kate-leo-revolutionary-road-2.jpg
When All the Little Ants are Marching, Red and Black Antennas Waving

Revolutionary Road / Dustin Rowles

Film Reviews | January 9, 2009 | Comments (48)


Maybe it’s the economic environment we’re in now, but I found it extremely difficult to sympathize with Revolutionary Road’s Frank and April Wheeler (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslett), a married couple contending with the claustrophobic suffocation of suburban life. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of the damning-of-suburbia genre — I’m a firm believer that suburbia is slowly bringing about the death of America through homogenization, overconsumption, the proliferation of chain restaurants, and eternal same-sameness (I say this even after shoveling snow this morning in time with the rest of the neighborhood’s shovelers, as though in synch with a Danny Elfman score). I have a deathly fear of one day waking up in a room full of merchandise from Sharper Image/Brookstone, shuffling through a monotonous routine of Starbucks, cubicle, Subway, cubicle, and Applebees before witlessly falling asleep beneath the blue-flicker of Leno’s Daily Headlines, snug in my monogrammed department-store pajamas. (If that ever happens, you have my permission to stab me to death with an ice pick from Williams Sonoma (preferably in my sleep)).

Still, during a time in America when suburbia seems to be crumbling in on itself, as suburban couples are dealing with the loss of employment and falling housing prices while clinging to a little of that same-sameness they once had as the neighborhood falls down around them, a movie where comfort and security and promotions and steak and potatoes every night at six sharp represent real psychological horrors … well, it seems a little callous. Maybe it sounds hypocritical, but I don’t think this is a great time to be kicking Middle American ideals while they are in their death throes, even if Revolutionary Road is set in a much more economically stable 1950s. Two kids, a comfortable living, a nice house, and neighbors you can actually trust your children with for a few hours while you got out and get a beer doesn’t sound that bad, does it? Yet it is exactly that which is weighing down the Wheelers, a happy, content couple in public, but one that behind closed doors is suffering the torment of a 9-5 lifestyle, as though it were a loan shark they are paying interest on to, waiting in a perpetual sense of dread for the principal to come due and the heavies to break their legs.

But we all make choices, don’t we? And Frank and April made choices to get married too early, to have a family, and to move into that picket-fence life before they’d gotten life out of their systems. But rather than work to make do, or finagle themselves into a lifestyle they’d prefer (think of all those Eisenhower era opportunities!), they fuck people they don’t love, self-hate themselves into oblivion, and tear each other down, blaming one another for the consequences of their own choices. Maybe this is not the professional thing to say, or appropriate for a movie review, but: Boo fucking hoo.

Granted, Revolutionary Road isn’t a bad movie, nor should it be with the level of talent or the source material involved (Richard Yates’ remarkable 1962 novel). The movie is technically flawless — DiCaprro and Winslett act up a storm, and Mendes direction is perfect. A little too perfect, actually. Revolutionary Road feels like a movie that went from the novel to the storyboard to the screen flawlessly, but then again, there’s no messiness to cling to. In a technical sense, Revolutionary Road is kind of that perfect friend you hate — it’s too well done, too meticulous. Even the arguments between the Wheelers feel too controlled — Mendes has so perfectly constructed Revolutionary Road that he’s sucked the life out of the story. It’s impossible to really feel for the characters because they have no soul — they’re just perfectly dressed vessels who hit all the marks and deliver their lines perfectly — hell, even their mussed hair looks perfectly tussled.

It’s a simple narrative, one where the Yates’ complex thematic layers should’ve risen to the surface, but there were no gaps in the construction of the movie for them to sneak through. Frank works a lousy job in a cubicle, bored with his life. April is an aspiring actress trapped in the life of a 1950s housewife. They’re suffocating beneath the weight of American idealism, determined to believe that they are less ordinary than their ordinary lives and their ordinary neighbors and their ordinary jobs. They want badly to escape it all, so April hatches a plan — Frank will quit his job, and they will sell their house, and they will move to Paris, where she will work as a secretary and Frank will “find himself,” though there’s never much indication that there’s anything really there to “find” except for more ordinariness. The idea of the plan, more really than the plan itself (which is hastily conjured and fairly unrealistic) wakes them from their doldrums. They get excited about their lives. Frank tells his co-workers he’s leaving to start a new life; they eagerly inform their neighbors, all smug in their belief that they are going to leave those simpletons with the house and their cars and their comfortable monotony behind.

