A Second Look At "Still Alice"
Sunday, December 7, 2014 at 8:00PM Michael C. here to sort out a few mixed feelings at the prospect of the impending Julianne Moore juggernaut. Let me cut to right to the matter on everyone’s mind and say that any Academy voter who checks a box for Julianne Moore for Best Actress next year will have no reason to feel anything but pride in his or her choice. Her performance as Alice Howland, a 50-year-old linguistics professor suffering from early onset Alzheimer’s is every bit as good as billed. But let us also acknowledge the plain truth that Moore’s work here is all the more impressive because she is doing the heavy lifting for a script and direction that are not operating at anywhere near her level.
To point out that there is little exceptional or even all that much better than competent in Still Alice outside of Julianne Moore’s performance is to risk coming off like some sort of stone-hearted gargoyle. Who doesn’t feel the urge to pull some punches when presented with such an earnestly good intentioned film? And that is to say nothing of the reluctance to rain sour disapproval down on the Best Actress parade currently gaining steam on its march toward the Oscar podium. Who wants to spoil a perfectly good Julianne Moore coronation? Not this critic. [More...]
So I would love to give the film a polite nodding approval and carry on cheering until there is no longer a scrap of red carpet left anywhere that Moore hasn’t trod elegantly across, but writer/directors Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland make it impossible to ignore the sizable gap between the emotional impact they are aiming for and what they actually achieve.
I won’t attempt to deny Still Alice is often moving (how could it not be?) but it never manages to create a sense of real, messy life existing outside the narrow focus of its scenes. Interactions between Alice and her family hit one note at a time, her husband (Alec Baldwin) is a workaholic, her daughter (Kristen Stewart) is resentful - much the same way the film dutifully checks of the steadily worstening symptoms of Alice's condition. With a film like Haneke’s Amour the uncluttered, austere approach felt like the end result of an effort to plumb the subject for every possible wrinkle of meaning. In Still Alice you get the impression that the focus on the disease’s effects is because the film isn’t up to the task of tackling any greater complexities. Moore’s character is a professor of linguistics so the film can have the easy irony of a woman whose life is devoted to the study of language failing to remember the simplest of words, as measured by Alice’s steadily decreasing scores in Words With Friends. Compare that to something like Margaret Edson’s Wit, which uses its cancer stricken Professor’s field of metaphysical poetry as a powerful lens through which to view the situation and the protagonist.
None of this is to say that Glatzer and Westmoreland have crafted a bad film exactly, just a hopelessly bland one. Their one move as visual stylists is to blur the focus in a few shots to show Alice’s confusion. The biggest compliment one can pay them is that they possess a delicacy that keeps the proceedings from descending into mawkishness and which rescues the film on those occasions when it skirts the edges of emotional manipulation, like the moment where when Alice drops her carefully prepared notes while struggling against the effects of her disease to deliver a speech.
But then I can’t talk about that scene, or any scene, without it all coming back to just how good Moore is in this film. The scene as written is a serviceable version of the one that pops up in a few films every Oscar season where the hero triumphs over adversity and receives a tearful standing ovation for their troubles. Yet in Moore’s hands it’s mesmerizing. Moore lets us see every nuance in Alice, her nervousness, the way she absorbs the implications of what she has written anew as she says it, the dulling effects of the disease clashing against the frustration of the brilliant woman who is used to being in control. It’s like that in every scene. To say that she elevates the material is understatement. Her performance is this movie.
In the likely event that Julianne Moore picks up an Oscar for this performance I will be unreserved in my joy at seeing one of our best actresses being rewarded for stellar work. Yet if Moore’s overdue status can play into the decision to award her, can it also be the source of the tiniest taboo reluctance to see her take the big trophy for this film? Moore has a long list of unforgettable characters to her credit, from Amber Waves to Maude Lebowski to Cathy Whitaker, and despite her unassailable efforts, Alice Howland is not on the same level. She’s not even the most memorable character I’ve seen Moore play this year. If she were to win Best Actress it will be well deserved, let no one argue otherwise, but I can’t silence the nagging disappointment that her belated win may not be for breathing life into a great character, but for elevating a thin one.
Grade C+
Related: Nathaniel's take | More Julianne Moore
Reader Comments (23)
Nailed it.
Like Pacino winning for Scent of A Woman.
Spot on! Sometimes performances are awarded in weak films.
If she wins, and I hope she does, she'd hardly be the first actress awarded for a less than outstanding film and often not even their best work.
Bette Davis for Dangerous instead of Of Human Bondage, Susan Hayward for I Want to Live! instead of I'll Cry Tomorrow, Ingrid Bergman for Murder on the Orient Express instead of Autumn Sonata and on and on. At least her work is stellar so if her vehicle is a tad clunky she will still be awarded for the right performance.
