Monday, 1 April 2013

Trance: Like most therapy sessions sterile, wayward and discourages repeat visits


Danny Boyle’s a weird one, on par with Ken Loach and Shane Meadows as a truly notable British auteur. Like most directors I admire his distinctiveness is very conducive to narrative flow with rapid fire editing and chameleonic musical accompaniment that always sets you in the often schizophrenic mindset of his characters. The man’s name alone can get me into the cinema and the thought of him doing a contemporary film noir as a means of blowing off steam during the Olympic ceremony was an exciting prospect.

But alas everyone has their limits and Boyle’s, in my opinion, is adapting a relatively thin crime narrative into a feature length thriller. A similar feat was managed in 127 Hours by painstakingly detailing the tribulations of its trapped protagonist while fleshing out his character through flashbacks and hallunicinations. Trance however doesn’t have time for that, it’s got a mystery to solve, complications to provoke and a forgettable supporting cast to mess around with. Not to mention the titillating love triangle the film weaves between its protagonist Simon (James McAvoy) an art auctioneer who steals a painting for East End mob boss Franck (Vincent Cassel) only to lose it after a bonk to the noggin and attempts to divine its location with the help of sultry hypnotherapist Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson), who (least necessary spoiler warning) has her own agenda and begins playing both men against each other.

The problems with Trance's, frankly stupid, ménage a trios, involve spoiling a lot of plot revelations from late in the film. Thankfully though there are other problems I can go through before we have to cross that bridge starting with the main character. First things first, McAvoy gives a great, convincing performance as Simon, a character that undergoes a number of changes to persona without delving into split personality syndrome. Shifting seamlessly from charming lad about town, to impotent runt, to borderline psychotic all while ultimately staying the same person. The problem though is that we’re never introduced to Simon as a person of depth on a journey we want to follow. We know he’s confident, meticulous and something of a gambler but that’s it, it’s all external never showing the heart of it. Why he is stealing the painting, what pressure is he under, what will be the consequences of him failing?

In Vertigo we feel for Scottie because he’s a man of action now crippled by fear. In Oldboy we feel for Dae Su because he’s an innocent man imprisioned for a dehumanising amount of time. Simon however is a handsome young man with a good job and a modern London flat. He’s the victim of entirely his own circumstances and no amount of fingernail pulling will make us engage with him. The result is that much of the qualities you associate with a film noir; empthy , tension, intrigue are completely absent because you simply don’t care.

It’s possible this would have been avoided by simply opening with Simon post-concussion. It would have allowed us to piece together his character and sympathise with his situation before thrusting him into the plot. An episode of Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror did this to great effect earlier in the year though for some reason it also gets ludicrous once Tuppence Middleton shows up.

A far better mystery is Rosario Dawson as the hypnotherapist who, right off the bat, is established as knowing more than she lets on and quickly becomes master manipulator of both Simon and Franck. The problem here though is that there’s little indication of seduction and every indication of farting around. Her therapy session seem built around not rebuilding Simon’s memory but positioning him and Franck into a state of vulnerability, which would only encourage suspicion and hostility (towards her, not each other). At one point Franck even comments that they’re not making any progress while she lives out her power fantasies, which stood out because I was thinking the exact same thing.

See, and this is where I throw up the SPOILER WARNING, it’s easy to write this off as part of the real plot, which is Elizabeth’s ridiculously convoluted revenge against Simon, who is revealed to have been an abusive ex-boyfriend she alludes to in the film. Elizabeth not only hypnotises Simon to forget their relationship but also to orchestrate the heist and double cross the criminals he is conveniently acquainted with to steal a famous painting that he spent a few seconds of screen time talking about.

Now I’m of the opinion that a lot of the time plot holes aren’t a massive problem. Questions of how over the top this plan is, how much omniscience it demands of Elizabeth and how perfectly everything is already in place to enact it shouldn’t matter. They shouldn’t matter if the reveal is of dramatic and devastating consequence, NOT if it’s some random nice painting the protagonist happens to like. This twist is so random and impersonal that I can’t help but think about how many plot holes have manifested in pursuit of such a pointless endgame.

After that what else is there to say? As established the supporting cast are little more than sacks of meat counting down to the point where they have to take a bullet to demonstrate a characters descent into darkness. Apparently one of them is associated with Simon before the events of the film, I say ‘apparently’ because I don’t think he ever actually speaks to any of them. Maybe he isn’t real, maybe none of them are real, mere figments in what must be the least imaginative dream sequences since Inception. The action is of almost cartoonish quality, sucking up any real threat of death like a Dyson. So in short let’s call this one a rare misstep for Boyle and ask that he not try to overdo it on his next film which, in spite of everything, I still eagerly anticipate.

No comments:

Post a Comment