Newest Reviews:
New Movies -
The Tunnel
V/H/S
The Tall Man
Mama Africa
Detention
Brake
Ted
Tomboy
Brownian Movement
Last Ride
[Rec]³: Genesis
Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai
Indie Game: The Movie
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
Old Movies -
Touki Bouki: The Journey of the Hyena
Drums Along the Mohawk
The Chase
The Heiress
Show
People
The Strange Affair of Uncle Harry
Pitfall
Driftwood
Miracle Mile
The Great Flamarion
Dark Habits
Archives -
Recap: 2000,
2001, 2002,
2003, 2004
, 2005, 2006,
2007 , 2008
, 2009 ,
2010 , 2011 ,
2012
All reviews alphabetically
All reviews by star rating
All reviews by release year
Masterpieces
Screening Log
Links
FAQ
E-mail me
HOME
| |
Alexandra’s Project (Rolf de Heer, 2003)
Alexandra’s Project, Rolf de Heer’s limp tale of a housewife’s
vengeful malaise, tries to come off as a Jeanne
Dielman for the reality TV age. Unfortunately, this utterly disposable
post-feminist tract is so misguided that it ends up making most reality TV look
thoughtful. In Project’s thinly conceived plot, somewhat insensitive husband
Steve (Gary Sweet) comes home from a day at work to find instead of the surprise
birthday party he expected an unpleasant home movie in which his wife Alexandra
(Helen Buday) bears her grudges against him. The time structure of the film
takes place over one day, which harmfully limits our ability to judge Steve’s
offenses against his wife. When Alexandra turns the tables on her husband,
putting him in a position where he can only watch as she makes him squirm, it
has little effect for the audience, since nothing we’ve seen Steve do suggests
he has been so domineering that he gave his wife no voice at all. Husband Steve
might be guilty of taking his wife for granted, but at no point is he revealed
as a monster that would prompt such extreme behavior from his wife. Her
passive-aggressive assault on him is repulsive, as it’s meant to be, but not
at all instructive because it comes so far out of left field.
Alexandra’s Project’s first act is a huge miscalculation. In the
film’s political sphere, women are ignored and used by men who soak up glory
without appreciating them. Here, it’s precisely because we’re focused on the
miserable existence of the near-comatose Alexandra in the first few reels that
her inevitable gambit loses any shock value. The
script’s later attempts to equalize the playing field by turning the audience
on both husband and wife don’t work because they strain plausibility to the
breaking point, and once you stop believing in the characters in a film as
tightly controlled as this one, it degenerates into a pointless exercise.
Michael Haneke might be able to make a scenario like this work, but it’s
doubtless that his script would feature characters and performances that were
much more well-rounded than the sketchy ones we get here. Amicable divorce seems
to be the last thing on the film’s mind, bizarrely, which makes the film an
exercise in absurd sadism. Worse, still, than its obvious sadism is the fact
that there’s nothing remotely clever about its execution. De Heer enjoys
trying (and trying is probably the operative word for this bore of a movie) to
make the audience squirm as Steve watches his Blair
Witch of a wife reveal herself, but his concept is so shallow that it never
becomes more than a concept. This astonishingly self-satisfied movie is resolved
so concretely that it loses any meaning at all.
18
Jeremy Heilman
02-07-2005
|