    |
|
What's
It All About, Jude? by Marianna Martin
Alfie
Dir. Charles Shyer, U.S., Paramount
It's rapidly becoming almost trite
to declare 2004 the year of Jude Law, but I'll go ahead
and state the obvious nonetheless. The question is,
now what? So far this year, he's starred in I Heart
Huckabees, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow,
Alfie, Closer, as the Narrator in Lemony
Snicket, and has been named People's “Sexiest
Man Alive.” Disturbingly, I'm sure that I'm forgetting
a few more 2004 credits in there.
Alfie seems as good a place as any to approach
the sudden omnipresence of Law, especially considering
that this remake of the Michael Caine classic is redolent
with the odor of a PR release: it's less an Alfie
for the 21-st Century than a two-hour progress report
on Law's career to date and where he would like to see
it go. It's an occasionally stylish infomercial, but
it's still disconcerting to see one on the big screen.
Law has been a bit of an oddity over the years, as male
stars go, never easily categorized as leading man, character
actor, British artist, or box-office sex bomb. He's
done a little of each, but never lingered long enough
in any to be easily labeled. These modes make him perfect
for an Alfie remake, in a year with which he
seems to be trying to flood the Oscar categories and
finally snatch a win. Law has reportedly turned down
a few offers to remake Alfie before finally accepting
this one, and it seems the timing is ripe for him to
establish a solidified image and perhaps start erasing
past aspects that might impede a smooth climb.
In its cheekiness and tone, the 1966 Alfie was inextricable
from Swinging Mod London, and from the title character's
East London home and haunts. Alfie might be very much
the ladies' man, but he's not leaving his geographical
or social sphere to make his conquests. Changing
the geography is the first of many departures that the
remake takes from the original, and fidgety though it
may seem to extensively map the divergences-of course
a remake won't normally be identical to the original-it's
exactly their pattern that reveals what's going on in
the new version. Caine's Alfie drives a taxi in East
London and uses and abuses working-class girls; Law's
Alfie drives a limo in New York City and seduces stylish
and well-off women with his debonair British charm and
designer wardrobe. Caine's Alfie seems to be suppressing
a painful longing for time with his biological son because
he can't stop to think that long or everything in his
world will crumble; Law's Alfie is vaguely attached
to the son of a girlfriend but never in any consistent
fashion, and though he addresses the viewer about it
many times, it seems that it's just something to pass
the time. Caine's Alfie seduces a friend's wife, knocks
her up, and in one of the most uncomfortable sequences
I can recall, dispassionately arranges her appointment
with a stunningly creepy illegal abortionist but then
breaks down briefly when he discovers the emotional
pain of the decision and the physicality of the aborted
life.
It gets tedious to go on like this. But these instances
might be sufficient to reflect upon the contrasts at
work here. The Caine Alfie is about a man rooted
in his class and social setting (as the image of the
actor himself was in this era), who deliberately leads
a shallow life that glosses over a deeper current of
fears and events out of his control. Caine's Alfie
skips along the surface of his pond like a stone, but
he does his share of sinking to the bottom-only to struggle
back up to the surface as fast as he can, gasping. He
doesn't want to be in touch with himself, he doesn't
really want to be in touch with anything, just keep
moving forward-new birds, new fun, always on the move.
His cancer scare causes him a moment of panic and physical
collapse when he's forced to confront his actual mortality.
It's a palpable relief for him, more than that the diagnosis
isn't so dire, it also means he doesn't have to take
on the painful burden of thinking about anything.
Law's Alfie, on the other hand, has apparently figured
out how to mimic thinking about everything all the time
without really caring about any of it. His Alfie is
adrift, an “Englishman in New York,” (unlike Sting,
he's eager to assimilate), and his desired movement
is not so much forward but up. Better girls, better
clothes, better pad, etc. He doesn't move from bird
to bird out of boredom so much as he is perpetually
seeking something better, and it seems the sole
motivation of his leap to Susan Sarandon's character
as companion. She lives in a palatial flat and leads
a decadent, careless lifestyle he envies. Surely there
is a sexual seduction as well, but despite how excellent
Sarandon looks in this film, it's the material seduction
for Law's Alfie that comes across far stronger.
The 2004 Alfie (both character and film) seems
desperate to please the viewer: while it retains the
confessional style of the original, it does so with
a modern, inane, self-help twist. The old Alfie is trying
to tell you how good he has it, and rushes past the
unpleasant bits that make him hesitate, and the new
is splaying his perceived woes before the viewer in
a constant whine of self-justification, wheedling charm
(though the film is too manufactured to retain a systemic
charm, it proves impossible to kill Law charisma with
all the close-ups lingering on his radiant smile), and
desperate need for acceptance. It comes off in a schizoid
split between the actor Law addressing you directly
(“Please, I'm having a bit of a midlife crisis, just
had an ugly divorce, but I'm still very pretty and charming
and I'd like to be a star, if we could arrange that?”)
and the character simply leaving the impression that
perhaps what was once called poor or inconsistent characterization
might be eligible for the new Prozac name of narcissistic
ADD.
This is not a polemic against Law. It is however, rare,
to see such a nakedly exposed moment in an actor's oeuvre.
Law's career has not been headlining until now, but
it has been extensive and unusual, and he has a lot
of image baggage to either sharpen or discard at this
point. He's already a cult favorite for his looks and
often nuanced performances, and it doesn't seem unlikely
that he could become a big star, but he hasn't made
a concerted lunge at it until now, and his attempt at
the transition demands attention, from those interested
in the history of stars in cinema, towards what constitute
the barriers between the two career types (cult and
mainstream), and how they are to be successfully transcended.
And so it's worth looking closely at what Law and his
handlers seem to think those boundaries are too.
Bizarrely, despite the many incurable messes the film
creates for itself - slavishly copying visual elements
and exact shots from the original; the overall editing
that makes a good argument against buying too many Final
Cut plug-ins (must every transition be a fade/wipe
combo?); the mawkish dialogue paraphrased (and overcooked
to mushiness) from the older film; and the eagerness
with which the script jumps upon any opportunity for
cliché without ever committing to resolution - Law emerges
as…quite likable, at least long enough to get you to
listen to his pitch. His face is beautiful, his accent
seductive, and his close-up incomparable. He knows he's
been associated with some gender-bending or ambiguity
in the past (Wilde, Midnight in the Garden
of Good and Evil, Gattaca, et. al) but really,
he isn't gay, he's just British, and he can handle a
pool cue like an American alpha-actor. His press constantly
comments on how much he likes children, and how much
it pains him to be away from his own, therefore he can
grow wistful about inadequate time with kids in movies
too, to drive the point home. Every thing we're supposed
to learn about Alfie seems to be concurrently selling
Jude Law. He's a single Brit in the City, he can get
gorgeous young girls, likes kids, not gay, and you have
to like him too because of that smile. Just look closer
in the eyes. Please? And if you didn't like this, but
you like Julia Roberts, or Natalie Portman, we can try
again next month. Because Jude Law is built for the
close-up, and he may have a long run ahead with it,
and even if we can say no to Alfie, the camera can't. |