Stage plays and motion pictures are often two beasts with completely disparate characteristics. While theatrical performances usually rely heavily on dialogue to carry the production (often due to budgetary and physical space restrictions), most movies are stories told with pictures where -- for better or worse -- the dialogue is often a secondary concern.
As such -- and despite some examples to the contrary -- it's usually quite difficult to translate a story from one medium to the other. Such adaptions often seem restrained when on stage, or conversely, feel like a talk-fest on film that spins its wheels and never seems to get anywhere.
Such is the case with "Hurlyburly." Based on playwright David Rabe's 1984 stage production of the same name (and for which he adapted the screenplay), this film, seemingly a deep probe into the lives and psyches of desperate people, instead comes off as more of a chatty and decidedly boring mess.
Perhaps the story worked better on stage, but the nonstop yacking clearly doesn't carry the same poetic, albeit occasionally artificial sounding dialogue found in the works of fellow playwright David Mamet. Thus, the rambling and continual wordplay never sounds real, and too clearly shows the writer's intentions while never being witty enough to hold or at least appease the audience and their attention span.
What partly saves the production and serves as the only real reason why anyone might decide to see this film is its stellar cast. Although few of the characters are remotely likeable and often comes off more as vehicles for the film's message than as real, flesh and blood people, most of the performances are strong and occasionally compelling.
In addition, the performers should all get kudos for memorizing often long and jumbled trains of dialogue and for delivering such verbiage like they really mean what they're saying, even if they don't understand all of it.
Despite his character's often unrealistic dialogue, and the fact that too much "damage" is done early on that prevents the audience from truly caring about him, Sean Penn ("U Turn," "The Game") delivers yet another strong performance. Often underrated as an actor and often known more for his run-ins with the paparazzi than his acting abilities, Penn is a good and reliable character actor and it shows here.
As in most of another performer's movies, however, it's Kevin Spacey ("L.A. Confidential," "A Time to Kill") who steals the show. Featuring a platinum dye job and exuding his usual "oily" demeanor, Spacey doesn't showboat his character, but instead subtly delivers the film's best performance. Chazz Palminteri ("Diabolique," "The Usual Suspects"), while decent as the volatile loser, unfortunately suffers in a role afflicted by the fact that we don't like, and subsequently don't care about his character, thus undermining his efforts.
Supporting performances are relatively okay, but Gary Shandling ("Love Affair") -- who's often displayed a darker side lurking beneath his comedy that was brilliantly showcased in HBO's late, "The Larry Sanders Show" -- feels underused in his role for a film such as this one.
The trio of performers playing the trampled upon women who hang around these losers are all decent, despite their characters being shortchanged of any realistic depth. As such, while Robin Wright Penn ("She's So Lovely," "Moll Flanders") is as reliably strong as ever, Meg Ryan ("City of Angels," the upcoming "You've Got Mail") has a bit more to sink her teeth into, and nicely plays against her normally charismatic and bubbly roles. Meanwhile, Anna Paquin ("The Piano," "Fly Away Home"), playing her first "adult" character, is decent but not outstanding as the young drifter.
Dark, moody and decidedly misogynistic, this two hour film is tedious and occasionally torturous to sit through. With dialogue that's too contrived and artificial sounding, a plot that never really gets anywhere, and a passel of characters we neither like nor care for, director Anthony Drazan ("Zebrahead") can't do much with the film, and the audience subsequently has no reason to appreciate, let alone enjoy this picture. Despite its intentions and theatrical pedigree, the story -- as executed here -- simply doesn't work on film.
The disc's visual and aural characteristics are good, while the supplemental material — including one insightful audio track (featuring the director and writer) and a somewhat goofier one (commenting on the issues and themes of the story) — makes good use of the format's multiple audio-track capabilities.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
