 |
| Stranger than Fiction (2006) |
Going into this movie, I was getting all geared up to hate it. I don't tend to go into movies with a pre-conceived notion of what I'm going to think, but the opening premise didn't set itself up for success. A Will Ferrell movie where he hears his own narrator and no one else can? Be prepared to ask for the refund. But, I was really surprised by just how subdued this plot is. It's not even the main focus a lot of the time. It's mainly just used as a vessel for this guy to get his life together. There's a significant chunk of the film where there's no narration at all, and there's a surprisingly little amount of Will Ferrell comically talking to the voice in his head while innocent bystanders look on quizzically. Granted, it's also the catalyst for the plot in the first place, but there's a decent amount of the second act where the voice is just gone and the actions of the characters are shaped by the mere presence of the narration in the beginning. We don't even get a clear explanation for where the voice came from in the first place. While that is a little off-putting for me, as someone who likes all my questions to be answered by the end of the story, it wasn't that big a deal by the end. If it had been a huge focus the entire time, I'd be marching through the streets demanding an explanation, but the fact that it's so relatively subdued here somewhat justifies the lack of a lightning bolt or magic spell or static shock from turning the pages of a thrilling novel.
 |
| Will Ferrell as Harold Crick |
Even Will Ferrell's performance is somewhat subdued, at least compared to what people consider his usual performance to. In fact, I might go out on a limb and say that this might be my favourite performance I've seen him give. Not only does he nail the idiosyncrasies of a character like Harold Crick, but he absolutely kills it in the more emotional scenes. He also has great chemistry with Maggie Gyllenhaal, and I will say that maybe the movie could have done a little more to endear me to her character. While Gyllenhaal does fine in the role, I felt like Ana herself could have used a little more fleshing out. It just seemed like she's an anarchist... because she is. We do hear some of her backstory, and what we get is really good, but none of it is related to her most defining character trait, which is a problem. The rest of the main cast do a great job across the board. Dustin Hoffman does a great Dustin Hoffman, Tony Hale is a fantastic pick for comedy relief, and Emma Thompson is always, always, ALWAYS amazing, and this is no exception. Queen Latifah is also good, but her character seems a little pointless. I know she's there to show us how closed off Thompson is at the beginning in order to further her character arc, but Latifah's character herself doesn't actually do anything in the movie. I thought she might have done something to help her get over her writer's block, or talk her down by the end, but nope. I know that not every character needs to be integral to the plot, but a character that gets their name on the poster probably should.
 |
| Dustin Hoffman as Jules Hilbert |
Stylistically, this film is really unique. The film has a really clever way of showing off Harold Crick's OCD nature and, more specifically, how he manages to break through it. Initially, I was annoyed that the film didn't use it more often, but it does make sense with how the film shows Crick's progression. I also need to comment on the romantic subplot, since it does take up a significant portion of the movie and it's one of the key motivators for Crick's growth. And, I'm not going to lie when I say that it does feel a little rushed. I did say that Ferrell and Gyllenhaal have great chemistry, and I stand by that. It's also true that a lot of the scenes we do get between the two of them are really well written, and I could believe a relationship could generate between the two over time. The problem is that it happens a little too quickly, and in the wrong circumstances. Given how they establish Gyllenhaal's character, I don't see her falling in love with her auditor, especially with how she has such a rage-boner for the IRS. Even if she got to know the real Harold Crick, which she does, it still happens far too fast. They had exactly 2 non-IRS related exchanges prior to deciding they liked each other, and that seems like a very quick development, especially stacking that up with the amount of hostile IRS-related encounters they've had. I don't know, it's not a huge deal breaker, and the relationship is still solid by the end, but it's a little iffy.
 |
| Maggie Gyllenhaal as Ana Pascal |
Just quickly, I do want to touch on the main reason I'm glad we don't discover the reason why Crick can hear the narration in his head, and we are encroaching somewhat on spoiler territory here, so be warned, but basically it all boils down to one scene. It's not even a very long scene. It's where Emma Thompson is obsessing, terrified, over if this situation has happened in the past, and if she's killed people with her writing. Not only does this form the basis of her character arc, but the fact that they leave this question ambiguous is honestly chilling. The movie doesn't definitively answer whether or not she's killed people with her writing or not, and there's no evidence one way or the other. That's honestly horrifying, and I'm surprised this movie had the guts to do that. I was also impressed by how Crick was written to die, since they'd keep setting it up as something that had to happen, and the fact that they actually gave us a situation where they puled it off and I agreed with them by the end is worth noting. That said, and I did say that I can overlook the fact that we get no explanation for Harold being able to hear his narrator, but something I can't overlook is the fact that his watch is apparently sentient. I get that was the plot device that Eiffel was using for her book, but that somehow takes control of reality... I guess...? The fact that the watch is sentient doesn't actually change anything. You could have just had the watch glitch at the beginning and you still get the desired ending. There's barely a focus on it, so it's not that big a deal, but it was in the back of my mind throughout the entire film, and the fact that it just seemed to be an afterthought for something so bizarre was a little jarring.
 |
| Emma Thompson as Karen Eiffel |
Stranger than Fiction (2006) was a nice surprise, and a movie I'll gladly watch again. It wasn't the funniest movie I've ever seen, but for a unique premise, unique style, unique tone and solid execution, I'm definitely recommending it. 8/10.
No comments:
Post a Comment