If you've ever needed proof that humor has the ability to temper unsavory attributes, attitudes and behavior, you need only compare the popular TV sitcom, "Seinfeld" to director Mike Nichols' latest film, "Closer." Both feature self-centered people who are only looking out for themselves, are desirous of satiating their needs (whatever they may be) and end up sabotaging their relationships with others due to such behavior.
Yet, where Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer were lovable due to their actions and the results thereof being funny, Alice, Dan, Anna and Larry come off as mean and nasty people. As a result, while you may have enjoyed year after year with the "Seinfeld" gang, the 100-some minutes with the lying, cheating and self-serving "Closer" characters feels like one-hundred too many.
Perhaps that's one of the potential interpretations of the title in that we're getting too close to these unsavory types. Of course, it could have any number of other meanings for the featured quartet. Another guess would be that it pertains to getting closer to knowing people within relationships but never really getting there all of the way. Different viewers will likely have different interpretations.
None of the above complaints, however, are an affront to the work in front of and behind the camera, most of which is top-notch. Adapting his popular London stage play, screenwriter Patrick Marber (making his feature debut) and Nichols ("Working Girl," "The Graduate") have fashioned an intriguing and complex work about the varying degrees of deception and manipulation that permeate all levels of most all relationships.
The dialogue is crisp and sometimes profound, and while it isn't always razor-sharp or memorable, at least it avoids the awkward timing and rhythm found in some of playwright/filmmaker David Mamet's "stagy" type works.
Effortlessly moving through time and briefly jumping around through it, Nichols explores various relation-based themes. The unexpected jumps forward in time -- where we suddenly realize some significant chunks of connective periods have been omitted -- do keep things from being too staid. They also allow for various developments within the various relationships to be accepted as having occurred without actually having to go through the motions and thus eat up valuable screen time showing what's to be implied and then accepted.
Since the filmmakers have gone that extra step in getting a bit "fancy" by moving back and forth, however, I wish they had gone the extra step and made the overall effort a twisted and knotted story. Just as the backwards moving plot of "Memento" revealed more about the story and characters as it neared the beginning/end, the same could have occurred here, resulting in a more multi-layered, complex and possibly even surprising experience.
Despite the overall unsavoriness that oozes from their characters' pores like a bad stink, the performances from the four leads are terrific. No longer a "pretty woman" (although she's still gorgeous from the outside despite her character's inner ugliness), Julia Roberts ("Mona Lisa Smile," "Erin Brockovich") is the most famous of the vehicle's stars. While she makes her character's bitterness utterly believable, Roberts inhabits one of the weaker/less developed of the characters.
Jude Law (who's appeared in about every film in 4th quarter 2004 - okay, just six, but who's counting) is more complex and plays a less charming version of what he created in "Alfie." Clive Owen ("King Arthur," "Beyond Borders") is good as the dermatologist who falls for Roberts, but he's likewise cheated a bit when it comes to depth or development.
The remaining lead is played by Natalie Portman ("Garden State," the latter series of "Star Wars" films). A self-described waif, she's the most nebulous yet complex of the characters and the young actress is terrific in the part that reminded me quite a bit of someone who would appear in a David Lynch film.
I just wish that they and the film didn't leave such a bad taste in your mouth and/or lead to the urge to shower after watching them. With only a tiny bit of comic relief -- during an online instant message sex chat between Law's and Owens' characters where the latter thinks the former is a promiscuous lady -- the film is simply too ugly to enjoy.
Some may like it for that very reason, and while it's easy to admire from a technical, performance and overall artistic standpoint, the unsavory elements will likely only appeal to those who already behave that way, such as Jerry and the rest of his gang. Unfortunately, they and their comedy-based charm are sorely missed in "Closer." The film rates as a 6 out of 10.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
