Where to start …? Suffice to say we all know that a Charlie Kaufman movie is going to be as bonkers as it is clever. I can’t even really attempt to analyse it in any meaningful sense, as one viewing of Synecdoche, New York is not equal to the wealth of symbolism and play it contains. Psychologists, deconstructionists and general film geeks alike will all find something to wax lyrical about in this movie. But as we all know, just because a movie is ambitious and intellectually challenging doesn’t necessarily make it any good. In this case I am relieved to say Synecdoche is an impressive achievement, which completely engrosses you and takes you into another world. That the world is that of Kaufman’s head means it might hurt at times, but hey there’s nothing wrong with a bit of mental aerobics now and then is there?! It sure beats watching Jason Statham try and emulate Bruce Willis any day of the week.
I suppose you’ll be wanting a synopsis. Eek. To say that this is a film about the fictional Caden Cotard (Philip Seymour Hoffman), a theatre director who creates a magnum opus based on his very own existence, which rapidly takes over his life as he becomes more and more obsessed with it, is far too simplistic and reductive. This Russian doll of a movie has all the hallmarks we’ve come to expect from Kaufman: postmodernism, blurring of the real and the artificial, self-reflective tangents, doubling, screwed up central characters and a net result of a heckuvalotta bafflement in the minds of the audience. Unlike his previous projects Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine, Synecdoche is bleaker and perhaps even more cerebral than anything he has done before. Is the movie a meditation on what it is to be an artist? Is its metatheatrical style saying something fundamental about the process of creating? Are we watching a dream? Or is the movie a treatise on the human condition (after all, we watch Caden grow older and more feeble as he makes his inevitable approach towards death)? Is any of this even happening for real?!
Maddening, eh? There are so many ideas and visual tricks employed in this movie that it threatens to overwhelm us with its cacophony of ideas. It’s therefore left to key player and reliable character actor Hoffman to add the emotive pull, which - it’s no surprise - he does very well indeed. Although his character is typical of male New York movie archetypes, a hypochondriac, self-obsessed guy unable to make a relationship work, he’s less annoying than some of the characters previously crafted by Kaufman (maybe by virtue of not being either Nick Cage or Jim Carrey – although both acquitted themselves well in Kaufman’s aforementioned movies). Whereas previous Kaufman protagonists can seem almost revoltingly needy, Caden doesn’t. Whereas he is also searching for something/someone to fulfil him, he comes across as less of a wet blanket and more a tragically flawed Everyman. The fact that the wonderful Dianne Weist’s character Ellen takes over the ‘role’ of Caden as he nears death encapsulates this everyman quality perfectly – he stands for us all. This strange shift also reinforces the notion of the fluidity of the self. But I’m just speculating as this is possibly the easiest idea to grasp in this labyrinthine movie.
As dreamy as it is sprawling and incomprehensible, film critics will have a field day. I found making sense of the movie rather daunting and as you can tell, didn’t really get anywhere. It defies description and comment in some ways – maybe it’s all an elaborate joke at the expense of folk like me?! The only thing I can say for certain about the movie is that its cast’s strong and accessible performances are a lifeboat for the audience. Old hands like Hoffman and Wiest give moving turns as different facets of Caden’s psyche and we are treated to wonderfully likeable performances from Samantha Morton as Hazel, a sexy box office administrator; the luminous Michelle Williams as a young actress; and a cheeky Emily Watson playing another version of Hazel (this will make sense). The sets are also amazing, from Hazel’s beautiful but inexplicably burning house to the grandiose and to scale New York set Caden builds as a stage. I am sure there are echoes and all sorts of hidden meanings that a second viewing would reveal, but for now I will just say the movie is a chimeric masterpiece with a cast who rescue us from being suffocated by the fecundity of Kaufman’s imagination. Or translated, save the movie from disappearing up its own beautifully fashioned arse.
Recent Comments