Across the Universe

I just finished watching Across the Universe. It's awesome. I loved it. I think everyone should watch it. It's a musical--utilizing only songs from the Beatles--about two people who fall in love during the 1960s Peace Movement, and how the events and aesthetics of that time mold and shape their relationship (but also the relationships of those around them). I figured it would be fantastic though because it stars Evan Rachel Wood, who I think is a spectacular actress. I can't think of a movie that I've seen her in that I didn't enjoy. Also, it's from director Julie Taymor, whom I also find very talented. She directed the 1999 film version of Shakespeare's play "Titus Andronicus"--probably one of his more twisted pieces--entitled Titus, which I also loved. So, everyone should go watch that too!

I thought Across the Universe not only did a wonderful job utilizing the Beatles' songs as a narrative device, but I felt that it also strongly captured the essence of their music. I think the only thing that irritated me while watching this film ***SPOILER ALERT*** was the fact that Direct TV summarized it as a story about two "star-crossed" lovers. This led me to believe that the ending would be one of those sad and pitiful ones where one, or both, of the main characters die. So, it kind of sucked when the two lovers had hit their low point, and then the direction of the film seemed to be getting more and more uplifting. I kept waiting for something terrible to happen, but it never did. This film had a perfectly happy ending and I kind of felt as if my anticipating their doom hindered the full effect the film could have had on me.

***BORING ANALYSIS*** One of the things I thought special though, was the cinematography of the film. I love artsy fartsy camera, sound, and lighting work because it makes you think. Example: I thought the ending of Across the Universe was at once both consistent AND contradictory with the narrative and cinematography of the film. Just as the Peace Movement frames the narrative, so does the cinematography; It plays around with the structure and shape of the narrative through movement and color. What I thought was most interesting about this though, was that the 1960's Peace Movement was all about freedom of expression and peace, which Taylor shows effectively through her fun use of camera work and narrative, but at the same time fails to express through these very modes. One: She is limited to the film medium, which is made all that more obvious with her manipulation of said medium. Two: The narrative is classic Hollywood. As I mentioned above, the film has the typically happy Hollywood ending, which to me says "conformity." It seems almost tongue in cheek. Perhaps it was, given the time in which the film was made ;).

Anyhow! It's a fun movie to watch :), but also moving. I cried a few times...