But they never make it to Paris. Frank can’t resist the lure of a promotion and more money, which he thinks will buy him the life he’s always wanted, while April conceives a child, threatening to throw her deeper into the life she hates. They take their self-hate out on one another, which all leads to a conclusion that probably felt more dramatic, more believable, and more unexpected in 1962, when the book was published.

But the frustration and yearning in Yates’ book doesn’t translate onto the screen, in part because it doesn’t really feel like Winslett and DiCaprio inhabit their characters. It’s too dismissive to say that they walk through the motions because they walk through them so well. It’s as if they were giving Mendes exactly what he wanted, but Mendes never asked for a little goddamn spirit. I never felt like Winslett’s character was sad, I just felt like Winslett was acting sad — and man alive, was she doing it well. DiCaprio and Winslett put on an acting clinic, and that’s exactly what it felt like: A clinic. You could almost hear the acting students in the audience scribbling notes. Everything was perfect, except their eyes — you couldn’t seen anything beneath them.

Lookit: I wanted to love Revolutionary Road. It contained two of my favorite themes: Suburban monotony and adultery, as well as a director and two actors I respect considerably. And I almost don’t even want to blame them for the failures of the film. It was a well-oiled machine, and they pushed all the buttons at the right times. Unfortunately, the light just never came on. But hell: Maybe, in this economy, we should just be happy someone’s still getting paid to operate the machinery.

Dustin Rowles is the publisher of Pajiba. He lives withi his wife and son in Portland, Maine You can reach him via email, or leave a comment below.


Echelon Conspiracy Trailer | Pajiba Love 01/09/09





Comments

I just felt like Winslett was acting sad

Heresy! Kate Winslet doesn't "act." She WINSLETS, dammit!

Posted by: SofĂ­a at January 9, 2009 11:13 AM

I adore Kate Winslet, but given her typecasting I expected something like this to happen eventually. There's no love lost between me and Leonardo DiCaprio, and I TOTALLY expect this sort of this out of him. I feel like he's really old-school, he constructs his characters as he would an intricate garment, perfects them and then wears them like a skin instead of inhaling them like helium. It appears that he knows the characters inside and out, but forgets that the characters don't know themselves inside and out. Plus, the dichotomy between his angry eyes and pillowy lips has always given me the willies.

Posted by: Ling at January 9, 2009 11:15 AM

You forgot to mention the number one evil of suburbia: the child's birthday party as a competitive sport.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 9, 2009 11:16 AM

It must be happy naked Winslet week here at Pajiba.

Posted by: Snath at January 9, 2009 11:21 AM

I don't think Kate or Leo or anyone else involved in the direction, production etc. can be blamed for this being a somewhat bland outing. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: But wait, isn't this a fucking boring premise for a full length feature film??!?!? No really. Sure, I'll take this over Paul Blart: Mall Cop (which caused me pain to type), but really? Couldn't they have thrown in a sinking boat or planet ending disaster threat just for good measure?

Thanks Dustin, now I have enough ammo to fire at the Trophy Wife to get out of watching this one...

Posted by: Xtreme at January 9, 2009 11:25 AM

This movie should have come out two years ago, when having a boring-yet-comfortable suburban routine was still disdained instead of a blanket some run for.
A few months back, a co-worker saw the trailer. She said it looked terrible, "with people shouting at each other the whole time. I didn't get it."
As you said Dustin, we all make choices. Boo-fucking-hoo indeed.

Posted by: brouhaha at January 9, 2009 11:32 AM

Boo-hoo! My name is Frank. I have a good job, I was recently promoted, I only have to work 9-5, I get to eat steak and potatoes every night, and EVERY week is "happy naked Winslet week" for me.

