Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Director: Tim Burton
Starring: Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Timothy Spall, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jamie Campbell Bower, Laura Michelle Kelly, Jayne Wisener
Running Time: 116 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

Tim Burton is a one of a kind filmmaker that’s for sure. In fact, he’s such a one of a kind filmmaker that I’m starting to worry if he’s only capable of making one kind of film. And with his adaptation of the Stephen Sondheim musical Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street he’s given the last thing he ever needed: An excuse to completely overindulge his dark, Gothic sensibilities as a director. There will be those who absolutely love this film. For fans of Burton’s notoriously macabre work or even movie musicals in general this is a dream (or rather nightmare) come true. Even though I don’t fit into either category I’m still recommending it, but not without some reservations.

Anyone who claims Sweeney Todd is a giant leap forward for Burton or some kind of huge departure because it’s a musical is completely off their rocker. This is totally in his comfort zone and other than the fact that it has music in it it’s still very much vintage Burton. It’s also his darkest, most depressing effort since Batman Returns and could make No Country For Old Men look like the feel-good date movie of the year. But there’s no denying that it’s very well done for what it is.

The performances are great, it mostly succeeds as a musical, and as a tragedy it’s also effective. However, if you’re looking for a rollicking good time, go someplace else. I’d tell you you’ll feel like slashing your wrists when it’s over but by then you’ll probably be so sick of the sight of blood that you’ll lose interest. What the movie proves, for better or worse, is that no one makes a Tim Burton movie like Tim Burton and because he’s so great at it he gets a pass. I’m just not sure how much longer I can put up with it though. It would be nice to see him try something completely different for a change.

15 years ago Barber Benjamin Barker (Oscar nominated Johnny Depp) was falsely sentenced for a crime he didn’t commit and exiled to Australia by the evil Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman), who lusted after his beautiful wife Lucy (Laura Michelle Kelly). Now, going under the alias of "Sweeney Todd," he returns home to London only to discover that Lucy had taken her own life and his now teenage daughter Johanna (Jayne Wisener) is in the custody of Turpin. He enlists the help of quirky pie maker Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) as he re-opens his barbershop, cutting hair and slashing throats until he finally has a chance to get his hands on Turpin and his troll-like associate Beadly Banford (a delightfully creepy Timothy Spall). Complicating things further is a developing feud with him and another local barber Pirelli (Sacha Baron Cohen), which results in one of the more entertaining musical numbers in the film.

Sweeny Todd is not the kind of movie musical where you should expect show-stopping tunes you’ll be humming weeks after you see it. Actually, a few of them are pretty dull and drawn out. Across The Universe this isn’t, but it does have some big moments like the fantastic duet "Pretty Women," with Depp and Rickman, who work really well together. What the music does do very effectively is convey an interesting story that’s well acted by the entire cast. The singing is okay, but not great. Simon Cowell would probably have a field day ripping the thin vocal performances apart, but the bottom line is they’re as good as they need to be given the material and considering these are actors not singers. Supposedly Depp has never really sung before so taking that into account he actually did a fine job. Despite being a little young for the role he remains the perfect choice to play a weird outcast with internal rage. He’s always had that territory well covered and he’s brilliant again here.

Unknown co-stars Jayne Wisener (who looks exactly like a young Kirsten Dunst) and Jamie Campbell Bower (who plays Sweeney’s right-hand man) fare even better with the singing and their forbidden romance storyline interested me more at times than Sweeney’s revenge. These two have hardly acted in anything of note before, but you’d never know it. They’re just about the only characters you don’t have to feel guilty about rooting for in the film. Helena Bonham Carter once again transcends her natural quirkiness to add some much needed warmth to Mrs. Lovett, while Rickman really chews into the scenery as Turpin. The entire third act of the picture is basically a total blood bath and the ending, while completely appropriate, will probably leave some viewers feeling deflated.

