I watched Roger Avery's screenplay of a novel by Bret Easton Ellis, "The Rules of Attraction" today. Released in 2002, it stars a very recognisable cast, including James van der Beek, Jessica Biel, Kate Bosworth and "Boone" from Lost (Ian Somerhalder - who plays the gay character pretty well) to name a few. I enjoyed its unconventional style and reflexive technique. It didn't have a beginning/middle/end as such, or a linear story progression, it just unfolded and refolded onto itself, and it worked. It seemed to me Avery was really trying to subvert the structure of the traditional plot, and by doing so he achieved something very interesting.
A snapshot of a time in one character's life can be an interesting stand-alone story, but when you add snapshots from the other interconnected characters as well, it provides for a lot of resonance. Duh, right? Well this film made me look at the omniescent perspective in a different way (hehe). There really wasn't a narrator, essentially the film was a series of independant stories from each of the characters that, put together, made an overall story. Again, duh, yeah? There was just something about this film's techniques that mixed up the conventional... You might have to watch to see what I mean.
Sure, it's chock-full of sex and drugs and college-ness, but Avery uses each of these devices expertly to intimate a tone or a mood or realisation for a particular scene. The film (I haven't read the book) brings up some interesting points about how anyone can truly know another person; sounds depressing but is quite thought-provoking. Especially when wanting to know/love a certain someone is all that you really desire.
The film starts mid-sentence and it ends mid-sentence. I've never felt how I did after watching a movie than after this one.
The film summed up in 3 words? Unique/Confronting/Raw
The themes summed up in 5? Desire/False Hope/Rejection/Despondency.
Dale's rating? 4 out of 5 - for how much it got me thinking.
Would like to know if anyone else has seen it and whether reactions were similar... or very opposite!
Dale.
5 comments:
Well, you are indeed a bit behind the times. I saw this in 2002. Loved it. As much as I'm loving this new layout!
I'll add it to my list. Great little review in any case, you really hammered home what seems to be a complicated little description here.
Jimzip :D
I remember seeing this at the movies and really liking it - it's fun when talented people play with structure. Actually, I've heard duplicity does something similar, but the preview looked crap. Hmm, but it's done by michael clayton writer and I ilked that. Also liking the new layout.
In 2002 I was a very young 14, and I wouldn't have appreciated it as much as I did today. However, I do remember really wanting to see it when it came out because of it's 'R' rating lol. On second thoughts, maybe I wasn't such a young 14. :P
Thanks Jimzip. I don't really do much reviewing, but I think it would be a cool thing to be good at, so I might just do one every now and then.
You "ilked" michael clayton, Luke? :P And yeah, Duplicity previews haven't really inspired me either.
Thanks for the layout compliments. I was searching for a long time. Possibly an eon went by over the course of my search. :)
I write that comment on my iphone on a bumpy tram so cut me some slack! :P (I got no excuse for that write/wrote typo though...)
Post a Comment