Worse than you realize

Rating: Null/10 (4 January 2004)

Beware of Spoilers
For the sake of all that is holy, please do not leave the theater convincing yourself that this is a good movie. You've already sold your soul to "Seabiscuit", now let me try to talk you away from the ledge before you plummet into the abyss:
Plot? See the trailer. Simple setup: Gigolo Joe is a Confederate soldier who deserts the smoldering trenches to return to his idyllic paradise hometown, the namesake of the film, where he can find peace and (more importantly) Nicole Kidman. Sounds like one helluva setup, right? Moving a character from A to B allows for all kinds of exciting encounters and the opportunity for hilarity to ensue.
The first major flaw of this movie lies in an obvious place: the two lead actors. Jude Law is unoffensive in this role, but nowhere near remarkable. On the other hand, Nicole Kidman is simply not right for her part. There wasn't a single moment in this movie where I could tolerate her. Actually, have her exchange roles with Natalie Portman and you have the makings of Hollywood "magic".
Why do I have a problem with our two star-crossed lovers? Because I never care about them. Not once did I feel any tangible connection to their "love". They barely knew each other when he went off to war: they had shared a few words and a single session of passionate necking. And this isnt a vendetta I have against Kidman, she made me care about the romance in "Moulin Rouge!", its just paper thin at it is. "Oh, but even though they knew each other only briefly, they loved one another". Fine, but don't just tell me this, convince me.
Now for the duplicitous dilemma at the core of this mess: the movie tries to be a mix of "O Brother Where Art Thou" and "The Matrix:Reloaded"...what do you get when mixing elements from a great movie and an awful one (in that order)? A mediocre movie leaning heavily towards travesty.
Why "O Brother"? It is a journey full of ambiguous and yet blatant "Odyssey" references that attempts Coen-caliber humor. "Reloaded"? Because of the spiel that the Yoda lady goes on about everything having a predestined purpose, a special providence. So I'm supposed to be moved that Sky Captain's purpose was to return to his beloved, plant his seed, and die in the act of cleansing his town? How profound.
Actually it could've all been profound, but the filmmakers decided it would be better to spend time with Kidman and Zellwegger learning how to plant corn than focus on the one character that I could've actually given a damn about: Cold Mountain. Minghella would've been would've been wise to have better established the corruption of Cold Mountain by Teague and his posse after most of the men leave for war. Instead this corruption and its physical effect on the town is only hinted at, and Teague's band of misfits become static foes on the prowl for deserters. In the end it is the town that is saved, not the blossoming love they've been building up. The tragedy I could feel for the is the destruction of immaculate, unadulterated Cold Mountain. Instead I'm told to long for the fulfillment of Joaquin Phoenix's lustful desires.
I hate Renee Zellweger. Her accent is terrible. Phillip Seymour Hoffman isn't anything more than entertaining. Come to think of it, Donald Sutherland gives the best performance of the cast after the Native American fellow and Jack White.
There are many moments in this movie that I enjoy... the sequence with Natalie Portman is one of the strongest and Ethan Suplee is always a plus, but please, please do not convince yourself that this is an acceptable movie by any account: just because something has all the makings of greatness, it doesn't mean it can achieve it.