Closer doesn't go far

Rating: 6/10 (28 December 2004)

What kind of move ignores its subject matter? Closer is a movie about sex or love. Your pick. However, neither makes an appearance. Mike Nicohls gives us a movie with lust and striping (implied, at that) but leaves out the juicy details. If people are accusing Kinsey of keeping its hands clean, they haven't see Closer yet.
Based on the stage play of the same name, this is a movie about four people that play musical bed partners for two hours. It doesn't have to end there. There is no reason for us to go home to a real idea of the world other than that people get impatient if something takes longer than they were expecting. That's a great way to explain Alexander's failure without having to bring up the topic of homosexuality. In the case of Closer, the film could have ended after the first half hour, the second half hour and so on. There is a break between each set of screaming matches between yet another different pairing of the only four people in the movie. This is a convenient time to get a refill on your caffeine. What my dad refers to as "focusing agent" should make a tidy sum with this film. They should market together. I mean, how else to you plan to stay focused (for lack of a better word) during this event? With such a popular subject, such as love, it is important to be original and to offer something that the guy next door couldn't. A movie should offer something more than depiction of life. Closer presents a very bleak look at love and to accompany that should be a reason. What did these characters do that brought them to this? Why do they settle for it? Each of the four characters is practically that same as their counter part. Of course, there are small differences. Anna is a successful photographer and Alice is a stripper but these things are not big enough to build a character study on and that, at times, is what Closer aims for. In its dissection of this view on love, the characters should be the catalysts but instead serve more as puppets to deliver the witty line that does not add to the over all picture.
If we wanted solely a portrait of life, we would watch a documentary. A film is a medium of art that will be bombarded by critics and pretentious moviegoers (myself included) trying to find symbolism. The sad truth here is that the symbols we seek are often not there and what is happens to be nothing more than a chuckling director who knows he has the audience on a string. Still, even when the symbolism is far fetched, there needs to be something to differentiate a movie from a home video. Just because a moment is caught on film does not make it art. Closer is obviously art, no disputing. The problem is that no one bothered to make it interesting art. If I want to watch a movie about love or a movie about sex my choices are endless. Why should I pick this one? Because Natalie Portman is finally a "grown up"? Because Clive Own is the next big thing? Because Julia Robets ditched the Pretty Woman and $20 million pay check for this?
Maybe another day. ***/*****