of it."

Posted by: RW at June 30, 2007 11:27 PM

Sounds like we have a new genre: Northern Gothic.

Posted by: Joe at June 30, 2007 11:42 PM

Haven't seen the movie, don't plan to see the movie, but Newport, R.I. is a really gorgeous place to visit. You can take old house tours, and walk along the coast, and it's all rather wonderful if you like that sort of thing.

Posted by: twig at July 1, 2007 1:42 AM

I would rather watch paint dry than anything with Claire Danes. I tried to sit through "The Family Stone", but her presence made that already shitty movie even shittier.

Personally, I'm curious to see how Mamie Gummer performs. From the other reviews, she sounds like a chip off the ol' block. The rest of the cast is stellar, but this is just too Lifetime Movie of the Week for me.

Posted by: Brie at July 1, 2007 3:18 AM

"Harrie is a blandly handsome doctor.."

?!?!?!?!

Surely you cannot be speaking of the fucking GORGEOUS Patrick Wilson...surely...surely I say.

(He's also pretty talented as well. See: Angels in America, Little Children. Do NOT See: Phantom of the Opera)

Posted by: Chris at July 1, 2007 3:27 AM

"An explanation exists, but unfortunately, the scriptwriter failed to actually read that portion of the novel."

I don't plan on seeing the movie or reading the book, but now I'm curious to know what the explanation is. Anyone know?

Posted by: lazy at July 1, 2007 10:53 AM

I read this book after I saw a preview for the film, thinking it was right up my Michael Cunningham-loving alley--but Good. Lord. I could not even finish reading it. "Morphine-induced unquoted dialogue" indeed. I could not deal with watching a bunch of lock-jawed WASPS hemming and hawing their way through a weekend and I salute AB for having done so. You, miss, are much braver than I.

Also, does Mamie Gummer really qualify as one of the "greatest actresses of our time?"

Posted by: Cara at July 1, 2007 11:16 AM

Okay, I'm operating strictly from my two+years-old memory of the book here, but am I correct in thinking that Ann is dying in her house in Cambridge and that the fling with Harris (Chris - I'm with you with respect to Wilson. Nothing bland about that guy.) takes place in Maine? I know I'm being a bit pedantic here. I completely understand taking license with an adaptation, but I recall the family having the wedding as well-to-do and WASP-y, but not Vanderbilt-level rich. I just don't understand the purpose of that change is all. If I'm totally wrong here, ignore this comment.

I have never, ever seen the reason for Danes's appeal/fame. Sure, she was good in "My So-Called Life." But, honey, what have you done for me lately? I find her profoundly forgettable.

Posted by: Samantha T at July 1, 2007 11:37 AM

On a completely shallow and unrelated note, Mamie Gummer has got to be the most geriatric-sounding name in the history of the world.

Posted by: M at July 1, 2007 2:00 PM

Favorite quotes from the review!

the film begins its slow dance of death between the past and present.

Buddy loves Ann. Ann loves Harris. Lila loves Harris. Buddy loves Harris. Harris loves no one, but he is willing to have a quick fling with Ann in the tool shed. Ladies and gentleman, we have a winner.

Ha! Sweet. AB, I'm still laughing.

Also, while I agree that Patrick Wilson is indeed gorgeous, I'm not that surprised that his character is described as blandly handsome. I haven't seen Angels in America, but I have seen Little Children, Hard Candy, and Phantom of the Opera. He does tend a bring a blandish yet handsome aspect to his characters. I'm not saying that is the extent of his range, but an aspect of it all the same.

Posted by: Daphne at July 1, 2007 2:21 PM

This review caught my attention like I know the movie never will.

Posted by: Candy at July 1, 2007 3:21 PM

Claire Danes did a good job as Beth in "Little Women." She had a couple scenes where she managed to show true emotion, and did a nice job with her death scene.

As for the movie, I have to say my minor in Women's Studies prohibits me from seeing anything in which a woman pines for a lay she had fifty years ago. I'll spare you the feminist rant, though...and I hear your sigh of relief.

Posted by: Shannon at July 1, 2007 4:01 PM

This is the second movie that's come out recently (The Namesake being the first) that is based on a book which takes place in Cambridge, MA and then the movie-makers change it. Do we have some anti-Cantabrigians in Hollywood or what?

Posted by: Ariel at July 1, 2007 5:37 PM

"Surely you cannot be speaking of the fucking GORGEOUS Patrick Wilson...surely...surely I say.

(He's also pretty talented as well. See: Angels in America, Little Children. Do NOT See: Phantom of the Opera)"

Agreed, this is exactly my feeling. He was also compellingly good in Hard Candy. But in this one, I'm not so sure how it sounds.

Posted by: Ben at July 1, 2007 6:00 PM

If I hear "We are mysterious creatures, aren't we?" I swear I'll shoot the television.

Posted by: GroovyVic at July 1, 2007 6:17 PM

As a Hugh Dancy fan, I'm seing this movie for sure. I mean, his last movie was "Blood and Chocolate", ANYTHING is an improvement...

