Curious Case of Benjamin Button...illogical plot twists! Not for intelligent filmgoers...

At the end of last year, I stumbled across a paper-thin dog-eared copy of "The Great Gatsby", so I opened the front cover and plunged in for a second read.

Frankly, I forgot what a remarkable writer F. Scott Fitzgerald was!

So, when I took in a screening of the adaptation of a lesser-known literary work - "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" - I was saddened by the convoluted mess I witnessed up on the silver screen!

Granted, the early scenes which moved along at a fast clip, managed to hold the rapt audience (myself included) in their thrall.

And, why not?

After all, intriguing special effects convincingly transformed actor Brad Pitt from a fortyish-male in real life to a gnarly old man in the world of make-believe - and in the creative process - buoyed up the premise of a man moving backwards in time to a credible standard of excellence.

Even when a plot twist hurled Benjamin Button (Pitt) on a tug boat - to toil for a brief stint as a sailor - the project remained afloat at sea.


To some, a clandestine affair with the wife of a Diplomat (Tilda Swinton), may have been a little far-fetched; but, it didn't upset the apple cart in my estimation.

However, Swinton's part amounted to a throw-a-way role, which was annoying.

What a waste of stellar talent on screen!

When "Button" shifted forward and focused the lens on the character's middle years, illogical plot twists flabbergasted me.

Subsequently, the overly-long feature from Paramount & Warner - that a handful of lunatic critics are raving about - ended up all "holes" to me.

For example, although Benjamin was raised in humble surroundings and was an uneducated down-to-earth man - in a revved up second half of the screen oddity - a Brad Pitt fashion show shifted into high gear.

In spite of a lack of foundation, Button is suddenly captured on celluloid jaunting about the globe - by jet, luxury auto, and pristine cabin cruiser - all decked out in what smacks of top-of-the-line Gianni Versace suits and a supporting cast (wardrobe ensembles) that would dazzle even the jaded Duke of Windsor!

Superficial crap!

For a moment, I thought was settling into a shameless segment of a Sydney Sheldon mini-series.
Then, at the heart of the film, the plot zeroed in on a love affair - and subsequent live-in relationship - that Button plunged into with great abandon.

Here, mind-boggling conflicts reared their ugly head for the discerning film buff to ponder incredulous.


For starters, I thought the lead actress - Kate Blanchette - was terribly miscast.

Since the tale is supposed-to hinge on Button's fascination with a mystifying magnetic beauty from his long suffering past, you'd think that the producers would have cast an actress capable of exhibiting those precious qualities.

To me, Blanchett was little more than a cardboard cut-out of the Fitzgerald vision, with mechanical moving parts that propelled her everywhere but in the right direction.

Kate, the bloom is off the rose!

Shortly after a child is born out-of-wedlock, Button is prompted to exit the home life.

Fearing that when he "de"-ages, he'll end up a toddling burden to his mistress and a baffling oddity to the daughter he dotes on (now sprouting into a nubile young creature by-the-minute in the bumpy storyline) Button chooses to roam the high seas.

Ciao, baby!

Now, there are endless shots of Benjamin Button toiling at odd jobs, travelling the highways and byways of the known world, and - on occasion - dashing off the occasional picturesque postcard home.


"Sure wish I could have been there for your first recital," Button whined in one.

"Sorry, I missed the chance," he moaned in another.

What a load of piffle!

When Benjamin Button returned for a visit years later, his buffed bod and mental faculties were still intact.

At this juncture (it was obvious to me, anyway) that Button could have easily attended those first recitals or journeyed home to toast a number of birthdays - even celebrate a special family event or two - before the great "darkness" settled in.

The wanderlust years amounted to beef helper, if you catch my drift.

In the final analysis, the "Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is not a film for the intelligent filmgoer.

No, it's just a lot of eye-candy that ends up leaving a bad taste in the mouth after a - ho hum - predictable ending.

On a scale of 1-10 - 10 being best - Benjamin rates 3 button holes for the snappy designer suit.

http://www.julianayrs.com

Curious Case of Benjamin Button...oops! Blooper, did you catch it?

On the eve of the glittering premiere of the feature film release for - " The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" - the producers trotted out Brad Pitt on the red carpet to promote the intriguing F. Scott Fitzgerald story adapted for the screen, newspapers around the country were blitzed with eye-catching ads heralding a Benjamin Button "industry buzz" touting potential Oscar nods, and so forth and so on.

Pity they spent so much money on promotion and patting themselves on the back!

After all, into the first few minutes of the film, an obvious "blooper" indicated to me that some very sloppy filmmaking threatened to keep the Oscar at least an arm's length away.

Insiders - who have taken in the big-budget feature from Paramount & Warner Brothers - undoubtedly spotted the glaring gaff onscreen right away.

What exactly is a blooper?

Many familiar with the process of shooting a movie are undoubtedly aware that scenes are put together "piecemeal".

Generally, a director from the old school sets up the camera for an establishing shot, which is also known as the "master".

For example, if a scene takes place in a trendy cafe, the audience is first treated to a bit of footage that establishes the location of the characters in the storyline.

Then, the camera may zoom in for a close-up of the lead actors.

Usually, a two-shot is filmed showing the characters engaging in conversation - at which point - the director sets up the camera to capture each actor individually.

Later, in the production studio, an editor will "seamlessly" piece the clips together to give the appearance of an on-going chat between the characters.

As the scenes are being put in the can - a script supervisor and a staffer in the "continuity" department - take note of the clips that have been shot, what footage needs to be filmed to ensure the segment makes logical sense when edits are conducted later in the production studio, and so forth and so on.

On occasion, there are slip-ups.

For instance, when one segment is shot for a bar scene, there may have been a beer bottle on the counter.

During the course of the "set-ups" (when cameras are placed in position, lighting is established for the shot, etc.) the lowly bottle of ale may have been innocently moved by a crew member.

The end result?

As a filmgoer is watching the film, a beer bottle vividly appears on screen one moment, then vanishes the next.

This is a called a "blooper".

The one in "Benjamin Button" was quite glaring to me!

Anyone who took in a screening this past week may recall - that in the opening scenes of "Button" - a baby is left on the doorstep of an institution.

When a resident of the facility spies the child, she swoops it up into her arms, and sneaks it into her private quarters.

As she is coddling the child, there is a knock at the door.

Without much thought, she opens the top drawer of a dresser nearby - tucks the child lovingly inside - then slides it closed.

"Queenie" proceeds to open the door a crack and chat with an elderly woman.

At this juncture, she is inclined to get back to her duties tending the residents.

Now, Queenie half-turns toward camera at the door - glances at the child in the open drawer for a second - then exits.

Now wait a minute.

Did you catch that?

Before Queenie answered the door, she closed the drawer with the baby hidden inside the cozy little space.

But, when she turned back to gaze toward the dresser, the drawer was open revealing the child contentedly laying inside.

Did the drawer magically open by itself?

Obviously, someone on the set made a big boo-boo!

Or, there was a problem with footage back at the studio, so producers opted to edit the two scenes together in spite of the fact they did not "match".

I expect the filmmakers thought no one would notice?

Now that the Oscar ballots have been mailed out, and nominations are being considered by the Academy, I have to seriously wonder about one thing.

Can the powers-that-be give an Oscar nod to "Benjamin Button" in spite of the fact the director, the film editors, and producers screwed up so miserably in respect to a basic fundamental aspect of filmmaking?

Only Oscar knows for sure.

The envelope, please!

*A review of Benjamin Button will follow
http://www.julianayrs.com