Saturday, August 6, 2016
THE FAMILY FANG (2016)
Directed By: Jason Bateman
Written By: David Lindsay-Abaire
Based On The book By: Kevin Wilson
Cinematography By: Ken Seng
Editor: Robert Frazen
Cast: Jason Bateman, Nicole Kidman, Christopher Walken, Kathryn Hahn, Marin Ireland, Harris Yulin, Josh Pais, Michael Chernus, Danny Burnstein, Steve Barrish, Steve Witting
Annie and Baxter, the adult children of the controversial husband and wife conceptual performance art couple famous for their quirky macabre public performances, have never got over the fact that their parents kept using them during their childhood in their often gory and disturbing satirical public performances. They often clash with their now elderly parents over this and blame them for their problems in their adult life. However, the two become worried when they're told by the police that their parents have gone missing during their trip outside of town. The brother considers the possibility that something horrible might have happened to them, but the sister is convinced that it's just another one of their stupid games or twisted conceptual performances. She convinces him that they should go and look for them themselves.
The first trailer for the film wasn't released until three weeks before the release date. So the film never really had a chance. Which is strange considering the films pedigree.
Whatever I write about this film. It will come off as seeming bitter. As I read the book first and was a big fan of the book. I looked forward to watching this film as after all I liked Jason Bateman's directorial debut BAD WORDS. And since the book was also a dark comedy. I thought it was a match that made sense. The film speeds up the story. Realized that most likely the books story would have to be condensed and the dynamics of the story reworked. Not necessarily changing details but leaving less informed turns and losing a certain context hurts the story overall.
It certainly hurt my appreciation of the story presented here. Probably because I read it so recently We would of course expect what you enjoyed to be on display. If not in story then at least in mood. A film that you would expect more from or certainly handled by a director who had more of a reputation and history with similar material.
I believe I would have enjoyed the film more if I wasn't so familiar with the material. The films seems smaller scaled then needed. Shrinking the story to a degree. As it seems to try and be more intimate with the characters to be like a study by not moving the story forward as the book did with so many actions and distractions.
The novel ranked among Time's "Top Ten Fiction Books of 2011".
In the translation it feels like certain layers are lost. The book could have made a great movie. Just. It. This is not this film unfortunately. As the changes also impact the story. But makes it feel more grounded in reality and not so fantastic in the situations and parts. It never seems to have the impact that it should. As things happen and the film just seems to let them slide off the characters soldiers. Never taking the time or accepting the consequences. Jason Bateman seems to be playing his usual type of characters. So that it doesn't seem like much of a stretch. Maybe he wanted it to be easier as he also must direct the film. He plays the role with as many issues or sensitivity as the story provides for his character. His character here is more put together and take charge. Not as distraught as he should be.
He moves forward as a filmmaker showing more depth and talent. Though I thoroughly enjoyed his first film as a director. Here it seems he is more interested in making a strange story more conventional. Understand he must condense, cut scenes and characters as well as events.
Nicole Kidman seems to wear her character on her sleeves, but she is good in the role of the damaged sister who becomes an actress. She gives a good performance that is more serious and how's how grounded and good an actress she can be if given the right material. As she comes off less recognizable and less of a star even though she is playing one.
Jason Bateman and Nicole Kidman both have several credits on the project. Bateman is the director, star and producer of the film, while Kidman brought the rights to the book, served as a producer and as the leading lady.
This is a project that is obviously very close and personal to both the stars. Who I wonder if they didn’t let their influence and their own visions of what they felt the story was really about and letting them reach a catharsis to challenge themselves. As well as letting it be their own homecoming and look at their careers For instance it has a reunion of Steve Witting and Jason Bateman. Earlier collaboration was the Television series 'Valerie'. Thought hey share no scenes together. He also casts Kathryn Hahn in a small role. This is their third time working together including being his romantic interest in his directorial debut. As well as Kidman hiring David Lindsay-Abaire who previously wrote the film RABBIT HOLE which she starred in
Trying to condense an epic story into a confined space that limits it and it's beauty as well as shortening it's reach.
The film maintains it's questioning of art and artists throughout. The argument of life and art and what exactly is art is never answered. Which I believe is intentional to make the audience constantly wonder. What I real what is performance is also asked. As the film seems more nostalgic tinged and twee like a dysfunctional family as quirky more than devastating.
Feelings and emotions are on display as the story seems to be about overcoming your passion. Making reactions of others the real art. Turning it on the audience to make them more the performers. As the film puts an essential mystery in the middle of the film, but as the characters get more clues to try and solve it the film. Doesn't make it feel urgent at all and seems like it is more of an annoyance than anything else.
The film goes for a look of southern gothic.
The film is disappointing, both as a representation of the book and as a film on it's own. Not a bad film as it has it's own strengths of note, though the story feels more rushed then it should. It barely takes it's time before it is off on another lead.
So many details that could have been explored or slowed down instead seems more plot oriented then necessary. Characters that had darkness to them to match where the story goes are lightened up. So it feels more upbeat.Though truthfully there is nothing wrong with the film technically.
It's nice to see the cast is filled with naturalistic looking actors rather than unbelievably good looking stars.
Maybe as the adaptation of the book is written by a playwright. The film ends up feeling more like a play or at least more a theatrical piece then necessary The film lacks the Depth of what made the original so magical and a delight to read. As well as softening the ending. Making the film feel too cut and dry. Though it seems like a quirky film that normally would be oscar bait. That comes across as slight more then anything.