|  Click here 
        to see many fantastic things pertaining to this review.
 
 Moulin Rouge the movie? I hated 
        it. Make that, I hate it
 for some reason this feeling doesn't go 
        away by simply walking out of the theater or turning off the VCR. It is 
        like a very bad mistake in choosing a lover. It takes longer to get over 
        it than the encounter lasted in the first place.
 Moulin Rouge offends and outrages 
        me. I've long been a lover of the most extreme decadence and this candy-coated-apple 
        is completely void of the rotten center decadence demands. It is fare 
        clean enough for a family outing with your Southern Baptist in-laws. The 
        club Moulin Rouge that this appropriates its name from was so risqué 
        that many of its acts would be not only X-rated, but probably banned in 
        today's theaters. One famous act involved the star Tintine (the movie's 
        staring character is named Satine) being dragged about the stage by her 
        hair by her Apache lover. (For more information and pictures of Mistinguett--Tintine--this 
        is for you).
 The first time around, 15 minutes in I turned 
        it off, ejected it and watched the Queen's Jubilee instead. It took so 
        many viewings to get through the whole thing, I lost count.
 Oddly enough, when I talk to others who 
        also hated the movie, they often say the very same thing, "I turned 
        it off after 15 minutes." So for the sake of scientific research, 
        I rented the piece of crap again last night and timed it. Guess what happens 
        15 minutes in? Nicole Kidman lands in the spotlight dressed in a costume 
        very much like one I wore for a tap dance recital when I was seven, and 
        begins singing "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend"--well now 
        wait a minute, that might have been more like 12 minutes in. I think right 
        around the true deadly quarter of an hour wasted point, she is flopping 
        around a diamond heart and beginning her snort routine that from now on 
        is going to be the clue that she is being sexy.
 Nicole Kidman in the role of star courtesan 
        of the world's most notoriously decadent Parisian night club--is about 
        as sexy as a fencepost. Kidman is sexy like Princess Di or Laura Bush. 
        Sexy like the straight A's cheerleader in high school who went on to marry 
        at the perfect age of 22.5, raise 2.5 perfect kids, live in a split-level, 
        drive-a-mini-van-and-die-a-flawless-Methodist death. She is so stiff and 
        unathletic that she was injured in one of her numbers (we don't wish injury 
        on anyone of course, and especially not on such a pretty lady as Kidman
 
        but pretty does not sexy make) and spent the rest of the movie on pain 
        killers. They should have given her a lot more pain killers, if you ask 
        me. In fact, why not just shoot her up with heroin? That would have made 
        her faked-out tuberculosis much more convincing. Hey, you could even give 
        her just a little too much at the end, thus making the death scene
 
        oh now I'm getting way too carried away and decadent
. (Incidently, 
        just so it's clear why Kidman's hooker is so unconvincing
 a hooker 
        does not hold power over a man simply by snorting and growling and lying 
        around in garb
. The seduciton comes from the dynamic that Henry 
        Miller calls "crossing the red line" where the woman becomes 
        like a magnet, like "love over the radio" 
 what is truly 
        erotic about prostitution is the power the woman has over the man by putting 
        herself entirely into his hands--by taking his precious money to truly 
        surrender to him for the time he's bought--and this subjugation is such 
        seduction she ends up with all the power and control. Yummy.)
  Much better 
        choices for the role of Satine would have been Madonna or Angelina Jolie. 
        The movie rips off Madonna anyway, they might as well have had her swinging 
        from the rafters, too. I'm sure she would have played a much more convincing 
        boudoir scene, at the very least. It may have been a funding stipulation 
        that the huge majority of the cast be Australian. So far the only non-Aussi 
        I've found is John Leguizamo (Toulouse-Lautrec) who was actually born 
        in Bogotá Columbia. When I lived in Canada, the pressure for a 
        percentage of Canadian content in everything printed, filmed, painted 
        or photographed was intense. All Canada Council grants required at least 
        a 10% Canadian content, and that could be fulfilled by using Canadian 
        actors as well as in plot or setting. Perhaps the funders of this film 
        had similar agendas. I always felt for Canadian artists having such restrictions. 
        So much for freedom, truth and beauty, eh? (Those are the three principles 
        our heroes were supposedly living and dying for in this film
 another 
        co-opt that inflamed my resentment. How dare such a namby pamby lot be 
        calling on our counter-culture's raison d'etres?) Several 
        of the positive reviews that I read (a couple of them surprisingly from 
        European media. Mostly German and English who've never made it a secret 
        that they detest Paris and all she stands for.) begin with a disclaimer: 
        "of course the historical background must be suspended in order to 
        understand [sic] the movie." It is precisely this that I refuse to 
        do. If this period hadn't been what it was--"The world has changed 
        less since Jesus Christ than it has in the last thirty years," said 
        Charles Peguy of the Moulin Rouge era--I would be willing to suspend historical 
        fact for pastiche
 but that era was too rich to even consider over-looking. 
        Here a rich history is replaced with pastiche of the worst kind. It is 
        an example of a mistake many critics have been making for the last 20 
        years, confusing bad taste pastiche for postmodernism. When within a heartbeat of the beginning 
        of Moulin Rouge, which is visually quite beautiful--a shot of a 
        huge burlesque stage with side-pull curtains and flickering old-timey 
        graphics--a burst of The Sound of Music is followed by Offenbach, 
        rather than the other way around, we have been duly warned what we are 
        in for. Whenever the original movie score is dominant the film begins 
        to work. I use the word "dominant" because so much is going 
        on at all times in the club scenes
 not a bad thing since some of 
        the numbers are wonderful, Bugsby Berkeley-like extravagant, and some 
        of the editing quite brilliant. Unfortunately the "in your face" 
        techniques get old fast. But the intercutting of "stolen" music 
        is relentless and the stupidity of the film overall is epitomized when 
        our virgin hero (VH) is singing to our stiff hooker (SH) in the boudoir 
        scene, "You see, I've forgotten if they're gray or they're blue" 
        (from Elton John's "This is Your Song"), VH is looking SH straight 
        in the eye! Now that is a stroke of directorial genius, wouldn't you agree? 
        What I can't understand here, is why no one mentioned how idiotic that 
        was during the shoot. Can you imagine being on the set that day? Or being 
        VH having to keep a straight face for that one? I imagine that there was 
        quite a bit of editing on that scene trying to get out the background 
        giggles. Maybe that's why the Oscar nomination for editing has come to 
        Moulin Rouge. As I've already said, the editing was legitimately 
        exceptional in places, but this scene may have thrown it over the top.
 And the awards. The fact that Moulin 
        Rouge is up for no less than eight Academy Awards only ignites one's 
        indignation all the more. I remember last summer, while looking through 
        the recent releases at our local art video store (Missoula is lucky to 
        have one of these, so don't make fun of the single tense here, ok?), that 
        2001 was a very thin year in terms of good new flicks. When wind of a 
        film being made about the Moulin Rouge came our way, I thought this anemic 
        year might have been edified! Not.
 Nevertheless, Moulin Rouge is up 
        for the following awards: Best Actress (gag); Best Set Decoration (not 
        so bad but the website's version is better); Best Editing (the same shot 
        of women with their mouths unattractively gaping is used over and over
 
