Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Marie and Bruce

Initial Reaction: "What the hell was that?"

If ever there was an off-putting movie, it would be Marie and Bruce. It's about an unhappy married couple, and not much else. I thought it might offer us some insight into the joy, pain and often never-ending struggle that couples experience. Some might say it did, but geez, I thought insight of any kind was hard to find here.

Marie and Bruce claims fame with me as one of the few movies I didn't want to finish. I mean, I kept thinking that maybe, just maybe the end would redeem it somehow. But the rest of it made it become less and less worth it. I did finish it though, and because of that I am able to bring to you a more complete and negative review.

Marie and Bruce have been married for a number of years, and (thankfully) have no children. The film begins in the morning, and we hear Marie, played by Julianne Moore, telling us how much she dislikes her husband, played by Matthew Broderick. And this isn't just "I'm not sure if I love him anymore" or "Things have changed." This is full on hatred. She's filled with disgust, and as she looks at him sleeping in the bed next to her, refers to him with a string of profanity. He wakes up, and as he does so, she throws up her hands in frustration and whines "No!! Don't wake up!" This opening scene sets an interesting mood and tone that last for the majority of the film.

After they get up, they both make their way into the kitchen and start talking. They go back and forth between extreme politeness dripping with sarcasm and open distaste. When he tells her he's going to have lunch with Roger, she exclaims about how wonderful that is and goes on and on about how she's sorry she'll have to miss out on all of the interesting things Roger will have to say. It's very obvious she feels the opposite.

So this is essentially most of their interaction. They go throughout their day, trying to stay occupied since they're both unemployed and certainly don't want to spend their free time together. He goes out to lunch with Roger (played by Bob Balaban who does an incredible job being boring), then checks himself into a cheap hotel to drink and watch people through their windows. Marie goes out to lunch (apparently though they're unemployed they still have plenty of dough) and ends up being followed by a stray dog as she walks through the city streets. This ends up as a strange, almost dream-like scene in the woods by a river where she actually seems happy for a while.

You know, it's difficult to write this review because I feel like I don't have much to work with. Most of the time the main characters are pretty shallow, and when they're not, there's really nothing going on. From the very start of the film, Marie keeps telling us that she's planning to leave him. The same day, in fact. That night, when they got back to the house, she would tell him she is going to leave him. That's pretty much what keeps us somewhat interested in what is going to happen.

Marie and Bruce, I found out after the fact, is adapted from a play of the same name by Wallace Shawn. I had actually thought while I was watching it that it would make a better play. I might have appreciated it more that way, but now that I've seen this version I don't know if I'd want to sit through something else even closely resembling it again. The characters don't have many layers, and we basically just get to go through their miserable day with them. Even the ending, in which the mood changes slightly, was significantly wanting.

Rating: -13

Dull, sad, uncomfortable, and discouraging, Marie and Bruce left a lot to be desired. Good performances? Yes, but the script and plot just didn't deliver much in the way of meaning. I don't think you could even make the case that this is what a lot of couples deal with. Unpleasant from beginning to end, all I was left with was a feeling of "eww..." and for me, that's never a reason to recommend a movie. So, unless this sounds right up your alley, (and I mean you, Eeyore...) then please don't bother.

3 comments:

Dr. Worm said...

Yes. This was a difficult movie to watch. It was very stylized, and in a way that I'm sure works better on the stage than on the screen.

It was really a spectacle for disaffected, self-loathing, middle-aged, upper-middle class New Yorkers. I think those in that demographic would find it an enlightening caricature of their lives. But I think the rest of us have done all the analyzing that we need to of disaffected, self-loathing, middle-aged, upper-middle class New Yorkers.

Neal Paradise said...

a question for WLC (and DW):

as an engaged couple, how does seeing this movie affect your impending nuptials?

Wicked Little Critta said...

Um, thankfully, not much. I mean, I know that a lot of marriages are unhappy, but this was almost silly, and I can't imagine a situation in which I would ever act this way, or that DW would either. But it is true that seeing movies about marriage hit a little closer to home lately...