Agreed. I just watched the film last night.
BUT I want so badly Julianne Moore to be an Oscar winner that I can't even be that upset. But it is weird in this day and age how a front runner seems to emerge due to the internet talking. I would not expect this performance to be the frontrunner without the internet talking. Obviously her Cannes win helped start the year out right, but still. This seems a bit random.
Yes, Still Alice as a movie is just okay, but that's still better than Silver Linings Playbook, The Iron Lady or The Blind Side, so I won't complain.
I think it's a choppy script and one that simplifies the relationships too much. It's based on a preconceived idea that we accept all the characters have a more complex relationship than the one-dimensional one we're watching in those moments. Why even have the son character if he is completely irrelevant to everything the movie focuses on? I wish there was at least 4 more scenes between Lydia and her mom towards the end. (Spoilers) After Lydia comes back home to care of her mom, they only have 2 scenes: the one they are on the park bench and it gets cold and the Angels in America monologue, the end. (end of spoilers) Anyway, I felt I wanted to see that new dynamic with reversed parental roles play out more gradually. That only illustrates how the script doesn't explore the relationships with more depth and that is a big problem for a movie whose strength lies in seeing how her disease affects her in relation to her family (Alice has no friends - so odd!!! - such a simplification of her life by the script).
I couldn't agree with you more. I worship at the altar of Julianne Moore and have for years, but I do feel a slight tinge of regret that her inevitable Oscar victory will come for what is, as you have correctly observed, a subpar showcase for her talents. Katharine Hepburn famously said that you never win for your best work, and more often than not with this mid-late career tribute awards, that proves to be the case. I suspect we're all going to have a bit of sour morning after feeling about it when we see A Map to the Stars next year, and realize we all could have waited twelve months to hand her the prize for a film that was truly worthy of her - I think a lot of people felt that way about Jeff Bridges' win for Crazy Heart after they'd seen True Grit. Still and all, you can't know what a year may bring, and it would really be a shame if arguably the greatest American actress of her generation went Oscar-less for her entire career. So let her take the damn thing, and let's all just pretend she got it for Safe, Boogie Nights or Far from Heaven.
pretty much like the case of Meryl Streep in The iron Lady
Yes, it's sad that Moore did not win for her best work (i.e. Safe, Boogie Nights, Far from Heaven), but I think Oscar followers too often forget that actors are not competing against their filmography. We are (will) award her performance as the Best of 2014, not of her filmography. And frankly, I think 2014 did not produce any female leading performance as astounding as her work in Safe, but neither do most years, so there you go. I honestly think her perf in "Still Alice" is among the top 5 of the year and it would be a very deserving win. She's marvelous in it, and I think she's doing more than just heavy-lifting. Yes, pity she wasn't Oscared for amazing work before, but remember that if she wins, Oscar is not necessarily saying that it's her best work, just the best of the year.
it does not matter if the film is less than stellar, moore is amazing. this is among her best performances, probably her fourth best over all (safe, far from heaven, boogie nights, the hours) and this isn't like al pacino in scent of a woman. that was a case of an actor having a movie all to himself to showcase what he is good at. moore's performance in still alice is NOTHING like her other performances. and so what if her being overdue plays into her eventual win? narrative is important in winning an oscar, always has been, your reluctance to give this to her NOW is not gonna stop it from happening again, year after year. this win or loss won't change the fact that julianne has deserved this aware MORE THAN any of your favorites BAR FREAKIN NONE.
We must come to terms with the fact that Julianne will never be an Oscar winner for her performances as Amber Waves or Cathy Whitaker. That ship has sailed. Just as it did for Glenn Close as Alex Forrest or Merteuil.
I really like Julianna Moore. One of her best performances after her supporting turn in A Single Man has been in the underseen What Maisie Knew. Her narcissistic, inattentive aging rockstar mother is heartbreaking.
Most critics I read have said the same thing about Still Alice--material covered better in other films like Amour, and especially, Sarah Polley's Away From Her. I wasn't a fan of the book (or Genova's second one--Left Neglected) so I'll wait for VOD But, I wouldn't be upset if Moore wins an Oscar.
I still defend Streep's Iron Lady, especially the aged version.