Is it fair to judge a film in the context of a director’s previous work? Probably not, but it’s unavoidable when you’re talking about someone with a vision as unique and original as Burton’s. He’s an artist more than a filmmaker, which sometimes causes our emotional connection to the material to be severed. The main problem with the film, as with a lot of Burton’s previous efforts, is his characters tend to be so weird, troubled and dark that it’s hard to become really involved with any of them and the film suffers a little as a result. While it’s common for directors revisit certain themes in many of their films, Burton seems to be the only one who has essentially made the same movie over and over again for the past decade or more. They always focus on a weird, troubled outcast. They’re shot the same. They appear to have the same production and costume design. He even uses many of the same actors, regardless of whether or not they’re right for the roles. As usual, his work is a marvel to look and has a distinct feel but I couldn’t help but think his act is starting to get a little tired as I watched this.

Even his best films, like Batman and Big Fish, which deviated ever so slightly from the Burton template, didn’t reach the masterpiece level they could have because of his weirdness fetish. I’m not saying he should go off and make a fun, Disney kids film or anything, but something at least somewhat different would be a nice change of pace. Depp has fallen into a similar trap as well, as just once I’d like to see him attempt to play a character that isn’t some kind of disenfranchised freak.

He’s widely regarded as one of our best actors, but for me he’s yet to take on the variety of roles necessary to prove all his supporters true. Having said that, no one could have played THIS ROLE better than he does, which is why I’m so curious to see what would happen if he actually attempted to portray a normal human being in a straightforward serious drama. I’m all for actors taking risks but Depp just might be the only one who’s taken one too many and has gone so far in covering up his teen idol beginnings that he’s now in danger of covering up his talent as well.

It’s no secret that I’m not a huge fan of musicals and usually stay way from them so that this year featured two I did enjoy represents a big step forward, even if I respected this more than I necessarily enjoyed it. But it does have that twisted brilliance and dark sense of humor that only the team of Burton and Depp can provide and a fascinating story to match. Fans of those two know what they’re getting into here and won’t be disappointed at all. It’s as good an adaptation of Sondheim’s musical as was possible and this was the right direction to take in bringing it to the screen. But anyone else searching for a mainstream crowd pleaser should look elsewhere. Sweeney Todd is Tim Burton’s Gothic nightmare set to music and as that it’s successful.

Across The Universe

Director: Julie Taymor
Starring: Evan Rachel Wood, Jim Sturgess, Joe Anderson, T.V. Carpio, Dana Fuchs, Martin Luther McCoy, Bono, Eddie Izzard
Running Time: 133 min.
Rating: PG-13

***1/2 (out of ****)

You know a movie's trailer is great when you get chills watching it. That was the case many months ago with Across The Universe and since then I've asked myself how it could be possible for the film to live up to those two minutes. With great trepidation I eagerly awaited the film's DVD release and even gave the film's soundtrack a listen thinking it might be interesting hearing actors butcher the most famous songs in The Beatles' catalog. But much to my shock, they didn't at all.

Across The Universe soon became one of the films in 2007 I was most curious to check out. Not necessarily because I thought I would like it, but because I knew that a project with enough guts to center a musical around the work of arguably the greatest band in modern history would either turn out to be a masterpiece or a cinematic crash and burn the likes of which we've never experienced before. I've made it no secret that I don't care for musicals or films dealing with war. I do like The Beatles, but wouldn't be incredibly offended or take it personally if their music were given a shoddy presentation in feature film form. I mean we did already suffer through the film adaptation of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band so what could be worse than that?

Even when I mildly enjoy a movie musical, accompanying it is often a feeling of regret and embarrassment. I'm always asked what it would take for me to REALLY LIKE one. My answer is usually, "I don't know, but I'll know it when I see it." It looks like that day has come and while Across The Universe falls considerably short of being any kind of masterpiece it is a staggering visual achievement that offers up one of the best possible examples of film as literally the art of the moving image.