Posted by: irina at July 2, 2007 4:54 AM

Why is everyone saying that Claire Danes isn't as good an actor/is boring? She was amazing in Shopgirl.

Posted by: Greg at July 2, 2007 7:11 AM

Amazing she may have been (don't know, never saw the movie), but if I see her chin get all wobbly as she starts to crying one more time, I'm going to slap the tv.

Posted by: Stella at July 2, 2007 8:54 AM

Why is everyone saying that Claire Danes isn't as good an actor/is boring? She was amazing in Shopgirl.

Posted by: Greg at July 2, 2007 7:11 AM

************************************************

She's blaaaaaaaaaaaaand, 120lbs. of unfulfilled expectations.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at July 2, 2007 9:38 AM

" "An explanation exists, but unfortunately, the scriptwriter failed to actually read that portion of the novel."

I don't plan on seeing the movie or reading the book, but now I'm curious to know what the explanation is. Anyone know? " - lazy

Me too lazy! Can someone give me a book spoiler? I am not interested enough to read the bok but I am curious to know what could possibly make someone obsess and put so much life value on an acient fling!

PS - I hated Shopgirl. I feel nothing for Claire Danes

Posted by: Elle at July 2, 2007 10:21 AM

I dragged Mr. PaddyDog to The Hours and his only remark afterwards was that "it was the most depressing film he's ever seen about four people he couldn't give a shit about". So, boring or not, this will be Netflix for me some weekend in the autumn when he's on a buddy trip. Despite the bad review, like Twig above, I am a sucker for Newport, Rhode Island so I'll watch it for the scenery.

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 2, 2007 10:23 AM

Very rarely is a movie ever as good as the book. Evening was a wonderful book that I enjoyed immensely, however, Meryl Streep aside, I don't think I want to ruin my memories of the book by seeing the adaptation in film.

Posted by: Helcat at July 2, 2007 10:37 AM

I DEMAND YOU REWRITE THIS REVIEW!!

Just kidding.

Actually, an excellent review of what looks like a terminally dull movie. Thanks.

Posted by: TK at July 2, 2007 11:24 AM

Great review!

Posted by: Marsi at July 2, 2007 12:10 PM

Good review AB. Unfortunately, I already saw this movie (as a favor to a friend), although I knew that it could not live up to the expectations raised by the excellent book and the cadre of top notch actors.

As for your comment on deathbed thoughts, you may have been spared such scenes. Many of us who lived through the scourge of the early eighties were not. I am not at all surprised that someone at death's doorstep would harken back to a fifty year old fling.

My partner's mother spent many of her final days thinking about her long-ago boyfriend--who she did not marry because he was already married and she would not marry a divorcee--despite having a subsequent loving marriage and wonderful family. Many of my friends recalled vividly first crushes/kisses/sexual experiences as they lay dying, even though most had longer-term satisfying relationships in their lives. They were mostly comforted by such memories.

That aspect of the book and movie was, for me, the most realistic because I had seen it occur. The ability to portray that aspect so well in the book and so poorly in the movie is what critically distinguishes the two.

Posted by: rudy at July 2, 2007 12:15 PM

Try to catch Claire in "Stage Beauty" if, that is, you can tear your eyes from Billy Crudup.

Posted by: joy at July 2, 2007 2:15 PM

I saw the preview for this in the theater when I went to see "La Vie en Rose" and burst out laughing after Meryl Streep said "Oh, we are mysterious creatures, aren't we?" or some pretentious crap along those lines. If it is a movie full of lines like that, and from the review, it seems so, I will have to take my friends to go see it. We are a pack of ravenous cynics who feed off of terrible movie dialogue. Does that make us mysterious creatures?

Posted by: AllGussiedUp at July 2, 2007 4:37 PM

*Do we have some anti-Cantabrigians in Hollywood or what?*

With all due respect to the fine people of Cambridge MA, Ariel, there may be no hope for your town, if you are dealing with a great word like anti-Cantabrigians. I can just picture a whole Hollywood office devoted to "Anti-Cantabrigian Affairs."

Geez, the Brits came up with all the good town monikers, i.e. Liverpudlian... It would tickle me to no end to be called a Liverpudlian. Being a District of Columbian just doesn't have the same romantic ring to it.

Posted by: AllGussiedUp at July 2, 2007 5:02 PM

It wasn't easy having to sit through a review when the main character shares your name.

I only saw this film really for Hugh Dancy. I have to admit that, and I was pleasantly surprised to see how great he was with the only interesting role in an otherwise dull film. At the very least, he's proved his acting abilities since the rather unfortunate Blood and Chocolate which never should have been made to begin with.

There were so many positive reviews for the film, but really, it was ridiculous, and despite being a bit of a film snob, I laughed at inappropriate, somber moments and mades jokes the times I bothered to pay attention rather than listen for what was going on in the theater next to ours wher Evan Almighty was playing loudly.

