This year's "Forrest Gump," only worse

Rating: 3/10 (10 January 2009)

This schmaltzy, bloated film sounds, on paper, like it was going to be some kind of unique experience in cinema; to my knowledge, an entire film that centers around a person aging backwards has never been done before. But as the film eventually progresses on (and very slowly mind you, slower even than "Zodiac;" Fincher is in need of an editor these days) we soon realize that that is the ONLY thing that is unique about the film. It's actually a very conventional bildungsroman which has everything you expect from any coming-of-age story. We see opportunities missed, opportunities taken, chance encounters, and a whole lot of death and dying. It's always a cheap way to narrate a film by killing off characters one by one, but sadly, it IS the film's narrative.
And about the unique element of Benjamin aging backwards, the film doesn't really capitalize on it to make a bigger statement of life (In fact, for a running time of almost 3 hours, it doesn't make ANY profound commentary). Benjamin could have aged normally, and it wouldn't have made a difference. In fact, it just becomes downright bizarre and sometimes even disturbing in some scenes. When you see a decrepit looking Brad Pitt sharing secrets under the bed with a 9 year old girl, you will not feel comfortable. What might have been more poignant is if Benjamin had a real disease and knew he was going to die at a young age, and he still took the chances he took in this film. So the gimmick of age-reversal remains what it is: A gimmick. (Though I'd be curious to see what Fitzgerald had in mind when he wrote his short story.)
There are also some plot events that simply do not make sense in the narrative of the film. Why have Benjamin raised by African Americans? It did not make a difference at all whether he was raised by blacks, whites, or Asians  Benjamin is certainly not influenced by the African American community through the course of the film. For a film that starts in the 1910s and makes it a point that Benjamin is raised by blacks, it absolutely makes no mention about the hardships of blacks in pre-civil rights America. Another thing is that the film is told in flashback by Benjamin's one true love, who's dying and lying down in a hospital bed. It is not told in the present, but rather, it is told in 2004 in New Orleans. Yes, hurricane Katrina strikes eventually. What's the point for the filmmakers to include one of America's most devastating natural disasters if it has nothing to do with the plot? In a way, this film made me appreciate the films by people like Yasujiro Ozu (whose "Tokyo Story" is one of the greatest films about the impermanence of life) even more, with their spare, poetic style.
David Fincher has made some of Hollywood's most suspenseful films in recent memory and I thought it'd be interesting for him to try a new genre. But after viewing the results, this is definitely not Fincher's territory, and the only reason I can see why this film was made was purely for Mr. Oscar. It tries to be this year's "Forrest Gump" but even there it fails  it has not one memorable line from it, and clearly Fincher is trying too hard to be dramatic. Instead, he eventually becomes melodramatic. It's a curious attempt, and at least it's pretty well shot, not to mention some outstanding aging special effects. In the end, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is Fincher's chick flick, and I hope it's his last one.