Movie Review

The Hours

One of my biggest problems with The Hours, despite finding it a very good movie, was that it felt like a two and a half-hour film.

The movie has a load-up that is somewhat relevant in style and theme with The Quiet American, a film that I felt revealed too much in the beginning and left a scarcity of suspense toward the events to come. In The Hours, having knowing what?s happening before our eyes will eventually take place down the road takes a little bit of the guessing away or just the feeling that we?re not quite sure what?s to come. In films, I don?t usually prefer this method because it just removes a solid amount of suspense that the viewer can be engaged in much further in. The Hours isn?t a suspenseful film by any means, but revealing this component of the story still takes away some of the impact it could produce in bigger chunks when it actually falls into gear.
The film itself was not as good as I expected, but it surely is worthy of a strong recommendation. The Hours surrounds three women who are struggling with midlife crisis issues. To them, their lives may not hold much meaning and it feels like they wake up in the morning with no unique purpose or ambition. Let?s note that these women are in different time periods, as one is an author in 1923 (Virginia Wolf ? Nicole Kidman), another is a housewife in 1951 (Laura Bown ? Julianne Moore), and the other is rather unknown in occupation but lives in New York City in more recent time (Clarissa Vaughan ? Meryl Streep). In a sense, the story shares similarities with that of Adaptation where it consists of a group of people who are essentially trying to find a place in the world for their existence; somewhere to belong to; a sense of meaning.

There were spots in the film that had my full attention engrossed into what was going on, but then there were moments where I really questioned the purpose of such incidents to the point of the plot (making the movie feel longer than it was). The Hours? introduction catches the eye even if it takes away guessing toward the further ends, which is an admirable quality in my view as I always love when films grasp attention spans at the load-up. But the film to me lacked enough substance beneath the layers throughout the show to really brand it as something extraordinary or even close to one of the best pictures of the year. I understood that screenwriter David Hare was attempting to convey the sort of lost life map that these characters were trying to overcome. But as depressing as this movie can come off to some, it really felt as if Hare needed to dive even further within the material to really grab the reaction or impact I was hoping to walk out with.

In a sense, the movie wasn?t as depressing as it could?ve and should?ve been. As a whole, the production is fairly gloomy and not very friendly but really, the production design and the acting (along with the directing) were the only two elements that portrayed this theme strongly. Through these performances by Kidman, Moore, and Streep, I was convinced that these women were thoroughly investigating for their gem for existence, but within the page of the script there was a layer that was not visible. In About Schmidt, the script dealt with the issue of finding a purpose in life even when your existence might be caving in given age. But via details regarding Schmidt himself, his family, and the dialogue throughout the film, co-writer Alexander Payne had a lot to say about life and meaning and displayed these aspects terrifically in the directorial sense.

In The Hours, to me it appeared as though the actors were doing a splendid job with their roles, but the substance involved with the script itself was lacking a special significance. I understood the generality of their (characters) views, but there were certain features that never appeared visible; the real heart of their feelings or character felt hidden and untouchable, as if I was missing a page and needed a further analysis. Julianne Moore?s character is a lonely housewife who is evidently lacking a real "life" and who doesn?t seem to have any real friends outside of her husband and little boy, but still, it wasn?t profound enough.

Her life is showcased really well by director Stephen Dauldry; with the production design and Moore?s performance assisting in the process of believability (to the lonely and depressed inner side of her), but I almost sensed a lack of knowledge to where these feelings came from or what really brought on this stage of her crisis. We are given information to her current feelings, but how she got here and even the inner world of her traits is kept under slight wraps. We know she?s somewhat shy and she?s losing control, and Moore conveys this really well, but I craved more than just that in character analysis.

Nicole Kidman is probably the highlight of the show, as she seems to so easily warp into the mind of Woolf; with the rather harsh attitude and also walking on somewhat of a shaky path in terms of where her life may be heading. She nails the accent dead on and her physical nature on-screen is just about constantly commanding even when the actress doesn?t have dialogue. For me, she was the most realistic person in the story but even so, like Moore?s role, I was asking for more detail within her life. Production design and performance proved to be two big accomplishments again for her side of the story, but within the page of the script where details are key to a really special experience, her role needed a little more juice for me to invest even deeper curiosity.

