Bad DVD of the Month

Something was telling me not to watch this movie.

Actually many things, signs to be exact, told me not to watch this movie. There was my mother’s warning that after she walked out of the theatre, she felt as though her heart had been ripped out of her chest. There was the lazy Sunday night when I settled down to watch the movie but was distracted by a tight Phillies- Braves tilt on ESPN. There was the Monday when I promised myself I would watch the movie, until I was offered two free Celtics playoff tickets. And finally there was the Tuesday when I completely cleared my evening schedule, only to be offered a free Red Sox box seat.

Something was indeed telling me not to watch this movie. I should have listened.

March 2005 brought us the DVD release of “Closer”, a relentlessly depressing and sobering movie that amounted to a $4 punch in the gut. I could have got the same result by walking into Cask ‘N Flagon and yelling “BUCKY DENT!” Although painful, that route clearly would have been cheaper and less time-consuming. When the misery finally ceased after 100 brutally destructive minutes, I felt angry. Not because I had invested time and feeling into the characters, but because I was actually expecting to enjoy this movie. Why? On paper it looked like a homerun. On the roster were Academy-Award winning director Mike Nichols (“The Graduate”, “The Birdcage”, “Wit”) and four bona fide superstars in Julia Roberts (playing “Anna”, a successful photographer), Clive Owen (“Larry”, a cheeky dermatologist), Natalie Portman (“Alice”, an American ex-pat stripper) and Jude Law (“Dan”, an obituary writer and unsuccessful novelist).

The premise of “Closer” (based on a London play of the same name by Patrick Marber) is one of love and coincidence. The movie opens with Alice getting clipped by an automobile and saved by Dan, after which they engage in an awkward first conversation in the hospital. The two strike up a relationship and things look promising until Dan visits Anna to have a headshot taken for his new book. That fateful visit sets off a cacophony of lies and deceit interspersed with enough vulgar language to make me long for the days of silent film. Equally as dark as the characters is the setting of the film. Unlike lighter movies like “Notting Hill” and “Bridget Jones’s Diary”, the London portrayed here is sinister and unforgiving. Through Nichols’ lens, every street is an unfamiliar alleyway dotted with cruel faces and cold stares. Every location in the city is a scene for new heartbreak, and every denizen is only looking out for himself or herself.

I disliked this movie so much I took retroactive pleasure in the fact that despite its collection of talent, it didn’t win a single Academy Award. Don’t let the names attached fool you; this movie will leave you angry, bitter and confused. Still not convinced? Here are five reasons why “Closer” is one of the most disappointing movies in recent history:

Casting: I don’t mind Jude Law. I have nothing against him personally. In fact, I’ve thought he was a pretty damn good actor ever since his big-screen breakthrough in “The Talented Mr. Ripley”. But if I ever see him in another movie again, it will be too soon. I can’t remember an actor in recent memory being more overexposed than Law is right now. You might say he was a bit busy in 2004, starring in “I Heart Huckabees”, “Sky Captain & The World of Tomorrow”, “Alfie”, “The Aviator”, “Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events” and, unfortunately, this movie. It is by far his worst work of the six. He goes through the motions in this role and doesn’t have enough range for material this heart wrenching.

The talent here in and of itself is impressive, but it simply does not work for this movie. Clive Owen and Natalie Portman do their best with the material, but Law and Julia Roberts struggle to truly become their characters. They’re both too nice and a little too good looking for these parts. Everything about Roberts is wholesome, and this prevented me from believing her character. When the movie is over you aren’t mad at Anna, you just hate Roberts.

Production: This movie has a handful of sets, no special effects and a grand total of six officially credited actors. It cost $27M to make. Was Matt Amorello somehow involved?