Boo-fucking-hoo indeed...

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at January 9, 2009 11:48 AM

THIS MOVIES BULLSH**T! ITS JUST LIKE THAT ONE WITH TH NICOLE KIDMAN ONE, AND THAT FLICK WITH THE REDHEAD MOORE! THESES TWO SHOULD SINK WITH THE TITANIAC!!! TUCKER MAX IS GOING TO F****ING RULE WHEN HE COMES OUT!!! PAUL BLART WILL DO FOR NOW, THAT KEVIN JAMES IS ONE FUNNY MOTHERF**ER!!! WHERE ALL THE HONEYS AT?

Posted by: GUIDOFEVER at January 9, 2009 11:50 AM

the characters felt very empty to me, and i, too, had a hard time trying to feel attached/empathy when they were going through their rough patches. but what really drove me crazy (and this might have been because i was in the front row and spent the entire movie looking at giant winslet and giant dicaprio) was the fact winslet's eyebrows don't match her hair. every dramatic close-up had me cringing. can't she just be a beautiful brunette? would it have really hurt the story all that much for her not to be blonde? maybe i'm overly critical, but the perfect suburban housewife with 2.5 children should have hair that matches her eyebrows.

Posted by: cntr_of_atntion at January 9, 2009 11:57 AM

Dustin "Hussein" Rowles... Bin Laden

HUh....

This review comes from the same guy who was hating on Supertroopers and the rest of Broken Lizard's body of work just yesterday.

I don't know what to think..

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 12:02 PM

Meh...I was very excited when I heard of this movie, but all the reviews I've read since just amount to 'bleh'. Which is a fucking shame, really, because no one deserves better roles than Kate Winslet, yet she keeps getting these suburban mom roles where...I mean jeebus are we supposed to believe Kate frakkin Winslet is stuck in suburbia? HER? It'd be like making Tom Cruise play a man on welfare. Just not right.

Plus, it looks like an even more depressing version of 'Little Children', only set in the 50s. And one Little Children was enough.

Posted by: figgy at January 9, 2009 12:07 PM

As far as Winslet goes she might getter (read: sexier) if she lost, at least 15 pounds, girlfriend is too chunky.

There I said it.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 12:13 PM

I get your point. That said, nothing will keep me away from this movie. I'd probably pay to watch Kate eat Rice Krispies for two hours.

Posted by: Cindy at January 9, 2009 12:28 PM

Jesus Christ, B'Slim!!!

Take cover now. Either you have a death wish posting that on this site, or TK finally figured out he could post under your name something that many Pajibans would rise up against and his work would be done for him.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 9, 2009 12:30 PM

HAHAHA BRING IT!

I stand by my post.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 12:35 PM

Winslet doesn't need to lose 15 pounds, go out and get a job you fucking bum.

Posted by: Pookie at January 9, 2009 12:45 PM

HA! now I'm convinced, make it 20 pounds.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 12:47 PM

B Slim, that's crazy talk. If Kate Winslet lost 15 pounds she'd look nasty. Not everybody has a naturally willowy frame. I think Winslet is at a very healthy, fairly thin weight for her build.

You ass ;)

Posted by: tt_marie at January 9, 2009 12:50 PM

I'm terrified at the idea that Pookie and I are on the same team on this issue. Although, I'd guess probably the entire Pajibaverse will disagree with Mr. Slim here, since we all bow down to and worship The Winslet on a regular basis.

Posted by: tt_marie at January 9, 2009 12:52 PM

wow cntr_of_atntion , as a natural blonde with dark eyebrows I have to say I was a bit taken aback by how angry that made you! I think it's actually quite, ahem, attractive, and defines the eyes nicely.

Posted by: zygomatique at January 9, 2009 12:56 PM

BSlim you are so fucking infuriating with your neanderthal views on Winslet's weight, if you had half a brain you would know her weight is just fine. Its her ta-ta's you jerk, they need to be bigger.

