Expressionism, Anyone?

Rating: 6/10 (2 January 2002)

Expressionistic art BY DESIGN brings attention to it's artificiality. Even though many films use expressionistic elements ("Tom Jones," "A Hard Days Night," "Airplane," "The Naked Gun), I've seen only four films could genuinely be classified as "expressionistic films:" "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," Fellini's "Never Bet the Devil Your Head, Mel Brooks' "Blazing Saddles" and now "Moulin Rouge," which is the LEAST successful of the four. The other films used expressionism to reinforce their themes. However, unless writer/ director Baz Luhrman INTENDED an antiromantic picture (which I believe he did), his self-conscious, anachronistic artifices work AGAINST the main plot (i.e., the love story between the poor writer and the doomed cabaret singer). While incredibly beautiful and dreamlike (Oscar worthy cinematography, set decoration, art direction, editing and sound) and boasting great performances by Nicole Kidman and Jim Broadbent, the main plot is uninvolving, the characters uninteresting and the film is ultimately unsatisfying.
Possible Spoilers:
I have several reasons for believing the film is MEANT to be antiromantic. Ewan McGregor's dialogue is chock full of "modern" "romantic" musical lyrics, integrated in a manner assured to bring laughter. The love songs between Kidman and McGregor, while lovely, all appear to be done tongue in cheek. As McGregor "sobs" over Kidman's lifeless body, he appears to be guffawing. Baz Luhrman could have made his point complete if he'd included a "lovers singing while walking in the clouds" sequence at the end of the movie. Alas, I was left unclear as exactly what WERE his intentions. Oh well, perhaps that's on Disk 2 of the DVD.