by Thomas Willett
3:00pm PST, May 24, 2012
It seems like every actor these days is contractually obligated to do a period piece that requires them to wear lavish outfits and speak with ridiculous accents. In Bel Ami, Robert Pattinson joins the club by trying to seduce three women (Uma Thurman, Christina Ricci, and Kristen Scott Thomas) in order to move up the social ladder in Paris during the 1880’s. While everything appears fine at first, things about the upper class slowly start to reveal themselves. Does Pattinson have what it takes to become a respectable actor, or will this just show his limitations?
If the movie has one fault, it is that nothing feels important. The story follows Georges Duro (Pattinson), who starts off the story penniless, but he never feels that way. He is already obtaining wealth in a conflict-free way that is only made clearer as his relationships begin to develop. There is never really an understanding of the lead character’s conflict, thus making everything to follow feel sort of pointless. While this devolves into a romantic period piece and nothing more, it never gives a reason to care about anyone.
Co-directors Decclan Donnellan and Nick Ormerod do a good job of creating a realistic vision of Paris in the 1880’s. The issues more come from Rachel Bennette’s adaptation of the Guy de Maupassant’s novel. What once made for thrilling conflict doesn’t translate well to the screen and the story lacks anything but affectionate gazes from the actors. The movie does little to distinguish itself from every other period piece, which only hurts the story as the melodramatic third act kicks into gear.
All of these issues manage to make the performances seem more forgivable. Robert Pattinson manages to show some emotional complexity, but not enough to make his character interesting. His chemistry with Kristen Scott Thomas may be the best of the three co-stars. Thomas takes the campy older woman role and brings a little heart to the relationship that makes it feel significant. Uma Thurman is almost as good, though due to her story line, is a little less interesting by the end of the story. Christina Ricci has her moments, but is the weakest of the three largely due to her limited screen time.
Since there isn’t anything to really take away from this movie, Bel Ami comes across as an unambitious, easily forgettable tale about love that has been told in different and better ways. The actors give it their all, but with no huge conflict to drive the story, it rarely gets interesting. The accents are tolerable and probably the least detrimental aspect of this movie. There was a need for everything to feel livelier and make the characters feel authentic to match the scenery and the times.
This will probably not be remembered as the definitive book adaptation. It is mostly a boring, slow, poor attempt to cash in on the period piece genre. While no one is necessarily terrible, there isn’t anyone who stands out either. While it probably won’t change too many people’s opinions on Pattinson, it at least proves that he can attempt to have range when necessary. He may not last long in independent movies if he produces work like this. However, it is possible that his next feature, David Cronenberg’s Cosmopolis, will turn things around. He just needs to prove that he’s more than a miserable man.
Comments
Post a Comment