More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Advertisement

Overall Rating
4.22

Awesome51.82%
Worth A Look: 32.73%
Average: 4.55%
Pretty Bad: 7.27%
Total Crap: 3.64%

9 reviews, 56 user ratings


Latest Reviews

Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets by Rob Gonsalves

Roman J. Israel, Esq. by Peter Sobczynski

Coco (2017) by Peter Sobczynski

Prey (2017) by Jay Seaver

Lu Over the Wall by Jay Seaver

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri by alejandroariera

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri by Peter Sobczynski

Justice League by Peter Sobczynski

Mumon: The Land of Stealth by Jay Seaver

Geek Girls by Jay Seaver

subscribe to this feed


Far from Heaven
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by Erik Childress

"Modern Old-Fashioned Melodramatic Storytelling Done Right"
4 stars

It’s easy to fathom why modern filmmakers would want to dredge up the past in a style for their latest project. In an age of groundbreaking special effects, fancy rapid-fire editing and gross-out humor, the term “old-fashioned” becomes a compliment rather than a censure. Screwball comedies, archaic ghost stories and even “70s thinking-man’s action films” all come back now and then and present a timeless quality that will likely elude most of the titles even deemed “modern classics” today. Melodrama, however, is usually reserved for golden era television productions and has been relegated to the soap opera and disease-of-the-week variety. It’s mocked by critics and audiences alike, so why would any filmmaker take it upon himself to channel a genre from the bygone era of the cinema?

Not just a genre either, but a filmmaker himself, Douglas Sirk, whose literate melodramatic compositions of the 1950s were initially dismissed as camp but have since garnered a place in film history amongst scholars who cut through the operatic emotion to focus on its subtext. Director Todd Haynes has crafted a film in that very style; one that requires patience as its all-so-subtle underpinnings and overdramatic moments approach the realm of parody and if you didn’t know better, you would swear it was.

Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) seems to be living the All-American life with the All-American family in the All-American town. In the 1950s. Life in the suburbs, a supportive husband (Dennis Quaid), gossip with the gals over a pitcher of daiquiris and magazine reporters looking to feature her and her home. That’s until she sees husband Frank kissing someone else. And it’s not a woman. Big, jarring dun-dun-DAHHH moments like this are what melodrama is all about; overwrought emotion, tragedies amongst lovers and families and BIG music on the soundtrack to emphasize it all.

There are reasons why films like this seem dated today, no matter what attitudes of greatness are thrust upon them. That’s what I kept telling myself well past the initial hour of Far from Heaven, until I was struck with something much more. What a wonderful piece of storytelling was happening here. The familiar themes and plot coincidences we see in everyday daytime drama are there, but the way it’s being told to us not only slowly buries or brings new perspective to what we would normally jeer, but encapsulates about five decades of film history.

The more recognized films of Sirk were released during the time of the production code, well before the entity of the MPAA was telling us what is and isn’t acceptable for the eyes of the young. Even the title of Sirk’s All That Heaven Allows is a subtle jab at the days when two people in bed (on film) must keep at least one foot on the floor. As Frank’s “sickness” threatens to destroy his life and makes him feel “dispicable”, Cathy befriends Raymond Deagan (Dennis Haysbert), the son of her late gardener and their platonic relationship gets the rumor mill rumbling in the whitewashed society. Oh the humanity! Cover your eyes, children!

Racism, homophobia and the breakdown of the Nuclear family are the dirty secrets of a society deemed utopia by any one individual whose perfect life can’t be bothered with the hard truth. The Ozzie-and-Harriet nature of the Whitakers is accentuated through neatness and the autumn palette of their neighborhood has room for all of the colors except black. Inside the house, “’oh jeez’ is not the type of language” they use. Not even a darn or a gosh is tolerated, making the film’s only utterance of profanity all the more penetrating. So restrained is their existence that we feel a sense of relief when the couple allows themselves to scream at one another. Even the audience’s early perception of their perfection reveals itself as an illusion when it dawns on us that even though they always tell their children “just a minute” they never seem to have one for them.

