The Truth About Charlie Review
by Tim Wick
For those of you who don't know, The Truth About Charlie is a "re-imagining" of the classic Stanley Donen film Charade. I'm guessing that if you don't know that fact, you have never seen the original film starring Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn. I am going to begin this review by referring you to that film not because it is far better than the remake but because this remake is simply a bad film.
One could question why anyone would see Mark Wahlberg as an acceptable surrogate for Cary Grant (although I do like Wahlberg's work most of the time) or why Thandie Newton would be considered an acceptable replacement for Audrey Hepburn (there is no such thing). In truth, it is not in casting where the film fails. Nor is in the attempt to re-create and update what is already a classic. No, the fault lies in the fact the movie is sloppy and unfocused.
Jonathon Demme, who has directed far better films (The Silence of the Lambs, Stop Making Sense), helms this film and steers it off course in ways that only a really good director can. He makes edgy choices and goes for an atmosphere that will give the movie style and character.
But style is all the movie has. Unlike last year's Ocean's 11, which had loads of style but underneath there was also some substance (not a lot), The Truth About Charlie is like a lemon marangue pie without the lemon. It is light and fluffy without ever managing to engage your intellect. Not even for a moment.
Demme choses to shoot the entire film with handheld cameras - I suppose to make things feel more intimate. He shoots his actors in extreme close up, letting their faces fill the frame to the point that a pan and scan copy of the film would cut off their nose. This technique does not serve the film well. Instead, it is a distraction as the camera swings about with frenetic energy that the rest of the film lacks.
Having seen Charade just recently, I had no trouble following the story as this "re-imagining" follwed the original story remarkably closely. Despite that fact, every time it departed from the original, the film became unclear and I never really understood many of the finer aspects of the inter-character relationships.
Most importantly, the film is supposed to be about Newton and Wahlberg's characters falling in love but they never have enough time to get acquainted. They spend most of their time alternately being trusted and mistrusted by each other. The romace is not given time to develop.
I have seen worse films this year but I have seen few films that manage to be so competently mis-made. Everyone invovled in the film is talented and Charade is certainly a film that could be re-made without ruin. Yet all the pieces come together in a way that is ultimately ugly.
Consider the fact that the film is shot in Paris. The city itself is beautiful and could be considered a second main character. But instead of sun drenched walks on the Seine, we see overcast skies and ugly flea markets with corrugated aluminum. Of course these things are part of Paris but since the location is of such importance, why not photograph it in a better light?
The film is not suggesting that Paris has a seedy underbelly of corruption - it is a romantic city but it does not look like one. Why set the movie in Paris if all you are going to do is take a couple shots of the Eiffel tower (perhaps the ugliest building in the city) and call it a day?
Nothing in the movie worked for me. Not a thing. Newton is cute and perky and while she is not Audrey Hepburn she does OK. She may be a great actress but she has nothing to work with. Neither does Wahlberg as his entire character is nothing more than a myserious guy who is always turning up in the right places at the right times. Maybe it makes perfect sense someone would fall in love with him but not to me.
Ultimately, this movie is the perfect example of what happens when talented people decide to tackle a project that should never have been tackled. The worst thing I can say about the film is that it's boring. By the end of the movie, I could have cared less. What's worse is they spend some time building up sympathy for one of the characters and then dispose of him during the credits in a post script that is (I think) supposed to be funny.
Don't go see this movie. Don't rent it. Find a copy of Charade and watch it not because this film is a remake of that film but because this film is awful and that film is not.
|