Posted by: Pookie at January 9, 2009 12:57 PM

Kate Winslet is my ideal woman. I'm a straight woman but I would turn in a second for her. In fact, I think she's lost a bit too much weight recently.

BSlim IS an ass, but I think that's what he's going for.

Posted by: coveredinbees at January 9, 2009 1:03 PM

I'm a straight woman but I would turn in a second for her.

Posted by: coveredinbees at January 9, 2009 1:03 PM


------------------------------------------------

Sooooooooooooo, two words:

You fuckin'?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 1:11 PM

And the answer BSlim? If you're name's Kate, I'm (b)all(s) in.

Posted by: Xtreme at January 9, 2009 1:55 PM

Xtreme what the fuck are you talking about? BSlim ain't never had no pussy in his life, and the only way he would get some pussy is if a bitch died and left it to him in her will.

Posted by: Pookie at January 9, 2009 2:06 PM

Pookie my friend, you are like that monkey that looks into the pond and thinks that the moon's reflection is THE actual moon and that if it jumps in, it can touch it.

keep dreaming

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at January 9, 2009 2:18 PM

Oh, no! A Pookie/BSlim throwdown is going on in here!?

My world is rent asunder.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at January 9, 2009 2:35 PM

I thought I had something to say but now I'm just going to get popcorn and sit back.

Posted by: Cindy at January 9, 2009 2:56 PM

BarbadoSlim can go watch Pirates of the Caribbean if he wants some vomit-inducing Kiera Knightely

Leave Winslet alone before I bring MY extra 15 lbs.

Posted by: soto at January 9, 2009 2:56 PM

*DJ phil cue the music*

Put some gangsta shit on the wheels of steel cause I'm about to drop some science.

BSlim, I'm like paper and you're like glue. Whatever you say about me, sticks to you.

BOOYAAAAA!

Posted by: Pookie at January 9, 2009 3:10 PM

No mention of Michael Shannon's brilliant scene-stealing performance?

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 9, 2009 3:11 PM

Just move into the city, dude. Divorce your wife, abandon your kids, and get a studio apartment in Korea Town. You'll thank me later.

Posted by: Lucas at January 9, 2009 3:44 PM

I just read the spoiler for the ending of this movie, and EW FUCKING EWWWWWWWWWWWWW! People should be warned, dammit.

I'm sorry, I have a hard time feeling sorry for people who work 9-5, have a house, food and a good looking spouse. If you have all that, you have enough money and time to get a fun hobby. Kwitcher bitchin.

Posted by: BWeaves at January 9, 2009 4:04 PM

you couldn't pay me to see this piece of shit (well, maybe you could, but it would have to be a lot of money, like $100 or something). winslett is a fucking hag and dicaprio has to be one of the most overrated actors, ever.

Posted by: sosumi at January 9, 2009 5:01 PM

Already know it without knowing anything about the book or movie. I bet any one of you DiCaprio dies in this. He dies in every piece of fiction he's ever been in. I dare you to name a fictional film he hasn't died in.

By fiction, I mean you can't count Aviator or Catch Me if You Can, they were both real stories.

Very poor choice of words sosumi. I shall, for 1 million dollars. See you in court, cocksucker!

Posted by: George at January 9, 2009 6:23 PM

Suburbia is strange to me though. The town I live in, Los Alamos, is 40 or 50 miles away from the nearest actual city without a heroin dealing problem. And for a city more along the lines you're thinking, its 100 or so miles. But the people make great money, but you wouldn't know that from looking at the town. It's more along the lines of South Park, except with money that people rarely spend.

Posted by: George at January 9, 2009 6:27 PM

I liked this movie the first time...when it was called "American Beauty."

Boo-freakin'-hoo for these perfect people living their perfect lives in the perfect world that they loathe and can't wait to leave.

I know of too many people who go home hungry, struggle to pay for the most basic of things and dream of someday making it to the Zombieburbs.

Posted by: Fredo at January 9, 2009 7:29 PM

BSlim, maybe Kate will lose 15 pounds when you gain two or three inches.