If ever a trio of actors complemented a piece of material, then the performances by Moore, Quaid and Haysbert are masterstrokes. Both evoking the spirit of the old-school substance and playing every moment with their feelings just barely up their sleeves, never does a scene with them play false or hokey. Moore (who should have won the Oscar in 1997 for Boogie Nights) may finally get her chance at the podium, delivering one of her best turns as a woman whose feelings overshadow her ignorance about her husband and the way society functions. And if “due” is the word to use for acclaim, then between this and The Rookie, Dennis Quaid may have finally had his big year. Watch the nuances of Quaid’s performance when he gets drunk at the Whitaker’s big party as exceeded alcohol consumption shrewdly frees hidden inhibitions. Haysbert (so good on Fox’s 24) has played the interracial love angle before in Love Field with Michelle Pfeiffer. But here he displays a kindness and gentleness of not the “Uncle Tom Colored Man” kind that Spike Lee will criticize until he’s dead (The Legend of Bagger Vance, The Green Mile), not even a “colored man” at all, but just a man; one who understands his place in the community, but nevertheless longs for more in the future, especially for his young daughter.

From the big giant titles of the opening credits to Elmer Bernstein’s perfectly melodic score, Haynes gets just about everything right. Edward Lachman’s cinematography, Mark Friedberg’s production design and everyone associated with this film is going to see their names mentioned in pre-(and likely)-post-nomination articles. Before seeing Far from Heaven, colleagues of mine urged me to watch or re-watch some Sirk otherwise my experience might not mesh. Time constraints didn’t award me the opportunity, but it didn’t matter. Despite my initial reservations about tone and unintentional satire, I can at least definitely answer the question (for myself) as to why a filmmaker would choose to homage such a genre. Maybe he just wanted to tell a great story. What could be more old-fashioned than that?

link directly to this review at http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=6299&reviewer=198
originally posted: 11/08/02 07:55:59
[printer] printer-friendly format  
OFFICIAL SELECTION: 2002 Vancouver Film Festival. For more in the 2002 Vancouver Film Festival series, click here.
OFFICIAL SELECTION: 2005 SXSW Film Festival. For more in the 2005 South By Southwest Film Festival series, click here.

