BJM is considered one of the best films of 1999 and a game-changer in indie/comedy circles. It put director Spike Jonze and writer Charlie Kaufman on the map and made John Malkovich a symbol of indie cinema humor. Its a very important and fun movie that has inspired so much. Its the first absurdist romantic farce with existential themes and gorgeously moody cinematography, but not the last. I don't think we would have The Lobster or the over-the-top quirkiness of Anchorman 2 or Walk Hard without BJM. It showed that something supremely weird and stupid could still be smart and emotionally involving. That said, I don't think its a masterpiece.
The film starts very strong but loses track near the climax. The story's original ending was much more elaborate, surreal and followed the setup's themes more closely with a grander meditation on artistic ego and the metaphysical horror. The final ending focuses on those things but at the expense of something else.
BJM is about a puppeteer (played astutely by John Cusack) who eventually controls the body of actor John Malkovich. Why? To impress (Catherine Keener) the woman he leaves his wife for, even though she is a sociopathic manipulator who is in love with his wife (wonderfully realized by the underrated Cameron Diaz). There are lots of crazy plot twists and brilliant characters and dialogues along the way and thats the stuff that makes this film a cult-classic. But the disturbing ending left me numb, not from its defeatist poetry but from its cobbled-together kookiness. SPOILER: The puppeteer is trapped in the child his 2 wives have had and basically all of the villains win because our hero made the tragic decision to forfeit his artistic dreams for a cheap exploitation of another man's soul. Very poignant and yet it doesn't seem earned.
Does the punishment fit the crime? Probably. But what bothers me is that the agent for Cusack's corruption is always Keener. His love for her damns him and her only punishment is some sadness after rejecting Diaz for money and power. Cusack's character is unlikable and corrupted, but he's never worse than Keener's. Kaufman must have wanted this unsatisfying effect in his ending but its unsatisfying dramatically and logically, not just emotionally. The villains win and our tragic hero loses but it doesn't work as a great tragedy because the least villainous characters are the only ones who suffer. It can be argued that Diaz is the most virtuous because she does the least harm, but she is the one who keeps Lector's Malkovich room a secret from Cusack, she tries to kill Keener when rejected and she shows no other virtuous beliefs besides loyalty.
Kaufman is a great writer but I think many decisions were made just to tie together a great plot at the expense of fully-blossumed character motivations and a grander thematic statement. Since BJM, his films have grown more absurdist and existential but less comic and neat narratively. Maybe he is trying to perfect what he almost had in BJM, though he's had a hard time topping the popularity of BJM (Eternal Sunshine could be his most popular script is it as universally lauded or as good a movie???). Kaufman seemed to have more personal voice in his next collaboration with director Spike Jonze, the superior Adaptation.
Why the BJM is as likeable as it is and as imperfect as it is, in my opinion, is Spike Jonze's interpretation of the work. What was supposed to be a story about artistic madness and the exploitation of human beings becomes a metaphor for Jonze's own troubled marriage then to Sophia Coppola. The heavy focus on adultery, lust, betrayal and guilt run through his and Coppola's work from then to now and it probably starts with BJM. This film works best in context with her Lost in Translation and then his Her. They confess their sides of their divorce through their art and form a joint body of film work in the process. Talk about Freudian. This is what happens when two very brilliant but damaged directors fall in love. At least the films are good. The melodramatic ending and sulking obsession with bad relationships is why BJM was such a populist film and its original script might have made for a better film, but not much of a commercial launching pad.
So "Being John Malkovich" is not as good as it should be but it works for what it is. That can be said for most popular movies.
No comments:
Post a Comment