“THIRD PERSON” **
About a decade ago, a significant number of filmmakers created projects involving globalization, with stories set around the world, or short stories interconnected by one element. “Babel” and “Crash” are among the most profitable examples of that trend, scoring reasonable numbers at the Box-Office, acquiring success worldwide and receiving respectable awards. Since then, there hasn’t been one single title following that trend capable of proving that the formula hasn’t expired. Even Brazilian Fernando Meirelles, after Oscar nominations for “City of God” and “Constant Gardner” gave it a try, conceiving the awful “360” last year wasting great talents such as Anthony Hopkins and Jude Law on board. This time around is up to acclaimed writer-director Paul Haggis to try his best on a global storyline. Haggis is one of the most respected screenwriters in Hollywood, responsible for hits such as “Million Dollar Baby”, “In The Valley of Elah”, “007: Casino Royale”, “Flags of Our Fathers” and his Oscar winning directorial debut “Crash”. So with his name on the credits, directing, writing and producing this new drama, the audience is expecting a great blend of drama and suspense supported by modern and tragic issues. But unfortunately that doesn’t happen. Haggis introduces three different stories in exquisite places, New York, Paris and Rome, giving the audience a little taste of the emotional confusion his characters are dealing with, but they never connect, they will never meet, and they’re structured over their struggles to rescue the third person of the title.
Liam Neeson and Olivia Wilde play a writer and his publisher enjoying moments of flammable affair in Paris. As he’s writing a book about a woman’s love interests, Olivia refers to herself as a third person. In New York, traumatized by an incident, Mila Kunis is battling James Franco for their son’s custody, and Adrien Brody is a cynical businessman running the streets of Rome with a strange femme fatale seeking to set her daughter free from sex-slavering. There are many reasons why this film didn’t work precisely: the running time is too long for the lack of subjects, all three stories could’ve been told and resolved in a shorter frame; the audience develops interest towards their dilemmas but soon it fades away; in one inexplicable take, a note is left in a hotel room in New York, and then reappears in Paris; of course, Haggis knew what he intended with that, but by the time the narrative explains that, it’s already too late to save it from sinking. The players are completely comfortable into their roles, but sometimes they feel like under too much pressure: Neeson resembles the times Michael Douglas was the object of women’s fantasies; Franco sounds like an arrogant upper-class artist and Brody is kind of lost between the comedic and dramatic aspects of his mysterious role. Haggis coordinates the narrative with brilliant techniques, but wasn’t able to give his screenplay the right attention, forgetting to accomplish what he really envisioned for the dramatic atmosphere. Very presumptuous, next time, better stick to LA.
Comments