User Comments

11/05/15 David Hollingsworth Amazing film! 5 stars
7/31/08 Ramone Haynes' academic approach doesn't neglect real emotion here 5 stars
6/21/07 fools♫gold Almost as SHOCKINGLY flawless as "Yes." 5 stars
6/01/07 Anton Though the story was a bit flat, Julianne gives another incredible performance. 5 stars
12/28/06 Rob H Felt like an academic exercise or parody. Could not get into it. 2 stars
10/27/06 Matt H. Flawless cinematography, really amazing, however I do believe the story was a bit flat. 4 stars
8/16/06 anthonyuk when will the oscars recognize julianne moore as one of the best ever 5 stars
1/03/06 Daveman Hammy, even by melodrama standards. 2 stars
6/02/05 JFK great actings, great plot. Bad ending 4 stars
12/12/04 Charlene Javier Julianne Moore was robbed! 5 stars
9/26/04 NJ Cup Winner 95-00-03 Not as good as I had hoped, tho I respect Moore & Dennis a lot 4 stars
10/05/03 Darryl Seen all this before. Just maybe not in 1957 Hartford. Nothing special. J. Moore is good. 3 stars
10/02/03 Jinnvisible People have Gay and Interracial love problems-- YES WE KNOW-beautifull photography though 4 stars
9/12/03 filmfatale Excellent and riveting movie - Julianne did a great job! 5 stars
8/28/03 Chris The film's not perfect but very good none the less. The actors were all excellent. 4 stars
8/15/03 Ayla much better than expected 4 stars
7/25/03 Léo parent I LOVE THIS MOVIE I THINK IT,A GREAT MOVIE 5 stars
6/03/03 brentley The acting, the cinematography, the set design, everything - was all top notch. 5 stars
5/31/03 Jack Sommersby Familiar ideas directed and performed with flair and power. A wonderful film. 4 stars
5/26/03 Gil Carlson Hopelessly over rated and highly improbable 2 stars
5/12/03 Artist Freak Not as aweomse as I thought it would be. Nice cinematography tho. 4 stars
4/20/03 Boo Splendid 5 stars
4/06/03 gay man who's sirk 5 stars
3/23/03 Kyle Not bad. Didn't meet my expectations, though... 3 stars
3/20/03 regy A quiet gem of a movie. 5 stars
3/05/03 James Renwick Touching and moving motion picture. Society is still like in som many ways 4 stars
2/21/03 Jim the movie geek Slow and unreal in parts, but some powerful bits. 4 stars
2/14/03 Andrew Carden Excellent film, with great performances. Kudos To Julianne Moore 5 stars
2/13/03 Joe Tackled these subjects poorly, go rent a Sirk film instead 1 stars
2/13/03 kz Cinema at its Best 5 stars
2/12/03 alien assassin If you don't like this, dust off your collection of "happy days" videos. 5 stars
1/10/03 Goofy Maxwell *sniff* The style is just so beautiful. *sniff* Disillusionment is oh so painful. 5 stars
1/01/03 Mitchell Morris It's not a movie, it's something better—a "picture." 5 stars
12/25/02 Marshall Among the 21st century's first classic films. 5 stars
12/25/02 gg excellent but a bit overstated; technical mastery of late 1950's look is worth going for. 4 stars
12/24/02 Donna Horrendous propoganda in which no character is remotely close to the 50's. 1 stars
12/24/02 anna an incredibly artistic piece of work 5 stars
12/23/02 laura This film is so heavy handed and lacking in subtlety, it's offensive. I'm shocked as well. 2 stars
12/22/02 take1 Very enjoyable 5 stars
12/22/02 RS This could and should have been a good film. It wasn't. 1 stars
12/19/02 geekLove disturbed. Not a good date movie = the husband (me) turns gay, wife (date) loves gardener. 3 stars
12/18/02 steve interesting film for those that love "film," but honestly, it left me feeling cold. 3 stars
12/17/02 Cory Phaeus Moore and Quaid's "acting" is so patently phony, I am astounded the "critics" loved them. 1 stars
12/17/02 This Charming Man perfect period piece - excellent acting 5 stars
12/17/02 Stephen Essential viewing 5 stars
12/15/02 john Score detracts, attempts at saluting sirk distracts, story is weak 2 stars
12/15/02 Mike G Julianne Moore's acting and the set design is amazing! 5 stars
12/13/02 VINCENT LOCASCIO THIS FILM SHOWCASES DENNIS QUAID'S AMAZING ACTING ABILITIES BUT JULIANNE MOORE IS THE STAR. 5 stars
12/11/02 renegade mike the struggle to achieve in atmosphere got in the way of a really compelling story 2 stars
12/10/02 AgainstTheGrain This movie was an academic exercise. Save money, rent a Douglas Sirk movie! 2 stars
12/09/02 Flora P. Re establishes racial boundaries, Negro as spiritual help for troubled white woman 2 stars
12/08/02 David Hogan Stunning in every respect, and a movie that makes me understand why I love movies. 5 stars
12/06/02 Suzz beautiful looking film; fine performances; but flat and uninvolving 3 stars
11/26/02 marzio arigoni@rtsi.ch What a nice surprise: good film, superb cinematography, Julianne Moore and Dennis Quaid sim 5 stars
11/21/02 Kenmeister Well-made, well -acted melodrama. The only part that rings false is Raymond. 4 stars
11/10/02 Ariya Best film of the year 5 stars
IF YOU'VE SEEN THIS FILM, RATE IT!
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:


Discuss this movie in our forum

USA
  08-Nov-2002 (PG-13)
  DVD: 01-Apr-2003

UK
  N/A

Australia
  06-Feb-2003




Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
eFilmCritic.com: Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast