So this is the film that transformed Charlize Theron from this:
I know, life's so unfair *insert self-pitying rant* 😦
into this:
But to distract our readers (there are 2 of them now, I believe… *smug look*) with the wonders of make-up would be downright boring. So lez (omg see what I did there? cuz she plays a lesbiany woman? lulz) get down to bizness.
Monster is a film that works primarily because of the strength of CT’s performance (since referring to Charlize Theron by her surname might be too much for our Theron to handle). Like most other indie movies, it boasts an unremarkable cinematography; the camera is mostly static, occasionally shaky and sometimes zooms a little to manipulate the viewers into some sort of sympathetic reaction. The script is straightforward and unpretentious. The production is obvs low-budget. Most characteristically, there is no distinctive artistic direction, no commendable directorial style. Everything just leads to the next scene, and there are no self-conscious attempts to uncover some hidden psychological agenda. In many cases, such indie films are easily dismissed as trite and unmemorable – often because they are not bolstered by strong lead performances – but Monster contains one of the greatest performances of the 2000s. Naturally, this is not a film that allows itself to be forgotten.
CT loses herself completely in Wuornos’ insecurities, fears and awkward tough-girl charm. Her performance is fearless, unpretentious and unsympathetic, and it is precisely because it is executed with a certain casual abandon, a certain disregard for audience reaction, that we (with grudging difficulty) see Wuornos as a victim of circumstance. I can’t comment on a flawless, faultless performance.
Christina Ricci as Wuornos’ child-like lover, Selby, is annoying and unconvincing, and the script does little to salvage this disaster. Wuornos’ real-life lover was actually named Tyria Moore; I presume the name-change was either to prevent a potential lawsuit in case of misrepresentation or to allow more room for intricate character dynamics. However, Ricci’s one-note performance as a whiny, unsympathetic little bitch exposes Selby as a superficial plot device that wails, complains, pouts and weeps loudly enough for Wuornos to do something about it, but not politely enough for us to actually give a fuck. Selby would actually make a wonderful opportunity to examine the philosophical dilemma in judging serial killers, but Patty Jenkins (the writer/director) seems more interested in making a big deal out of Selby’s lesbianism than in dissecting her inability to negotiate her feelings for Wuornos. And while Selby’s lesbianism is admittedly a good starting point for the sub-plot about Selby wanting a social life and acceptance, it has no bearing on the overall quality or complexity of the film, and comes across as a rather haphazard focal point stemming from a half-hearted attempt to prevent Monster from collapsing into a self-indulgent sympathy plea. Ironically, when Selby does achieve some kind of productive function (that is, when she is ignoring Wuornos or crying for arbitrary reasons), she just serves to heighten our sympathy for Wuornos – a woman who has little to love, who loves fiercely, and whose love has never truly been reciprocated.
Don’t get me wrong, I completely get how Jenkins wanted Selby to be the child and Wuornos the matronly serial killer girlfriend, but their relationship remains painfully unconvincing – mostly because Selby is a horribly-acted and horribly-written character. Throughout the film, Jenkins goes all out to insist that their relationship works because Selby loves Wuornos and Wuornos needs to feel loved. But Selby doesn’t really seem to love Wuornos at all. When CT breaks down into spectacular displays of emotional instability, Ricci’s Selby is distant and watchful, as though Ricci has completely eschewed all efforts to stay in character because she’d much rather marvel in silent awe at CT’s talent. When CT says that she loves Ricci, you feel her hitherto solid tough-girl sheen breaking down, and you can feel her love drowning out the scene like an uncontainable tidal wave. When Ricci replies, you don’t feel anything. It feels like something to say because the script expects her to. Additionally, the ending feels contrived and deliberately cruel, as though Jenkins is uncertain of CT’s ability to garner sympathy, so writes a scene to ascertain Wuornos’ status as victim by making Selby wordlessly attest to Wuornos’ deeds while more sentimental music plays in the background. While the script is often sensible (Jenkins smartly avoids any melodramatic lamentations by making Wuornos describe her childhood sufferings in comfortable, informal settings in an insidious build-up to the climatic first kill scene), the trial sequence is just awful.
Furthermore, I feel like a lot of things are left unexplained in the film; ironically, a lot of them would have helped paint a more sympathetic portrait of Wuornos – something that Jenkins obviously had aspired to do. After reading up on some stuff about Wuornos, it is very apparent that she wanted her lover to testify against her to protect her interests and keep her out of jail. The film almost completely disregards this fact, and makes Selby seem like a two-headed bitch/culprit. In an interview conducted days before her execution, Wuornos articulates her conviction that she was the victim of some elaborate conspiracy theory. In the closing sequence, CT’s Wuornos too demonstrates a firm awareness that Selby is in on some kind of scheme to convict her. It seems almost poetic that Wuornos, for all her instability and utter insanity, was right all along; it’s just sad that Jenkins chose to leave this stunning piece of irony out. Which brings me to my next point.
With this kind of stuff, it’s very easy to mistake brilliant acting for good filmmaking. Admittedly, I too was tempted to give this film a high score. But after watching it again, it became clear to me that Jenkins is an unfocused director who made many bad directorial decisions that inevitably exposed her understanding of Wuornos as superficial and peripheral. She tries too hard to make Wuornos sympathetic, because she doesn’t know what else she wants her film to convey. She tries too hard to carve new depth with Selby, but doesn’t really know the purpose of doing so. Ultimately, what we have here is an intellectually un-challenging film about an intellectual challenge. With a stronger script and a stronger cast of supporting actors, Jenkins’ direction could potentially become something genuinely great. Just watch this for CT.
KevinScale Rating: 3.5/5
therein, Therin. 