I saw the film at the NY Film Festival (with the actors in attendance), and I have to say that I loved it. In the film, Patrick "Kitten" Braden is an Irish baby who was abandoned by his mother on the doorstep of an uncaring stepmother. From the time he is a child, Kitten's cross dressing tendencies and his outspoken nature cause people to reject him (remember, this is Catholic Ireland in the 70s). Kitten grows up among the unrest of the IRA, but he is determined to be happy, and in order to be happy, he has to be himself (or herself). He goes to London, where he encounters all sorts of problems (they don't like the fact that he's Irish or a transvestite), but he keeps his optimistic nature despite all the hardship. The film is not about a person discovering himself (as so many coming-of-age movies are); it is about a Kitten knowing who she is and not changing her ways to please the world at large.
The direction and cinematography are amazing, but then this is Neil Jordan. Whatever problems you might have had with Interview With a Vampire, you can't deny that the movie was beautiful to look at. The same is true of all Jordan's films. He starts this film with a bird's eye view, and has many beautiful touches throughout. The chapter titles are hilarious. In particular, look out for the beautiful shot composition and direction of the scene between Kitten and her father in the peeping club. It's absolutely beautiful and well shot. Though he strays from the book (a lot), I believe the movie remains true to the character of Patrick, a charming, sometimes self-involved person who stubbornly makes his way through life. It must have been difficult to bring Kitten's active fantasy life to the screen, but Jordan helps us navigate between her fantasies and her reality with great skill.
The performances are the best thing about the film. Liam Neeson is always great, and this is no exception. Same goes for Stephen Rea. The actress who plays Charlie is someone to watch out for; she's great. The guy who plays Irwin did not impress me, but he wasn't bad. The movie, however, belongs to Cillian. Physically, he is suited for the role because he's so small, but it isn't just his appearance that helps. I've been watching Murphy's career since 28 Days Later, and I love his ability to switch between being really intimidating (Red Eye) or really vulnerable (How Harry Became a Tree); sometimes he's both in the same movie (28 Days Later). The man knows how to use his body to convey strength, or the lack thereof. Here, he is absolutely convincing as the witty Kitten, who desperately wants to be loved, but won't compromise her personality. You can see the hurt in his eyes when he is mistreated, but also the strength of his mind when he is determined to do something (witness the gun disposal scene and the police interrogation scene). Just because Kitten looks weak doesn't mean he is weak. When you least expect it, he summons a great amount of strength to pull through difficult situations.
I highly recommend the movie to anyone who has a chance to see it. It is hilarious, yet heartbreaking. The events related by Kitten are sad and terrible, but Kitten's sense of humor always shines through. The audience was in stitches the whole time. Was the movie perfect? No. Is it incredibly good, even great? Definitely.
The direction and cinematography are amazing, but then this is Neil Jordan. Whatever problems you might have had with Interview With a Vampire, you can't deny that the movie was beautiful to look at. The same is true of all Jordan's films. He starts this film with a bird's eye view, and has many beautiful touches throughout. The chapter titles are hilarious. In particular, look out for the beautiful shot composition and direction of the scene between Kitten and her father in the peeping club. It's absolutely beautiful and well shot. Though he strays from the book (a lot), I believe the movie remains true to the character of Patrick, a charming, sometimes self-involved person who stubbornly makes his way through life. It must have been difficult to bring Kitten's active fantasy life to the screen, but Jordan helps us navigate between her fantasies and her reality with great skill.
The performances are the best thing about the film. Liam Neeson is always great, and this is no exception. Same goes for Stephen Rea. The actress who plays Charlie is someone to watch out for; she's great. The guy who plays Irwin did not impress me, but he wasn't bad. The movie, however, belongs to Cillian. Physically, he is suited for the role because he's so small, but it isn't just his appearance that helps. I've been watching Murphy's career since 28 Days Later, and I love his ability to switch between being really intimidating (Red Eye) or really vulnerable (How Harry Became a Tree); sometimes he's both in the same movie (28 Days Later). The man knows how to use his body to convey strength, or the lack thereof. Here, he is absolutely convincing as the witty Kitten, who desperately wants to be loved, but won't compromise her personality. You can see the hurt in his eyes when he is mistreated, but also the strength of his mind when he is determined to do something (witness the gun disposal scene and the police interrogation scene). Just because Kitten looks weak doesn't mean he is weak. When you least expect it, he summons a great amount of strength to pull through difficult situations.
I highly recommend the movie to anyone who has a chance to see it. It is hilarious, yet heartbreaking. The events related by Kitten are sad and terrible, but Kitten's sense of humor always shines through. The audience was in stitches the whole time. Was the movie perfect? No. Is it incredibly good, even great? Definitely.