Changeling: The Film That Wouldn't End
I think it relevant to point out that I am not one who abhors the work of Mr. Clint Eastwood. In fact, I have the utmost admiration for the man. His films are generally interesting character studies that are well paced, neatly told, and, more often than not, contain the defining performance of many an actors' respective career. This however, is not the case with his new film Changeling.
Changeling is epic in scope, a surprising choice considering at its core, there is a much more intimate story that is trying to be told. The film follows the "based on a true" narrative of a Los Angeles woman, Christine Collins-- played by the sometimes brilliant Angelina Jolie-- whose young son goes missing from her home in 1928. Her story becomes local news and it attracts the attention of a muckraking preacher by the name of Reverend Briegleb (a well cast John Malkovich). Briegleb is quickly painted as a man on a mission, which he has decided to be the exposing of corruption in the Los Angeles Police Department, who he blames for the lack of progress in the case of the missing Collins boy. Soon after, the LAPD delivers Christine's son back to her arms, though to her surprise (and weak protest)-- the boy is not hers. What ensues is nothing short of tragic--Christine fights, cries, struggles, cries some more, and is persistently shut out from the truth by the LAPD as they try and uphold their flailing image and cover up the lie that has been constructed to bring a positive end to the Collins case. The film takes its needed twists and turns, then right when you think we are going to come to a mature unresolved ending, the film starts taking more twists and turns. And right then, when you think we will now come to a mature, but this time resolved ending, the film decides, again, to take more twists and turns. The dramatic ebb and flow becomes excruciating; as the film continues into its second hour, one can't help but hope that some mechanical god of yore would appear on screen, wiping the whole mess of characters out and thereby ending the movie at that exact moment...but it never does.
To be fair, this is be no means a bad movie, in fact, it is probably better than 90% of the films released by the studios this year. That said, and I know I will catch flack for being unable to separate the film from the filmmaker, but this is a Clint Eastwood Picture--I expect more. I expect those aforementioned gleaming performances, I expect classic storytelling at its best, I expect craftsmanship and maturity. Instead what I found in CHANGELING were over-performed roles that were under-written. Scribe J. Michael Stracynski, a talented veteran, finds himself somewhat lost in the vast landscape that is attempted here while he constructs scenes and sequences that could be quite powerful if given the time to breath, but are not. Instead they play like shallow abbreviations of the greatness that they could have been. I genuinely feel that if he had been given or taken the narrative space this film required, the screenplay could have been world's better, and moreover, the film.
The performances, as mentioned, are sub par, surprisingly. When I get the chance to see Ms. Jolie spin a dramatic role, I generally jump at the chance-- here she seemed to have only been given two notes to play and I'm disappointed because she plays them well, I just wish the depth and complexity that she is so capable of could have been on display. In general, the acting is as previously stated, over the top--characters are nothing more than caricatures delivering mostly hokey dialogue in a way that is more consistent with a 1940's comic book than anything else. I do think it is of interest to note that Mr. Stracynski has found much work in more sci-fi and comic fare--the residue on this film is apparent and I feel that it does not work well with the approach to filmmaking that Mr. Eastwood generally employs. The plasticity extends to the picture's design, which feels rather sterile and generally unauthentic. I wonder if our director was hoping to put on display the cinematic stylings of the era (and those that followed closely thereafter) just as Scorsese had done with The Aviator; another film made by a landmark director whose over-reaching cost him what could have been an otherwise great film. On a more positive note, I do think it is worth mentioning cinematographer Tom Stern's excellent work. His expressive use of a light and shadow is dynamic and interesting. He creates emotional depth with the frame, at times giving what is happening on screen more legitimacy than it at times should have.
CHANGELING is a good film that is trying to be a great film--therein is its failure, because in the end, it can only be paraded as a mediocre one. Should you ignore this picture? Definitely not, it is perfect fodder if you want to get through a film that is more than passable--one to enjoy with an accepted sense of fleeting; in other words, don't go in with the expectations that you are to see a trophy winner, you most certainly are not.
CHANGELING opens nationwide October 31st.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
this is the only review i've read of the changeling, so it surprises me that the film is so long and so plodding with too many twists and turns. stracynski did some terrific writing and the story arch for "babylon five" was rather outstanding. however, perhaps he is still writing "serials" when he ought to be editing himself down to movie length. then again, a man like eastwood has ultimate control of his films - he could have authorized rewrites, edited the film for time and consistency, and pulled more authentic performances out of his actors. at least that is the gist of what he didn't do with the changeling. too bad. i'll wait for DVD.