Many scenes are so visually eye-catching it's as if your wildest dreams have sprung to life onscreen and the director Julie Taymor's approach is so daring that the screenplay can't possibly keep up with it. It's an overindulgent, and at times maddeningly frustrating film that doesn't offer an easy method of entry for anyone watching. Better than ever before it illustrates the theory that it's always more interesting when a filmmaker shoots for the stars and just misses than when they make a perfect film playing it safe. Nothing about this movie is safe, or forgettable.

It's the 1960's and America is deep in the throes the Vietnam War with teenager Lucy (Evan Rachel Wood) grieving the death of her enlisted boyfriend while her brother Max (Joe Anderson) is busy goofing off with his friends at Princeton. Their lives are about to change with the arrival of Liverpool dockworker Jude (Jim Sturgess), who comes to America in search of his birth father and ends up joining the two in their trek to New York City. It's there where the three share an apartment with an aspiring Janis Joplin-like singer (Dana Fuchs), a Jimi Hendrix knock-off from Detroit (Martin Luther McCoy) and an abused lesbian runaway (T.V. Carpio).

Lucy and Jude fall in love and not unlike Forrest Gump, the screenplay throws them into nearly every tumultuous event of the decade as Max is drafted into Vietnam, Lucy is knee-deep in anti-war protests and they go on a psychedelic acid trip courtesy of the bizarre Dr. Robert (Bono, who resembles Robin Williams channeling Ken Kesey). We even get a cameo from Joe Cocker as three different characters and even though he isn't supposed to be playing himself he almost does a better Joe Cocker than John Belushi. And all of this is set to the music of The Beatles with more song than dialogue during the course of the film's running time.

Everyone breaking out into Beatles songs should seem forced or out of place, and at certain points it does, but mostly it doesn't. The songs really do advance the story. Actually, they are the story and having raw, untrained voices help lend a sense of realism to the many over-the-top events in the film. Far from The Beatles' most famous songs being butchered, they're actually given a fresh take and in many instances the actors actually bring something different out of the song we didn't notice was there. This is especially true of T.V. Carpio's take on "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" early in the film.

For the first time when a musical ended and I had the songs stuck in my head it wasn't necessarily a bad thing. The sequences are bursting with frenetic energy and at times are so visually breathtaking that it hurts to watch and you'll need to come up for air. The most memorable of which is set to "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" and features Max's recruitment into Vietnam by an Uncle Sam poster come to life and a horrifying brigade of square jawed officers. Another sequence with Jude realizing his feelings for Lucy in a bowling alley while singing "I've Just Seen a Face" matches it in emotional power, but at the other end of the spectrum. And there's a hallucinatory and visually dazzling excursion with Mr. Kite (Eddie Izzard) that I'm guessing would probably be better appreciated under the influence of a controlled substance. There are times where I thought Taymor overindulged and went too far as I found myself asking whether it's really necessary to show American soldiers in their underwear carrying The Statue of Liberty through the jungles of Vietnam. But when dealing with material like this I'd much rather have a director fall on the side of going too far.

All of these scenes are powerful and often emotionally moving, but strangely the story as a whole doesn't quite reach that same level and that's because the screenplay can't help but seem kind of cliché ridden. While that may seem like a huge insult it isn't exactly since musicals play by a different set of rules and by nature are built almost entirely on clichés. And when we're dealing with the sixties that opens up a can of worms in terms of what can be thrown in the script. The draft. Anti-war protests. Forbidden love. Race riots. The emerging rock scene. Counter-culture. The generation gap. You could go on forever. They even find a way to squeeze homosexuality in there. It gets a pass though because musicals are supposed to paint with broad strokes and although many of these issues seem cliché now they weren't back then and The Beatles' music did reflect what was going on at the time with not much more subtleness than this film, so it fits. You get the impression that if the "Fab Four" saw the film they'd probably love it (supposedly Paul McCartney viewed it and did). The movie is sincere, wearing its heart on its sleeve while lacking the inherent silliness that has sunk so many movie musicals in recent years. There's no winking at the camera or anything to joke about here, which is a nice change for a genre that on film could really never be taken seriously at all.