        the old "here it comes again" cut); Best Costume Design (this 
        is a joke when one compares the original costumes with the movie's--again 
        check out this headdress worn by Mistinguett); Best Movie (oh god, say 
        it ain't so), Best Art Direction (director Luhrmann's wife Catherine Martin 
        was responsible for this part and several other visual aspects of the 
        film. Perhaps he should have given her input even more play as the visual 
        dimension of the film is easily the best aspect overall); Best Cinematography 
        (ho hum) and Best Makeup (sucked
 not the runny turn-of-the-century 
        decadence it should have been. Black kohl eyeliner running down faces, 
        and circles of bright rouge on faces of men and women alike. Makeup had 
        just been "discovered" by the Parisians, and no longer was "painting 
        one's face" reserved for mimes and actors, it could be worn by anyone, 
        countess and scullery maid alike. Makeup, the great leveler of beautification. 
        But it was funky in those days. Lead-based. Cocteau's leading man (and 
        lover) in La Belle et la bête nearly died from lead poisoning 
        absorbed from his beastly, daily makeup session.)
 Turn-of-the-20th-century Paris was arguably 
        one of the most artistically inspired times in Western history. This movie 
        did not even resemble Paris (at any time!), did not get to the rot that 
        is necessary core of cabarets decadence, did not portray bordello reality 
        in the slightest, and was not a turn on for even two seconds. It doesn't 
        deserve even one of those nominations, much less an Oscar. But if I absolutely 
        had to pick one category of those up for the coveted prize that might 
        deserve such accolades, I would choose the Achievement in Sound category. 
        Some of the little sound bits, like swishes and clips when characters 
        moved their heads or made gestures, were wonderful.
 What was also quite wonderful was the team 
        of sidekicks, including John Leguizamo as the little guy painter Toulouse-Lautrec, 
        and Matthew Whittet as the composer Eric Satie. This group of sidekicks 
        were the only ones who seemed to have done their homework in terms of 
        their characters and that incredible era.
 But again, 
        the researchers were lazy. Satie and Toulouse-Lautrec were hardly the 
        only or even the most famous to have frequented the Moulin Rouge. The 
        personalities who were likely to have passed through the doors of the 
        Parisian cabarets included Osca Wilde, Joris-Karl Huysmans, Paul Verlaine, 
        Aubery Beardsley, Pablo Picasso, George Bernard Shaw, Sergey Pavlovich 
        Diaghilev, Vaslav Nijinsky, Isadora Duncan, and of course, one of the 
        greatest of all the "showgirls" of the caberet scene, Josephine 
        Baker (In 1944, Baker actually starred in one of the early versions--there 
        were at least 5--of the Moulin Rouge movies).Just imagine what an exciting film Moulin 
        Rouge could have been had the cast included fewer camp, inapproprate 
        musical scenes and more cameos of the phenomenal talents who frequented 
        the place.
 Well, one can only imagine. I guess it is 
        now that we reach for the (over stated in the film of course) absinthe. 
        The only good thing that came from Moulin Rouge for this beleagered reveiwer 
        was that it inspired a little site dedicated to the "truth" 
        about that era. Long live (the real version of) Truth, Beauty and Freedom! 
        Long live Rot and Decadence! Long live Paris, that lovely old whore.
 
 |