I heard that they took out the sex scene between Patrick Wilson's Harris and Claire Danes' Ann because of a lack of chemistry. I totally believe this explanation.

And despite my love for Patrick Wilson, he was kind of a creepy, leering, lurking Ken doll in the few minutes he did have on screen.

Posted by: ann at July 2, 2007 6:41 PM

Ariel - it's also staggeringly expensive to film a movie in Cambridge. Hence the frequent location switches.

Posted by: TK at July 3, 2007 2:55 PM

TK - money is one good reason, but they could always shoot a movie in Vancouver or Hollywood or Boston and claim it was Cambridge. Legally Blonde was shot on the U of Chi campus, and I doubt many people thought it wasn't Harvard Law (which, on an interesting side-note, has horrible '70's architecture not at all indicative of the typically bricks'n'ivy of the Yard). I doubt that movie would have been as funny if she was attending, say, UConn Law instead of Harvard. I think it's just one more way for movie-makers to take RIDICULOUS liberties with a book and still make money from the popularity of the text.

I maintain there's some secret society behind it all, maybe AllGussiedUp's "Office of Anti-Cantabrigian Affairs" or "the Priory of Anti-Cantabrigians." Who knows.

Posted by: Ariel at July 3, 2007 4:11 PM

A valid point, Ariel. But admit it, if they filmed it in Vancouver, you KNOW you'd watch it and the whole time think to yourself "that doesn't look like Cambridge at ALL!" I know I would. I'd be constantly watching going "that doesn't look a thing like Central Square. Where did they film this, Edmonton? This sucks."

Hm. That might just be me projecting, though.

Posted by: TK at July 3, 2007 4:22 PM

its cheaper to shoot a film in rhode island than it is to shoot in mass. this is probably the reason for some of the location changes. i dont know anything about rates for maine. one is as good as another up here, really (not to diminish any one place but trees, sprawling lawns, the ocean and the houses are kind of similar looking in a m.a., r.i., and maine kind of way). they did some of the film in little compton. a very nice place and prettier than newport and similar to maine in my small opinion.
i would watch meryl streep chew her food with her mouth open so seeing this movie is a must even if it sucks.

Posted by: WTF at July 3, 2007 5:29 PM

"I would rather watch paint dry than anything with Claire Danes. I tried to sit through "The Family Stone", but her presence made that already shitty movie even shittier." -- Brie

Appropriately, Brie, you're named for a stinky cheese full of runny goo. "The Family Stone" was a great flick and Danes was charming in it, if not overworked; it was a small but pivotal part in that underrated romantic comedy. The only problem I had with it in fact was that the gay couple never kissed. Everybody else got to kiss, why not them? The flick came out in 2005, not 1985!

And re this film: why on earth didn't Joely Richardson play her mom Vanessa instead of Danes? She looks more like Van that Claire does.

Also surprised that nobody invoked the name of "House of the Spirits", another disappointing filming of a popular 'womans' novel also starring Streep & Close, and the then-bankable Winona Ryder. Spirits was the beginning of the end of Ryder's career, so maybe this will be the end of Danes' -- good news for all you Claire haters. : P

Posted by: matt at July 5, 2007 10:25 PM

Brie - I'm with you. "The Family Stone" was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I don't invoke that superlative lightly ("Vanilla Sky" is, in fact, truly the worst movie I've ever seen). I wanted to slap the shit out of everybody on the screen, including the deaf gay son.

Posted by: samantha t at July 6, 2007 10:00 AM

It's been a few days since I saw "Evening," and I think I finally have a hold on how I feel about the movie:

There is a subset of the population who either regularly or occasionally gets off on this sort of chick-porn; it's cathartic, emotionally-driven, and requires much less focus on plot and characterization than on poking at the viewer's own emotional issues with a big cinematic stick.

That being said, I am one of those people. I've wept through "Evening Star," the terrible follow-up to "Terms of Endearment," and cried right into my bucket of popcorn at the end of "The Family Stone" (which I rather enjoyed).

"Evening," however, for all my desire for it to be a gem of a weeper amidst the testosterone-laden summer movie fare, didn't evoke a single tear. NOT ONE! I found myself, by the end, going "Oh for Christ's sake, just DIE already!" The characters could not have been developed more shoddily, and the profound love Ann feels for Harris could not have been more poorly explained. I found myself wondering throughout, "Why does she even care? He's just a one-night stand." All I can figure is that Patrick Wilson must be packin' (and dear God...please let Patrick Wilson be packin'.)

In my opinion, Meryl Streep's brief appearance and the subplot involving watery-eyed Hugh Dancy were the films only real saving graces. Any moment in which he would FEEL anything on screen, I could feel it too. I hope to see him in more films and truly look forward to "The Jane Austen Book Club."

I will not, however, schedule any future rewatchings of "Evening," which to me, is the saddest thing of all about this movie, given the story's potential and the number of great actresses in the film.

-s-

Posted by: Shane at July 7, 2007 11:23 AM



searchthesite.jpg