I agree. Its interesting cause Moore is amazing as always but surprisingly I thought Witherspoon gave the best female performance of the year. Though Moore truly deserves it just for her career i can't help but shake is this the right decision. Moore is amazing though and i can't knock it. I still think her best work is with PTA though. Those two characters are the ones that stand out in her filmography to me. Also I had problems in the second half of how the film portrayed alzheimers. I don't think it needed to go that far. The film seemed to ignore the fact at time that Alzheimers is a slow progressing disease and if im not mistakenly its especially slow in young people. I would have loved more time when she is aware of her disease. If they wanted to go to that level at the end then they would have needed more development in the secondary characters. Cause Alzheimers goes from a disease that affects the victim to one that really hurts a family. Kstew did her best. I actually was most enamored with Bosworth when it came to supporting performances. Her character just felt the most real. I couldn't even imagine Baldwin's character making that selfish decision at the end of the film. That really lost me. His character was almost paper thin. He was supposed to be sympathetic, but he came across as so selfish. Though don't let me dissuade you cause I did like the film in the end, but i had some issues with it. I had a grandmother that i took care of every weekend who suffered from the disease and of course this film hit a lot of hard emotional points in me. I couldn't help it, but i felt Wild actually hit me more on that front. To each his own. I feel like i just rambled forever.
Julianne Moore having an Oscar is more important than your feelings on the vehicle that provided it. STILL ALICE was made for earnest reasons. And Moore being cast as the lead meant it was the least likely to gain awards traction. Or better yet Oscar traction. Moore has been passed over twice in recent years for vehicles that made themselves known in several categories on nomination morning. We're on the cusp of possible change. For the second time in Best Actress history a woman in her fifties will take home the statuette. There are more important things than you feelings on the vehicle that provided it.
@ Josh: The doctor does say that in the case of early onset Alzheimer's the deterioration happens at a much faster rate.
I'll always defend TIL too, Pam.
We all have at least one movie or Best Actress (or acting win in general) win that most people didn't like. There are people who defend SaBu's win for TBS or Jessica Lange's win for Blue Sky. We have all individual opinions, thankfully.
And there are enough acting wins that are praised and I just don't get it, like Tilda Swinton in Michael Clayton for example. She did nothing for me there and that's dissapointing, because she's a great versatile actress. Other people think it's one of the best supporting actress wins the last decade. Okay if they think so, but it's also okay I do not.
I wish Moore all the best and even without having seen Still Alice, I just feel she'll give an intense performance like always.
It's a matter of opinion on the film SA,i thought it was ok but only when Moore was onscreen Tilda had been in better films and gave better performances before her win and since also but MC was quite a good film and she stood out in it,it's all about comparisons,can't say SA is Moore's best but comparing it with her other work and what a body of work she is again a different person/actress,totally in the moment always,I would be so happy that a great actress whose been passed over or snubbed completely for the longest time finally gets a career nod where everyone agrees she is stellar in the film she wins for but who has been better in other films but to say Oscar winner Julianne Moore will sure feel good if/when it happens.
Thanks for letting me know @mr. goodbar. Must have not heard that part. There is someone i know that has early onset alzheimers and i saw her a week ago and she was Ok. it seemed to progress slowly but I don't know this woman that well anymore to be honest and I'm no expert. My grandmothers disease really progressed when she got sick with a heap load of other things. I guess i have to research it.
I'm sorry about your grandmother.
I think it would have made for a very different experience for me had I not been given that piece of information. I'm usually very picky when it comes to accuracy in movies depicting diseases or mental disorders. That is why I cannot take Blue Jasmine nor Gone Girl very seriously. Their characters suffer from mental illness but it's just a plot device and not concerned about realism. For a good example on how to capture the complexities of mental disorder: A Woman Under the Influence.
A women under the influence is great. The one that really turned me off was the beaver. that one was almost offensive. I used to have issues with Silver Linings Playbook but i like the way they incorporated exercise as a benefit in the film. So I'm actually more positive on it now. Not completely realistic but its heart is in the right place. Not many movies are succesful at that topic besides that great Cassavettes film. Scorsese really excells at it. Travis Bickle could be the poster boy and LaMotta can't be far behind. The reason Taxi Driver is incredible as a vigilante film is cause it acknowledges vigilantism is a mentally ill creation. I don't know if i said that right though.
mr goodbar -- but why should Gone Girl be concerned with realism when its basically an allegorical thriller?
from what i've heard still alice is very accurate (and the movie doesn't have a lot of "time markers" as i recall so we really don't know how many months are passing between the scenes. plus, from eerything i've ever read or heard about alzheimers it seems like its still something of a mysterious disease to doctors. i feel like we'll be learning more about it for years to come.
I accept Gone Girl as an allegory as longs as the performances were coherent in that sense. When the best two performances of the movie, Kim Dickens and Carrie Coon, are both grounded in a realistic interpretation of the story and then you have Pike doing a calculated performance (different from the character being calculated) and Affleck doing whatever it is that he was doing, it makes for a frustrating schizophrenic experience. And I should like the movie because until now, he was a perfect hit-and-miss director ever for me, starting with a miss, of course:
Alien3, Seven, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, Zodiac, Benjamin Button, The Social Network, Dragon Tattoo and Gone Girl.