Posted by: Austin at January 9, 2009 10:02 PM

I know of too many people who go home hungry, struggle to pay for the most basic of things and dream of someday making it to the Zombieburbs.

Fredo, you do not want to go to the Zombieburbs. There's blood and guts everywhere, your car gets absolutely filthy driving down the street and you can't even mow your lawn without your neighbours trying to eat your brain. It's fucking hell man!

Posted by: admin at January 9, 2009 11:14 PM

Eh, I'm kinda there with you Dustin. I really wanted to like this movie but I left feeling kinda "meh" about it. Don't get me wrong, the acting was incredible and the cinematography was great...but I just couldn't fawn over it like the people I watched it with. Maybe it's because I'm not living in suburbia (outskirts of the city -- maybe -- but not suburbia).

If Kate Winslet lost 15 pounds she'd be living in the Zombieburbs. Next door to Rachel Zoe.

Posted by: Jessica at January 10, 2009 3:20 AM

Question: How many people will go see this simply because for them it's like Jack and Rose survived Titanic and got married? It's like a movie version of fanfiction.
From the 'berg to the 'burbs. Those crazy kids might never get it right!

Posted by: Sharon at January 10, 2009 4:51 AM

I just find it amusing that the dream of so many is to join the Zombie Horde that thinks the chicks in 90210 are "hot" or that all human beings should aspire to the A&F look or that forcing your kids into non-competitive sports is the way to go.

And Kate Winslet doesn't need to lose a pound. I'd rather her as is than some skinny bitch who can't enjoy...getting her brain eaten.

Posted by: Fredo at January 10, 2009 1:11 PM

Dustin, I think you're overlooking the heavy subtext of gender expectations which extends beyond the suburban context. The two dueling ideas of manhood presented to Frank (man defined by responsibility vs. freedom to define yourself), his expectations for April to prioritize motherhood over her individuality and freedom, their failure to recognize these pressures on each other. I think these forces move beyond suburbia and can resonate with people today despite our current economic problems (and for you to say we should prioritize the financial over the personal seems to feed into that suburban mindset, if anything).

I feel like this movie was so much MORE than a story about suburban unhappiness, it totally cut to the core of what keeps people from believing in themselves, what we truly want, what we fail to acknowledge about loving another person, how we ignore their real needs, and how we can sacrifice our true personal happiness in any societal setting. I love how complex this movie is, and I think it really sheds like on how we let society affect our choices and happiness.

Posted by: racheee at January 11, 2009 2:08 PM

dustin nailed this one. in " the reader " kate winslet WAS that german frau. in " revolutionary road " she is an actress playing a role ... not her fault because the material and direction were decidedly second rate. these characters weren't merely infected with suburban ennui, they were whackos who could exist in any decade, in any environment. does anyone who has seen this movie think that this couple would have been content if they lived in a 3 bedroom duplex in mid-manhattan?? the only thing mendes got right is that smoking was a widespread habit in the 50's. he is wrong about the cubicles however. they are a relatively recent innovation to promote a faux togetherness. in the 50's they had real offices and a better source for the history of cubicles is none other than dilbert.this film was well intended but the execution is pathetic.if it had been released in mid-year, it would be completely forgotten by now.

Posted by: snake at January 13, 2009 12:31 AM

I agree completely. Masculinity was such a key theme in this movie, and I particularly like how it played out in the juxtaposition between the Wheelers and the neighbors.

Posted by: Eleanor at January 13, 2009 12:47 AM

that was in response to racheee btw

Posted by: Eleanor at January 13, 2009 12:49 AM

i hated the movie the first time, when it was called American Beauty. seriously people, u don't like your life and have plenty of fucking money? u change it damn it. too feel hopeless about a fucking boring life u need to don't have a bank account or be constantly under on it. that's a general rule I think.

Posted by: rio at January 14, 2009 8:06 AM

You all still haven't figure out that Barbado Slim's raison d'etre is to stir the shit? Shame on you guys.

Posted by: Buenos Aires at February 19, 2009 2:27 PM





Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.