I just go to moviespoiler.com and get the gist of the movies I'm remotely interested in seeing. If it sounds good, I'll go. If not, I just saved $10.
It's funny, Mr. and Mrs. Smith has been the only other Jolie movie I've seen in the theater (along with this one) too. I was not impressed with this performance, the majority of her screen time were shots of her watery eyes (reminding me of silly Demi Moore in Ghost). Add that to the monotone delivery of her lines made her presence very underwhelming. Malkovich and Donovan were wonderful, as was the not mentioned often enough Amy Ryan (though her role reminded me of too many psyche ward/prison characters straight from Lifetime).
I agree with this blog, the film, overall, was very mediocre and disappointing, especially given the rich yet tragic true story it's based on, and I am a huge fan of Clint Eastwoods films. I thought Letters from Iwo Jima was brilliant, as was Million Dollar Baby, Unforgiven and more. Also not sure why this 2 1/2 hour movie had so many endings.
Jolie was actually very very good, she makes you forget she is angelina jolie, which is hard to do when your the most famous person in the world. Im not even a big fan of eastwoods but I actually liked the film, and John Malkovich was amazing, he deserves a supporting actor oscar.
i agree. while there are grains of truth to the goldstein criticism, especially the issue of endings, this movie outshines almost everything else this year and serves as damn good piece of filmmaking. as to the issue of how much crying on screen is too much crying, i don't know, but i've never lost a son either. i do have two sons, however, and i can't imagine how i'd spend one remaining day without shedding tears.
I won't see this movie, but I am curious about the true part of the story. Guess some research is in order.
Eastwood has ground out some bombs over the years, but I think he saw Jolie as akin to his heroine in "Million Dollar Baby." Better luck next time.
This appears to be the only page where the Changeling ad isn't displayed.
Forget the movie - I thought the writer over-wrote his critique. "He creates emotional depth with the frame, at times giving what is happening on screen more legitimacy than it at times should have."
WTF is that supposed to mean? The cinematographer made the film look good and it didn't deserve to? I think I know whose blogs to avoid from now on.
He said what you said, but with greater nuance and complexity. He communicated more information that you communicated. Which to me, makes him the winner.
Now I know why we got buried in Jolie/Pitt stories before the Changeling release - - the movie bought up a ton of advertising space on this site.
Laura Linney should have been given Jolie's role. She is a better actress and would have been more believable in this role.
Every single time I go to Huffpost, I have to close the ad for Changeling. It is irritating.
My pop-up blocker must be working wonderfully; I do not know what you're referring to.
" I think it relevant to point out that I am not one who abhors the work of Mr. Clint Eastwood."
That first sentence alone, you clearly let on your conclusions. Just to be fair, I read it through. I came to the conclusion that you dislike Eastwood, and don't care for Jolie, and regardless on how you worded them, it's obvious nothing they will do will satisfy. But that's not the real problem with your piece.
The story in itself had complex underlying political and social issues, the kidnapping alone had many twist and turn. It's not a television series like Profiler or CSI with their predictable ending. An epid drama about Los Angeles 1928, the police power and corruption, etc etc. In short, Chageling is an epic drama - EPIC is the word. People with ADD may not be able to follow them.
Chageling then is not for you.
Why Would I listen to this guy- I skipped his piece (didn't read other than his headline) and refuse to go see a director and actress whom I think are stellar???? those who do ---do and those who can't ....try to sell the public that they know more than the rest of us...no thanks I prefer my own opinion.
Yeah, but his opinion does not stand alone. Many critics were surprised that Eastwood's deft handiwork was not evident in this movie. Jolie's character was felt to lack dimension in many reviews. Response has been mixed, not glowing.
For me? The subject matter is way too depressing. The only Angelina Jolie movie that I've seen was Mr. and Mrs. Smith, and even though it was extremely entertaining, it was too violent.
Rent "Original Sin". Worth it for the bedroom scenes of her and Banderas alone...
To much emoting from Jolie, at least according to the trailers I have seen. The movie doesn't interest me. I do like Clint Eastwood's movies though most of the time.
I'll probably give it a chance even though Eastwood supports McCain.
I am a fan of Jeffrey Donovan so I was happy to see that he is appearing in a high profile movie. I just love him on Burn Notice.
Finally .... someone mentioed Jeffrey Donovan. Very good actor indeed. I hope he gets notice here. Thanks.
He is a very good actor as is John Malkovich. The movie as a whole does not interest me at all though.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
