Bonus Review #1
Film: Breakfast on Pluto [R] 135 minutes
WIP: $9.00
When 1st Seen: 13 January 2006
Where Viewed: Hallett Cinemas Bellevue Galleria Stadium 11, Bellevue, WA
Time: 6:50 p.m.
 |
DVD |
As I mentioned on my first day of this blog where I explained that in previous years I had tended to attend no fewer than 75 movies per year (one a week with some weekstwo), I will probably continue to attend a few bonus movies now and again. Originally, I had thought that I wouldn’t write reviews for these ‘bonus’ movies. And, that still might be the case in the future, especially given my challenge to see one movie a day for the next year. Even so, since it is still early, I have some writing juice left in my word processor, so I thought would crank out a review for a couple of my bonus movies—though not always on the day I originally saw them (that’s the catch, I suppose). So, my first ‘bonus’ review will be for the independent film released by Sony Classics called, Breakfast on Pluto.
Perhaps the first thing that might draw a person to Breakfast on Pluto is the title. What is this film about anyway? Is it a sci-fi film? Is it a remake of Breakfast at Tiffany’s set in the future with a twist? It’s very mysterious.
Huge Sidebar Digression: Titles and Movie Posters
(skip over if you are in a rush to find out about Breakfast on Pluto)
Since I was a kid, I was taught, never judge a book by its cover. I extrapolated this, rightly or wrongly, to mean never judge a book by its title. In my mind, that rule only applies to books. I feel it is absolutely fair to judge a movie by its poster and its title. A misleading, bland, or otherwise uninspiring title and/or poster can sink a film when there is a crowd of movies listed on the marquee. Movies tend to stay in theaters only so long, they tend to cost a lot more money to see (and by see, I mean in the movie theaters NOT AT HOME—that, in my mind does constitute really seeing a movie, sorry to all the home theater buffs, but it’s not the same as seeing a movie on a 50 foot by 20 foot screen in a theater packed with film goes all sharing the opening cinematic debut of a major motion picture, sorry!), and there’s that timing thing...sometimes you have to pick based on what’s showing at the time that fits neatly between dinner and getting home for curfew—if you have a curfew, which I don’t! So, people are choosy. Sometimes they use the advice of critics, friends, family, their hair stylist, etc. The point is that if a title or a poster does not grab the attention, a darn good movie can be completely overlooked when there are a bunch of films out at the same time. I think that is sort of what happened to Jennifer Aniston’s 2005 film, Derailed. Ever heard of it? Well, it was a decently good movie with a wonderful twist. I guess you’ll have to add it to your Netflix queue now won’t you! The title was just too bland. In the sea of movies out at the time, you would have really had to be paying attention to notice that it was even there. The title wasn’t catchy. ‘Derailed’? What’s the film about? Think about each of the next three titles and whether they, on the basis of just the title alone, would have been more likely to draw you into the theater had you arrived completely uninformed and had you to choose a movie that started around 5:15 p.m.:
Derailed
Revenge of the Lover
You Play, You Pay
Sins of the Heart
The last three of these titles, by the way, are free and clear according to IMDB. Not that that really matters since one thing that really drives authors crazy and marketing departments that try to market the work of authors crazier is that you cannot own a title. It’s true. The title of a book or a movie can be used over and over and over again. You cannot copyright a title. You can try to trademark a title, but only if it is really out of the ordinary stuff. The thought is that short combinations of words cannot be owned as they occur too regularly in everyday speech. So, you want to make a film called, The Return of the King, go ahead. Well, I apologize for that short digression into copyright law and titles. Anyway, the point was, which movie would you pick, the one that sounds like a train wreck, or the others which, in my humble opinion, more clearly get at what the story was really about; and, therefore, they would be more likely to draw a person into the theater under the given circumstances. In general, one-word titles are a huge risk.