Meryl Streep is in a similar part as she was in Adaptation, playing an older woman desperate to find the special urge she once held earlier on in her life to achieve something commendable in a day. The fact that the two said roles are so relevant to one another is somewhat of a hurtful element. It can be so easy to compare and contrast to see which was more effective in the writing and the directorial angle, rather than one of them being original or fresh in substance. In the end, Charlie Kaufman?s version (Adaptation) of the personality turned out to be more impacting and the directorial push by Spike Jonze added to the pull-off.

There?s a difference in layers between both films, as in Adaptation her character hides what she?s really going through whereas in Hours, the real flesh and meat of the personality is pretty viewable just through her eyes. Kaufman?s creation for me was more effective, as the point that she hides what she feels already says something about her personality or her outlook on life. In The Hours, it?s not as complicated even though there?s complication (to her) as to how to lead her life in harmony. I never found myself overly engaged into her side of the story, as it was like re-experiencing an alternate less impacting version of her life in Adaptation. Her side of the script (in Hours) is not as detailed in character analysis, as we are handed some tidbits but almost told to assume anything else.

One component to the story that really disappointed me was the lack of John C. Reilly?s character, Dan Brown. At the very beginning of the film, we are introduced to his very nice and friendly nature as the day is welcoming his birthday, and Reilly really executes this role wonderfully as the father and husband anybody would ever want. He?s the ideal picture of happiness in a family. His on-screen presence is controlling, but in a very pleasant and different fashion than the leading ladies (more toward Kidman). Reilly uses his entire physical nature to fulfill the position; as the facial expressions and tone of voice all assist in the process of believing who he really is and not just whom we?re used to seeing from previous roles.

But the disappointment factor came with the idea that his character in the story is only brief, for his short appearance in the intro and some little spots at the end are all the actor gets to share screen time. I happen to be a growing fan of John C. Reilly, as his performances in Paul Thomas Anderson?s films are really terrific. And despite that I did not appreciate Chicago very much, his singing part proved to be more of a natural ability than anyone else in the cast. From the first tidbits where Reilly is shown in The Hours, I was getting upbeat about what to expect in performance level from the actor, only to experience a bit of a letdown in terms of screen time even though I adored the time he had.

Part of the empty space for me when I was witnessing The Hours unfold was that I was having a somewhat of a difficult time really connecting to these people?s lives or their personalities. For a movie to achieve a really high rating I need to have invested a great deal of character sympathy or at least connect with those on-screen to the point where I really truly care for their actions. Ed Harris? character, Richard Brown, for example, was someone I didn?t really feel for greatly enough for what eventually rolled out.

Harris? acting was really good, like the rest of the cast, but there wasn?t anything about him within the script that dove out at me and pleaded me to like him as a friend or relative. He?s a dying friend of Clarissa?s (Streep), but the plain and simple fact that he?s dying ended up being the only real feature that met my eyes in terms of sympathy. I didn?t really know him as a person with the screen time given, as he really was just a figure in a story that was executed credibly in performance but sort of shallow in detail. It can be said that Harris really proves his talent here, as really, he?s not working with a grand amount of material but still fills the shoes.

The film that The Hours can really be compared to in one dimension is The Big Kahuna. That drama was a huge showcase of what two incredibly talented actors (Kevin Spacey and Danny DeVito) could do in performance, but the script itself carried along assets beneath the surface that really was dynamite to anyone who adores complex and challenging topics. More than anything, Hours for me was a showcase of what three great actresses can accomplish in one film but didn?t offer the extra oomph something like Big Kahuna did within the page throughout the journey. Kahuna was so good that I watched it twice in a row, which is not a common thing for me to do. The Hours is a film that I?m not even sure I?ll see again in the future.

The first time of seeing the story play out, it produces one emotion from simply learning everything as it happens while in another viewing, the reaction will very presumably not be anywhere near the same. I now know what is to come and the script did not tackle any huge, daring obstacles. But what makes The Hours so recommending to those who wish to take the trip is the acting. This is one of those films where the acting lineup is one of the top highlights to the show. And while a tougher script would?ve allowed this movie to be even greater in meaning and insight, for me you really can?t complain a whole lot when a sizeable group of talented people come together and bring to the table performance executions that you came for.

Lee's Grade: B
Ranked #14 of 143 between The Ring (#13) and The Good Girl (#15) for 2002 movies.

A	0.4%
B	30.0%
C	61.7%
D	8.0%
F	0.0%