|
|
|
|
Renée Zellweger is one of those Hollywood stars who is nauseatingly sweet. Butter wouldn’t
melt in her mouth. With her pudgy, puckered face and miniscule frame, Zellweger looks
rough enough to be a ranch hand yet elegant enough to wear Versace. One might say she’s
a chameleon actor, a term often used to describe the greatest living American actress,
Meryl Streep. That might be blowing too much smoke up her narrow arse, but she can
certainly play the proverbial damsel in distress because in Case 39, her first official starring
role in a horror film, she does it with her eyes closed.
It’s a pity the film was a formulaic pile of Hollywood poo...
Case 39 shares similar ideas to The Exorcist, The Omen, and most recently, Orphan. They’
ve unofficially been dubbed ‘evil kid’ films, a supernatural sub-genre that also includes the
likes of Don’t Look Now, Rosemary’s Baby, and lesser known films like Darkness and The
Unborn. So, where does Case 39 fit in? Definitely not in the same league as Friedkin’s,
Donner’s, Roeg’s, or Polanski’s films.
Zellweger plays a disillusioned social worker who believes that her trivial efforts aren’t
satisfactorily serving the needs of her clients. When we first get a glimpse of Emily Jenkins,
she’s swamped with cases and fed up with the system that’s paying her wages. One day her
boss drops a file onto her desk and reluctantly, she takes on the case.
Lillith Sullivan is a 10 year old girl whose parents are accused of abusing her. When Jenkins
visits the family home, the parents are withdrawn, solemn. There’s every indication that
something is going on, but whatever it is, she’ll have to find out the hard way. It’s only
after her parents try to incinerate Lillith in the oven that Jenkins champions to be her
guardian, and once Lillith moves into Jenkins’ house, all Hell, literally breaks loose.
I’d read good things about German director Christian Alvart’s 2005 debut feature,
Antibodies, which, like everything these days, is getting a damned Hollywood remake. Hell,
maybe the studios will even recruit him to do a shot-for-shot remake á la Michael Haneke.
Even though I haven’t seen Antibodies, I kind of expected something fresh, something
visionary going into Case 39, even though the studio had Alvart by the nuts.
Apart from being suitably atmospheric, Case 39 is just your run of the mill studio horror
film. There’s nothing here that hasn’t been said or done before, and that’s what makes it
just another generic, ordinary, typical star-driven vehicle. Did I mention totally illogical? Even
in the realm of the supernatural, Case 39 fails to convincingly tie up its loose ends. The
ending will leave you scratching your head, and not in a good way.
The thing I detest about Hollywood is not merely the fact that they love to exploit the
talents of European directors - who are willing to sacrifice their craft for a meaty salary, of
course – but the fact that there are too many guidelines that prohibit the course for
intuitive expression. The material is regulated and safe, the productions are lavish and
polished, there’s always a star involved who’s demanding 1/4 of the budget, and the story is
rigidly structured with a distinct beginning, middle, and end.
Yawn!!!
There’s no room for spontaneity or risk. It’s all about how the film fares at the box office.
That’s how success is measured, and that’s what the suits have done with Alvart and Case
39. They’ve produced a venture that is starved of structural, narrative, and thematic
flexibility, and those are the features that constitute an innovative film.
Zellweger and child actress, Jodelle Ferland (Terry Gilliam’s Tideland), do an adequate job
onscreen, but none of it is really outstanding. Ferland is undoubtedly well cast. She’s got the
face and mannerisms of a 50 year old woman, lending a freakish air to the role. Plus her
scenes alongside Zellweger are performed with relative complexity. Ian McShane, on the
other hand, is a standout. Whenever he’s in a scene, you’re constantly fixed upon him and
his husky drawl. It’s a brilliant if nonchalant performance.
Case 39 is a polished, uninspired, and at times irrational horror flick, typical of the pap that
Hollywood’s been dishing out over the last 20 odd years. The fact that it’s got a supernatural
stance gives it a slight edge over others that are rooted in the mechanics of the real world.
Everything is capably achieved, from the production itself right down to the script. However,
these are the issues that make the film, for me, too straightforward and ordinary. Case 39
will definitely garner an audience, and it’ll probably earn enough at the box office to reap
back its 27 million budget, either through ticket or DVD sales. Overall, Case 39 is barely
passable.
|
|
