Unique and Interesting But Not Amazingly Good

Rating: 7/10 (16 June 2009)

Here is the problem I have with Benjamin Button: It's not amazingly different or special in its own way. I think a friend of mine summed it up as a slightly mystical and more tragic cross between Forrest Gump and The Notebook. On one end, you have the man whose life spans many great moments and scenes and his disability (mentally or aging backwards) actually barely plays a role in what would be a great life for anyone. No doubt the use of imagery, period costumes and music, and time passing are key elements in telling the story. On both ends to some degree you also have the life long romance, from friendship to lost romance to finally capturing it and there is even the story-telling from a 3rd party aspect going on.
What problem I don't have is that both of those films happened to be good and while I'm not saying Button rips them off, it hardly does anything that makes it powerful in its rite like them.
What does it do well? Of course the aging-CGI is impressive and the makeup for everyone is excellent. The costumes are top quality and this movie does a better job of portraying time passing without the 'in your face' historical notes and blatant music overkill that Gump used. While the lead acting is good (Elle Fanning has a nice little part), it's largely out shown by the underrated Taraji P. Henson and an excellent side role by Tilda Swinton (who has not lost a step since Michael Clayton). Some of the side and smaller roles of this film do a better job of defining his life and experiences than the character himself. If you're into amazing, panoramic scenery with impressive makeup, CGI, and period sets and costumes, this film is a solid 9 out of 10.
What is it missing is pop. The seemingly deep devotion and realistic portrayal of young and unbridled love pushed the Notebook along strongly. In Gump, not only were his unintentional involvements in historical and popular events funny but it also flowed as smoothly as the metaphorical feather in the story. This story...well it didn't flow for me. The slightly tragic and pained romance, to me lacked magic. It lacked punch and in the end, it was a story that really lacked "Oomph". It had lots of scenery and beauty to it but plot-wise didn't deliver. It hung several times out there and yet disappointed me each time. Instead it stuck to a rather bland, mystical and magical sort of tone to his life and an unconventional romance.
I'd 9/10 for elements from costumes, sets, cinematography, and makeup. A 10/10 for aging effects. The acting is a 7/10 with most great parts being smaller ones and a 6/10 for plot. It has a nice hook but the actual plot lacks originality or anything special to it.
If you want to watch a movie for its visual aspects at a very high level, this is a new classical must see. If you want a truly great romance, there are many better out there. I won't say this is a bad movie, it's definitely worth seeing but it's not the instant classic some paint it as. It's a great movie for appealing to a sense of wonder and ones eyes and maybe ones spirit but certainly not to the romantic heart.