Short Cuts
Dir: Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, Nashville)
1993
I have to admit, I find Altman a bit overrated (mind you, I still think he is often good and sometimes great). But "Short Cuts" is worthy of all its praise (may be the source material has something to do with it; it's an adaptation of Raymond Carver's novel). The film is a series of stories that all interrelate, even if tangentially. I am a sucker for large ensemble casts with individual narratives tied together thematically (Magnolia, Crash); and Altman's ethos as an actor's director allows him to get an all-star ensemble cast (I believe Julianne Moore is in every ensemble film from the past 15 years).
Like most of Carver's work (and Altman's) most of the characters are simple folk facing common problems, be it cheating husbands, rocky marriages, or trouble with children. Although few of the characters face true redemption, none of the characters are treated with an air of condescension or caricature. Few characters are likable; there always seems to be a disconnect between the characters within the film and that translates into our relationship with them. The film is set in Los Angeles, a broader metaphor for the isolation among the masses and the attempt to find dignity in a world beyond control. The film ends with an earthquake, like Magnolia's frog shower, that punctuates these themes: the earth shaking realization of one's own emotional limitations. The film is not nihilistic or trite, but understanding of the hardships that many experience, even if they are self-inflicted.
Smart film, a must see. Altman's best.
1993
I have to admit, I find Altman a bit overrated (mind you, I still think he is often good and sometimes great). But "Short Cuts" is worthy of all its praise (may be the source material has something to do with it; it's an adaptation of Raymond Carver's novel). The film is a series of stories that all interrelate, even if tangentially. I am a sucker for large ensemble casts with individual narratives tied together thematically (Magnolia, Crash); and Altman's ethos as an actor's director allows him to get an all-star ensemble cast (I believe Julianne Moore is in every ensemble film from the past 15 years).
Like most of Carver's work (and Altman's) most of the characters are simple folk facing common problems, be it cheating husbands, rocky marriages, or trouble with children. Although few of the characters face true redemption, none of the characters are treated with an air of condescension or caricature. Few characters are likable; there always seems to be a disconnect between the characters within the film and that translates into our relationship with them. The film is set in Los Angeles, a broader metaphor for the isolation among the masses and the attempt to find dignity in a world beyond control. The film ends with an earthquake, like Magnolia's frog shower, that punctuates these themes: the earth shaking realization of one's own emotional limitations. The film is not nihilistic or trite, but understanding of the hardships that many experience, even if they are self-inflicted.
Smart film, a must see. Altman's best.
posted by ronvon2 at 9/18/2005 11:45:00 PM 
2 Comments:
Never saw it. But am I wrong to think Altman does too much celebrity worhsip? That's purely knee jerk reasoning.
MAP
Maybe so, but actors really seek him out because he gives his actors extraordinary artistic freedom. Although the Short Cuts cast is great, their star power was not as impressive in 93 as it is today. There are a number of critiques I would levy against Altman (pretension, for one), but I am not certain celebrity worship is one of them . With that said, ruminating on the idea of celebrity seems to permeate his work (The Player [not yet seen], Nashville).
Post a Comment
Go Back to Main Page