Who knows the plot yet? Michael Keaton plays Riggan, a fictionalized version of himself attempting to do two things: revitalize his failing career with a Broadway hit, and sort out all the craziness of his life. In his personal time, he hears a constant narration (his own, a deep, grunting voice that we come to realize is 'Birdman' himself). He can also move things with his mind, and is seemingly capable of flight (or perhaps that's just in his head, as well). Passersby stop him on the street to pose for a photo ("he used to be Birdman!"), and critics don't take him seriously. He drinks, his relationship with his daughter is rocky... Come to think of it, all his relationships with women are rough.
He comes to cast a new actor in his play last-minute, Mike (played by a very funny Edward Norton). He tries to make the play more edgy, more spontaneous... Riggan calmly takes it all in. Mike is a firecracker that could potentially ruin the show, yet their combines star power is enough to sell out their preview shows. There's a lot riding on opening night.
The story seems to want to be a satire on show business, on what is a celebrity, on the meaning of life... I have seen movies that have tackled just such issues with more courage and with more conviction, mainly 'Adaptation.' For a movie to analyze a down-on-his-luck actor like Michael Keaton, and to use a staging of a play as the main plot device, there needs to be either greater risk or a clearer message. For me, this was a movie riddled with cliche that didn't know how to make fun of itself.
Alejandro González Iñárritu is no fool. Quite the contrary, he is a brilliant director who has helmed great movies before. He crafts the movie as though it is a play, and through visual trickery and some beautiful choreography by the camera and cast, nearly the entire movie plays out in one continuous shot. That is not to say the story takes place over 2 hours, no. The film transitions with light and sound as though the actors are putting on a play for us. Well, a play about a play. The actors all do extraordinarily well. From Michael Keaton (like his character, a celebrity trying to prove his worth with a 'deeper meaning project') to Edward Norton, Emma Stone to Naomi Watts, this is a stellar ensemble. Likewise, the film is beautifully-shot (last year's Oscar winner for Cinematography, no less). It's visually-exciting and yet thematically-confusing... This film is like the Parthenon with no roof... All it is are a bunch of grand pillars of individual accomplishments with nothing much to hold up.
Ultimately, what is the point of it all? I see the merit in the story, and in a way this is a positive review accompanied by a negative rating. 'Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)' is a film that insists it is something more. It wants to pull the wool over my eyes. For a movie of this caliber to go over my head to this extent, perhaps I wish I could join the majority of critics and audience members who have already heaped their praises. Apparently, ignorance is bliss.
(Awards potential: Best Director, Best Actor (Keaton), Best Supporting Actress (Stone, Watts), Best Supporting Actor (Norton), Best Cinematography, Best Sound Mixing)
No comments:
Post a Comment