As for the poster, which you can check out at IMDB, of course, it was perfectly misleading. You can only sort of tell that Jennifer Aniston was even in the movie. The poster prominently features Clive Owen. Now, I’m not interested in taking any polls on this one because I doubt it is necessary and because I’m pretty sure if I took a poll a lot more Americans would say they know who Jennifer Aniston is than would say they know who Clive Owen is. So, if you are trying to sell a movie and draw in American customers, I don’t know. I don’t think I’d feature Mr. Owen in the USA version of the poster, I’m not even sure I’d feature him over Jennifer Aniston on the Irish version. Hey, it’s a new movie with Jennifer Aniston, feature her. Make her look all beautiful and desirable, and well, you know what happens. $$$$$$$$$$$
(end of sidebar)
Well, I have a hard and fast rule about not giving away important plot points, unless the story is well-known, like Little Red Riding Hood, for example. So, I have to be careful in writing about the title of this film and what it means. Let me say that, (a) it is not a sci-fi film, so if you are looking for a sci-fi fix, watch Battlestar Galactica on the Sci-Fi network—not only is it great sci-fi, but it’s one of the best shows on television period, (b) the movie does not take place on Pluto or have anything really to do with Pluto or with breakfast for that matter, and (c) finally, no, it is not a remake in any way of Breakfast at Tiffany’s—so Audrey Hepburn fans everywhere can rejoice and not worry that someone has tried to monkey around with a classic. Though, to be honest, I think a role-reversal B@T’s set on Pluto in 2075 could be quite intriguing, but that’s just me. Anyway, Breakfast on Pluto is about a young Irish boy named Patrick growing up in a very small town in Ireland in the 60s at a time when the world was even more hostile toward his desire to cross dress and behave as a woman than it would be today. The movie unfolds as chapters in his life as you see him grow up from Patrick (age 10) played by Conor McEvoy to the Patrick of age (15-30) played by Cillian Murphy—yes, the same actor who played the ultra-scary Scarecrow in Batman Begins and the maniacal guy in Red Eye. Mr. Murphy has been a busy little actor this past couple of years. I can think of only a few instances where an actor has pushed himself in two such totally opposite ways in the same year. To go from playing an ultra-creepy villain in a Batman movie to a cross-dressing, flamboyant, ultra-sensitive Irish lad is quite a statement that he should not be typecast. Bravo to director, Neil Jordan, for recognizing the incredible talent of this relative newcomer. And, honestly, except for his grating, not so great attempt at a female voice, he does a enchanting job of becoming a sort of attractive woman. In that sense, Mr. Jordan has done it again, only a bit differently than he did in his famous jaw dropper, The Crying Game. Breakfast on Pluto even has a role for Crying Game’s Stephen Rea who quite fancies the older Patrick and uses him in his magic act—sorry, if you wonder about that, you’ll have to see the film!
There is a lot to like and a lot to dislike about this film. The parts to like include the satisfying story. It’s not completely Disneyesque in tying up all the loose ends perfectly, but pretty close which seems almost contradictory in a movie that confronts the harsh reality of the Irish / British religious war and the terrorism associated with those times, the abuse of transvestites in civilized society, the lack of celibacy on the behalf of some clergy, the underbelly of western culture in general, and a host of other social issues. This film has a lot to say about a world full of people who judge others before they judge themselves. On the side of things not to like, would be the continually ethereal Patrick himself. He seems to float through life compelled to answer the most burning question of his existence on the one hand while becoming completely satisfied to live in a remote, broken down, mobile home because he gets to play house and receive occasional, perhaps conjugal, visits from Billy Hatchett, a minor rock star of Irish fame. And, thus, this sort of becomes the way of his adult life where he moves from odd situation to odd situation the most bizarre of which lands him in jail as English detectives believe him to be guilty of a heinous crime that ultimately leads to him wanting to stay in jail because he feels safe. I am not sure what I really wanted Patrick to be. I guess, I wanted him to be stronger, and that’s just not who he was. In a nutshell, for me, it simply was too hard to watch all of his meandering, aimless, wandering existence when juxtaposed to the brutal reality of his life, the horrific political climate, and his core desire to find the phantom mother, who left him as an infant. That, then, becomes the haunting dichotomy that prevents me from fully endorsing Breakfast on Pluto. Technically, the movie is very, very good. The story, on this one point, leaves me tortured. I cannot fully accept that someone with such a compelling core mission could live this meandering life. And ultimately, that sort of sank this film for me. Maybe it’s wrong for me not to like a movie because I cannot believe that a person could really live this life, but it did. I just didn’t believe it.
Now Available for Purchase on DVD
Breakfast On Pluto [DVD](2005) DVD
Buy the book: | Order the soundtrack: | Get this movie on DVD: |
No comments:
Post a Comment