Mixed cheese platter anyone?

Rating: 1/10 (2 May 2005)

I'd rather enjoyed Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet, I'd been overwhelmed by the gaudiness of Strictly Ballroom but somehow also managed to find some mindless entertainment in that... but I am sorry to say I won't be anywhere near as generous with Moulin Rouge. Some adoring reviewers here have claimed this film has revealed the endless possibilities of cinema to them. I must then think that they haven't seen very many films in their lives, seeing as Moulin Rouge does nothing but pick 'n mix then regurgitate with an extra helping of gorgonzola from films and genres that have been seen, digested and assimilated many, many times before. Except the now-obligatory post-modern irony isn't even in this mish-mash, as the two leads - Ewan McGregor and Nicole Kidman in particular - are so totally devoid of any ability to do irony, you'll end up with tooth decay at the end of this schmaltzy ride.
Kidman and her button nose, which prevents her from looking anything but pretty but never beautiful (as this film would have us believe), is probably one of the most actory actresses working in Hollywood today. Her performances go through all the motions - see her Oscar-winning performance in The Hours, for instance, where she showed us what a mentally disturbed, brooding artist does, at least externally - without ever reaching anything resembling the SOUL of her character. In this sense, when comparing Julianne Moore's unforgettable performance to Kidman's in the same film, you understand in what ways she could also be viewed as unconvincing as the doomed courtesan Satine in Moulin Rouge. As for McGregor, who was supposed to be playing a young Londoner (with an awfully good Scottish accent for someone from so far South in the UK!), his Christian had a little more integrity, but way too much sap. Watching such a man declare his undying love to me would probably make me feel like the most unromantic, irreverent and callous woman in matters of love!
The film itself, essentially an old-fashioned musical with no original songs and a few clever gimmicks to give it a superficial modern veneer, will probably date very quickly. Whoever will be watching it in, say, the year 2020 won't help noticing how turn-of-the-century it is. A film which uses popular culture references for a greater, more timeless purpose rather than being used BY them, will probably stand the test of time. Not so a film which does nothing but wink and nudge the spectator all the way through just to show how up-to-date with all the latest, late 90s, trendy pop references such as MTV-style cinematography, Bollywood movie aesthetics, Kylie Minogue and the "naughty" and Bohemian use of absinthe (which had a revival in the late 90s)... Even the big, turn-of-the-century New Year's bash... a direct reference to the MTV generation's own 1999.
**SPOILERS AHEAD** One scene I found particularly ridiculous was the one in which the ruddy-cheeked, mustachioed Cockney (in Paris!) impresario Jim Broadbent (only superficially reprising his much more interesting role from Topsy Turvy), tells Nicole's Satine she's dying of consumption (tuberculosis for you and I). He does this as a last resort to convince her once and for all that she must give up her true love, the impoverished writer Christian and sleep with the evil Duke so that he'll sponsor the Moulin Rouge and her acting career. When Satine hears this shocking bit of news about her health, she reluctantly agrees to going along with her impresario's wish. I'll explain why I think this scene is ridiculous: if anyone has ever known someone who's had to go through the unspeakable pain of discovering they have a terminal illness, they will know that Satine's reaction - agreeing to give up her love for Christian - is psychologically the least credible thing she could have done. Exactly because she knew she had so little to live, what really matters most in life would suddenly have come into sharp focus for her. She'd have wanted to spend her last period alive doing exactly what she had always wished for and what was really worthwhile - not pretending to love someone she despised in order to further someone else's business interests! As for her own business interests, what would they matter if she knew she was dying? **END OF SPOILERS**
Speaking of the Duke and the way the evil, upper-class patron was portrayed in Moulin Rouge - he made the whole film so similar to Titanic in my eyes. Not unlike that other gargantuan cheese-platter, Moulin Rouge's poor were the generous, creative, lively, warm, vibrant salt-of-the-earth types to its cold, heartless, snobbish, evil rich. Moulin Rouge and Titanic portray class differences in a manner so simplistic, I wonder why more people didn't feel insulted by such an affront to their intelligence.
Other majorly irritating elements about Moulin Rouge besides the... er... choice of music were some of the supporting characters, John Leguizamo as Toulouse-Lautrec in the front row. A lisping, simpering fool played by an actor of average stature unconvincingly walking on his knees.... It makes one balk just to think he was meant to portray one of France's legendary Belle Epoque artists, one whose artistic heritage embodies that time in the French capital like few others. Yet here he was, reduced to no more than a cutesy, Disney animal side-kick so he could be fed to the MTV generation without turning them off from the historic/cultural baggage that would come with such a figure normally! My final words on Moulin Rouge are that if I'm going to watch a gaudy, noisy song-and-dance with funny characters talking in silly voices, give me the original Muppet Show series any day.