A big fuss has been made about how timely this film is and how it can be viewed as being reflective of what's happening in our country at the moment. While I definitely appreciate the fact that this could make the story resonate more with some, for me it hurts the film a little…at least right now. I've just been so sick of hearing about politics everywhere I turn that I've been completely burned out with it. The last thing I wanted to see was a movie that addresses it, but that's more a reflection on me than the picture. What does reflect on the film though is that at times it seems to be preaching from the pulpit with its anti-war message. Perhaps when some time has past and I go back to the film again it's possible that aspect won't hit as much of a sour note, but I just don't like it when films start proselytizing about politics regardless of whether it's reflective of the mindset in that time period.

There is a feeling that Taymor is trying to jam as many Beatles songs and accompanying supporting plotlines into this as she can which causes the movie to zig zag a little as it heads to the emotional finale, which I think is why the final number doesn't register quite as deep as it could have. The battles Taymor had with the studio over final cut are infamous by now but this version is apparently hers, making me wonder if maybe the studio could have had a point that it needed a little trimming. It's also impossible to care about the three lesser supporting characters as much as Jude, Lucy and Max, which seems to have been an inevitable problem since the screenplay doesn't flesh them out as well. At times the lesser threesome seems to be there just to satisfy the Beatles musical quota, touch on social issues and share space in the apartment like tenants from a sixties version of Rent.

Taymor did make the right call in casting lesser-known names in the roles as Jim Sturgess and Joe Anderson are not only great singers, but even better actors. Sturgess is especially impressive, showing real leading man range in a supremely difficult part. While Evan Rachel Wood has always done strong work in everything she's been in from Thirteen to Down In The Valley, she's been an actress that's difficult to get a handle on in terms of what she's really capable of. There's consistently been a quietness and naturalness to her that's made her captivating, but for some reason has kept her just out of reach for moviegoers. That "one big role" was always missing. Until now. This is the most exposed she's ever been and whatever gap may have existed between her and the audience has now permanently closed. This is a big showcase for her talents.

There's a scene late in the film where Lucy tells Jude that she'd jump in front of a tank to end the war and bring her brother home. Watching the special features on the DVD you'll have no doubt Julie Taymor wouldn't have hesitated to do the same to make sure her vision was carried out exactly how she imagined. Seeing her in action you could understand why the possibility of the studio robbing her of final cut would be devastating and impossible for her to deal with. In all the DVD behind the scenes special features I've seen in recent years I can't remember seeing a director this enthusiastic, interesting, or dedicated. I could tell you that none of it is reflected in the final product but I'd be lying. This isn't just merely a director, but an artist using the film as her canvas.

Taymor started her directing career on broadway with The Lion King before helming feature films like her bizarre but visually arresting adaptation of Titus with Anthony Hopkins and the Oscar nominated Frida, starring Salma Hayek (who cameos here). Across The Universe is not the film that will win her a directing Academy Award but one is coming to her and very soon if she keeps this up. That it failed to make a dent at the box office is of no surprise. It's a given anything this risky and ambitious would polarize audiences and critics, which explains it's nearly 50% split right down the middle on the Rotten Tomatoes meter. But it has struck a very strong chord among a core group of viewers who very passionately love it. I wouldn't go that far, but I understand why.

This is a difficult film to form an opinion on immediately after watching it because it's one of those movies that require some distance and breathing room to fully comprehend what you've seen and make sense of your thoughts. It's kind of like listening to a CD for the first time that's so different and challenging you don't know what to make of it. That first listen is just a formality to say you've heard it and nothing more. Upon repeated listens everything starts to come into focus. This is one of those and when it ended I'll admit I had an itch to watch it again so that opinion would come into fuller focus.

What I am sure about is that this film has something few others possess: An uncompromising vision. It also reminded me just how boring it is when movies are completely perfect. When you're walking a tightrope like this mistakes are going to be made and flaws will be visible. It doesn't make the movie any less memorable and in cases like this it can even make it more more so. Without risk there is no reward. So in taking so many chances Across The Universe just may have captured exactly what made The Beatles' music so special to begin with.