Post by joekiddlouischama on Dec 20, 2023 7:00:13 GMT
I just saw it today; if you have a chance to do so before it leaves theaters (in a day or two, in most cases), Eileen is worthy of a look. Set in the Boston area in 1964, and based upon a novel by Ottessa Moshfeg (who also co-authored the adapted screenplay), the movie follows the curious relationship of two sexually ambiguous women, a young staff assistant played by Thomasin McKenzie (who resembles Rooney Mara) and a somewhat older, much more glamorous, doctoral psychologist played by Anne Hathaway. The film's style is somewhat overwrought, but the narrative ultimately moves in unexpected ways. The characters' motivations, and the justifications for their actions, sometimes seem undernourished, but the movie's lean, allusive style makes for concision while inviting audience participation, forcing viewers to think for themselves. Visually, Eileen offers an attractively gritty (if typical for a period piece) look, although there is nothing remarkable about its compositions or lighting. The movie suggests that the raw and dark New England winters lead to sexual suppression, supposed deviancy, and perversion, but the cinematography could have done more with landscape and environs to invite this impression. Nonetheless, Eileen manages to be atmospheric and fairly engrossing.
All of that is a way of saying that (for me, at least) the film's quality feels ambiguous while watching it and also immediately afterwards—you don't quite know what to make of it. But a few minutes later, Eileen might firmly strike you—as it did me—as "good." It uses simple gestures to suggest powerful themes rather than constantly spelling them out. One senses that the novel fleshes out the issues and characters much further, and one perhaps misses that level of detail in the movie. But again, the film's leanness proves compelling, offers a sense of mystery, and engages the audience rather than pandering to or oversaturating viewers. Sometimes, less is more, and the movie's jazz score makes Eileen all the more esoteric and enigmatic. McKenzie's quiet, naturalistic performance is the most powerful, while Hathaway is adequate—as good as she can be.
All of that is a way of saying that (for me, at least) the film's quality feels ambiguous while watching it and also immediately afterwards—you don't quite know what to make of it. But a few minutes later, Eileen might firmly strike you—as it did me—as "good." It uses simple gestures to suggest powerful themes rather than constantly spelling them out. One senses that the novel fleshes out the issues and characters much further, and one perhaps misses that level of detail in the movie. But again, the film's leanness proves compelling, offers a sense of mystery, and engages the audience rather than pandering to or oversaturating viewers. Sometimes, less is more, and the movie's jazz score makes Eileen all the more esoteric and enigmatic. McKenzie's quiet, naturalistic performance is the most powerful, while Hathaway is adequate—as good as she can be.
