Saturday
Sep032011
Cinema de Gym: 'Waiting For Forever'
Saturday, September 3, 2011 at 6:00AM 
Editor's Note: In Cinema de Gym, Kurt writes about whichever piece of whichever movie was playing while he cardio'ed. I wish my gym would play movies! Kurt here with the second Cinema de Gym column about a film I never even knew was out there (here's the first). The Rachel Bilson quirk romance Waiting for Forever does have a certain sweetness, but it's pretty hugely un-special. It's the kind of film that can make you cry a little inside. We spend so much time dissecting all the product, Hollywood or otherwise, that's funneled into theaters each week that it's easy to lose sight of just how many freaking hours, dollars, brain cells and, by god, people it takes to complete a feature film production. It's one thing to have a little-seen movie slowly amass a cult following or wind up a critics' fave, but what about films like this that don't seem to have any audience at all?
Unless there's some Waiting for Forever fan club I don't know about, this has all the signs of being a speck on the cinema landscape that's really not worth anyone's time. And there are thousands of these, many barely able to pay the crew. All cynicism aside, and with full consideration given to risk-taking and an artist's legitimate need to create, wouldn't it have been better to just bag it altogether? As a colleague of mine points out regularly, weren't there any prescient souls on set who could've spoken up to say, “Guys, this baby is doomed. Why don't we all just go home? I have to put my kid to sleep.” I guess they just didn't have the heart to give their two cents. I feel for those people.
Which is not to say Waiting for Forever is terrible, at least not judging by what I saw. It seemed innocent enough, and largely inoffensive, if irritatingly feigned. It's an overeager boy-chases-girl drama that thinks hollow affectations will give it an instant indie spirit. Will (the gruffly cute Tom Sturridge) is a juggling street performer who always wears pajamas, just in case you couldn't tell he was a little eccentric. For years, apparently, he's been stalking following Emma (Bilson), a girl he knew as a child and has loved ever since. They've only just reconnected, it seems, as she came back to their hometown and he finally felt it was the right time to be more than just a shadow. Naturally, the revelation that Will has long been begging for a restraining order is reserved for the all-is-lost moment, when Emma finally lets him in only to allow her gosh-darned, societally-ingrained good sense to overrule the fact that he's a kind-hearted, well-intended creeper. Before that point, they're seen visiting the soda shop of their youth, every detail of which Will vocally recalls with a kind of Peter Pan nonchalance, uncaring – or unaware – that his boyish ramblings are raising eyebrows. Emma seems mildly charmed and intrigued, but the character isn't developed enough, nor is Bilson good enough, for you to to truly tell. Watching Will, she's more or less shruggingly disengaged, as insubstantial as his jammies.
There's a cute bit in a park where the old friends reminisce on a jungle gym, followed by a familiar domestic scene in which Emma argues with a volatile militaristic boyfriend (Matthew Davis) who's obligatorily bad for her. But if the film is to go the obvious route and ultimately drop Emma in Will's arms (I didn't get anywhere near that far), it doesn't seem she'd be much better off, as Will, while benevolent, appears genuinely unstable – more unstable, I'd guess, than the film means for him to appear. Despite Sturridge's efforts, this isn't just your average sympathy-for-the-weirdo scenario. From what I gathered, it seemed pretty plausible that Will might truly snap one day and try to use Emma's head for a juggling ball. Now there's a movie worth making!
There's a cute bit in a park where the old friends reminisce on a jungle gym, followed by a familiar domestic scene in which Emma argues with a volatile militaristic boyfriend (Matthew Davis) who's obligatorily bad for her. But if the film is to go the obvious route and ultimately drop Emma in Will's arms (I didn't get anywhere near that far), it doesn't seem she'd be much better off, as Will, while benevolent, appears genuinely unstable – more unstable, I'd guess, than the film means for him to appear. Despite Sturridge's efforts, this isn't just your average sympathy-for-the-weirdo scenario. From what I gathered, it seemed pretty plausible that Will might truly snap one day and try to use Emma's head for a juggling ball. Now there's a movie worth making!
Conclusions?- Throwaway films can be depressing for reasons well beyond their content.
- Rachel Bilson seems to be an actress without an identity. Do I need to have been an O.C. watcher to appreciate her?
- If you want your audience to love your misunderstood stalker, best to make him more teddy bear and less ticking bomb.
tagged Cinema de Gym, Rachel Bilson, Tom Sturridge
Cinema de Gym, Rachel Bilson, Tom Sturridge
Reader Comments (12)
I have never heard of this either. I remember Rachel Bilson starred in a movie like five or six years ago where I couldn't even tell her apart from the other lead actress of the movie IN THE TRAILER. How can you be that generic?
Tom Sturridge is one actor that I think has the potential to become a huge success the way Andrew Garifeld is now. I loved his scenes with Annette Benning in Being Julia and his on-stage UK performance in Punk Rock was one of the most raved about performances in 2009. Someone to watch out for.
Rose -- i thought he looked familiar. yes, being julia. I don't see why he couldn't break out but then i have only seen that one (as far as i recall)
I knew about this! I was actually waiting for it because Sturridge is gorgeous and I believe can be a huge talent. But when it finally did release, I could not watch it. It seems really really sappy. Maybe I'll catch it on the telly later...they show much worse stuff.
Her identity has something to do with being fashionable. Actually, it's kind of a surprise that she didn't score more roles after Jumper was such a success. She's really the only OC alum to have had a real shot at the big screen. Mischa Barton flamed out, Adam Brody is still playing the indie guy and Ben McKenzie, wisely, decided to stay on TV.
@Nat - From what I've read about him, I'm guessing he's just selective. He's had super-agent Hylda Queally representing him for quite some time (since being Julia, i think ) so I cant say that there's been no opportunities. He has some quality work lined up though: he's playing Carlo Marx in Walter Salles' On the Road and has also got one of the main roles in Emma Thompson's new movie, Effie. Plus he has the lead role in another indie with Jeremy Irons and Kim Cattral. He's known in smaller obscure circles, but he hasnt really broken out the way his peers Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan, Jim Sturgess and maybe even Eddie Redmayne have over past couple of years. I think its only a matter of time though before he does.
Sturridge was also the bland but cute lead - or audience surrogate, anyway - in Pirate Radio. That's the only thing I've seen him in. My sister informed me at that point that he was mostly famous for being Robert Pattinson's best friend, so he's got that going for him.
Who was he in Being Julia, btw? Not picturing him at all in that film...
Roark -- he played Bening's son/confidante.
Oh right, duh. Thanks.
For a second there I thought this was the Gossip GIrl film. Then I realized that Blair is actually Rachel Bilson and Nate is Tom Sturridge.
Nat, thanks for answering Roark's question - now I remember him! I recall he was an enjoyable presence in that film.
From the review, it sounds like you did not watch until the end. The movie redeemed itself a little. it was a nice feel good movie, though forgettable.