Dialogue: Normally this section would be titled “Bad Script”. Well, as you may have already gathered, there isn’t much about this movie that is normal. As I mentioned earlier, “Closer” was adapted from a play and this becomes obvious mere minutes into the film. The movie in its entirety actually resembles a play on film. It seems that instead of putting his own fingerprint on the work, Nichols basically just filmed the original play as is. It would have much been much cheaper and easier to take a handheld camera to the West End and sit in the orchestra seats. This is minimalist filmmaking with the fast paced back and forth of a stage production. But just because the dialogue is tight doesn’t necessarily mean it’s entertaining. The characters engage in volley after volley of lightning quick banter that is exhausting to watch.

I remember watching “Dawson’s Creek” in college for the first time, thinking that there were no teenagers who spoke as they did. I for one didn’t know any 10th graders who sprinkled words like erudite and loquacious into their daily conversations. Well, I don’t know any adults who speak like the characters in “Closer”. Every word of every line seems contrived and forced. These people don’t talk just to hear themselves speak, and every phrase is a witty, incisive dig. Unless you’re an absent-minded Oxford professor (which means you’re probably not reading this newspaper anyway), you will not enjoy listening to this dialogue. Although he’s never won an Academy Award or been named Sexiest Man Alive, all the players here could learn a thing or two on how people really talk from Jeff “Must…Must Go Faster” Goldblum.

Acting: Julia Roberts is an accomplished actress who is one of the most recognizable faces on the planet. There’s no denying that she’s done it all, from playing a small town dreamer in “Mystic Pizza” to a lovable prostitute in “Pretty Woman” to a headstrong corporate whistleblower in “Erin Brockovich”. All that being said, an actress as globally likeable as she does not belong in this movie. Her character is a scheming workaholic who seems to be planning her next devious move even while she’s screwing her current partner over. Roberts’ goody-two-shoes image clashes too much with the morally bankrupt Anna.

The problem isn’t that I can’t even repeat most of things that come out of her mouth, but more so that they just aren’t believable coming from her. She is truly evil in this movie, and it didn’t work for me. I found myself laughing during the most intense scenes because it looked as though she was reading from cue cards. Her image is much too squeaky clean for this role. An actress who has pulled off edgier roles would have been much better served as Anna, possibly Nicole Kidman or even a lesser name like Maggie Gyllenhall or Naomi Watts.

Offensive Content: You wouldn’t normally expect to see a graphic, 15-minute long cybersex scene between two men in a major theatrical release. Well, I didn’t expect to hate this movie as much as I did either. If you haven’t gathered yet, “Closer” is not a movie to watch with your parents, your significant other or anyone that you have an ounce of respect for. Nowadays it’s hard to be shocked by anything, but I can honestly say I was floored by the crude nature of the movie. Even more surprising is that none of the shocking content is visual, but rather entirely in the filthy words that are tossed around with reckless abandon.

Vivid, cringe-inducing descriptions of sexual situations are usually reserved for independent releases, but this film still manages to push the envelope. Aside from Jude Law and Clive Owen enjoying each other with the help of a cable modem and a seedy London chat room, the most eye-opening scene involves one of the many breakups. After Anna reveals a secret affair, she and Larry (who marry halfway through the film) engage in an uncomfortable back and forth in which he grills her on where, when and how she cavorted while he was away on business. They both spit verbal venom at each other in a contest to crush what little is left of each other’s dignity before they part. Aside from not believing what I was hearing, I was left wondering if people like this actually exist. I couldn’t imagine repeating some of the movie’s dialogue to my worst enemy, never mind my wife.

When a friend first asked my opinion on the movie, I told her it was definitely not a “Friday Night Movie”. After all, there are a few films you want to avoid watching on the weekend to avoid crippling depression. But, as you can see, this movie is not suited for any day of the week. This is a film in which the characters do more than just break each other’s hearts, they obliterate each other’s spirit until there is an emotional wound cut so deep it will never heal.

If even a small fraction of adults are as immature and fiendish as the characters of “Closer”, then we all might need to think twice about who we give our hearts to.