The Artist - Review

We're a day away from the 2012 Academy Awards, and if any of the rumors are true... we're in for a dull ceremony this year. I haven't posted my full thoughts on the Oscar nominees this year, but in short, I found them kind of underwhelming. Oh sure, there were a few good calls and a couple of nice surprises, but for the most part, the Academy played it safe again with predictable nominees, along with a few "what the hell?" calls while better and more deserving films were given the shaft. Right now the frontrunner for Best Picture is director Michel Hazanavicius' tribute to silent cinema, The Artist. Is it good, great, overrated, a letdown??? Let's look and find out.

As I mentioned before, The Artist is an homage to the classic silent films made in the early decades of cinema. Directed by renown French filmmaker Michel Hazanavicius and featuring a roster of talented actors including Jean Dujardin, Bérénice Bejo, James Cromwell, and John Goodman, the film is shot in black and white with hardly any audio minus the non-diegetic soundtrack.It takes place in the year 1927. Dujardin plays George Valentin, an acclaimed silent film star at the top of his game. During this time, he meets an aspiring actress named Peppy Miller (Bejo), whom he encourages to pursue her passion. Meanwhile, the film industry makes one of it's biggest transitions, from silent cinema to talkies. Peppy Miller succeeds in the transition, quickly rising to stardom, while Valentin fails to adapt, and is promptly forgotten from the public eye. Can Valentin regain his star status or will he be doomed to obscurity as an outdated relic?

You might think that a film like The Artist would be a dream come true for classic film buffs or movie geeks like myself. And you know what, in some ways, it kind of is. To his credit, Hazanavicius' vision to recreate films of the silent era is commendable. In fact, it's loving recreation of such influential films is hard not to admire. The actors' spot-on pantomime performances evoke memories of classic Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton films, the German-Expressionist-inspired cinematography was had great visual appeal, and the background soundtrack was an inspired ensemble of themes that recreates the era's style of music while providing the appropriate mood to the tone of the respective scenes. At the very least, it's a loving recreation that evokes memories of classic films. If you're a classic movie fan, that might be all the convincing you'll need to see this.

Now, let's be reasonable here folks. No matter how much of a cinema snob or classic film buff (and I am one) you might be... you have to admit that The Artist can't help but come off as more than a little gimmicky. Listen folks... I get it. I love movies, I love classic cinema, and I understand how greatly films from the advent of cinema have affected our modern techniques and perceptions of filmmaking. BUT... simply re-enacting styles of a particular era does not a great movie make. For reasons I'll explain in the next paragraph, The Artist rarely rises above it's gimmicky concept... a well-executed gimmick I admit, but a gimmick nonetheless.

If that plot description sounds familiar to you... you're not alone. This film evokes memories of a similar film, Mel Brooks' underrated 1976 tribute to silent movies called... Silent Movie. By no means his best work, it still nonetheless demonstrated his excellent abilities as a comedic writer. His satirical references and enjoyable characters shined through in an often funny and interesting look at the film industry. It wasn't his most dynamic directorial effort, but the script worked where it needed to. I don't know if The Artist took any influence from Silent Movie, but I couldn't help but think while watching it that this concept has been done before. Hell, the story itself is basically a combination of Singin' in the Rain and A Star Is Born without the catchy musical numbers. As result, the film is often entertaining, but not particularly memorable. Nearly every plot point is by-the-book, the ending is predictable, and despite a couple of creative scenes, mostly plays it safe and takes few chances. Entertaining movie? Yes. Great movie? Not really.

I don't want to sell the movie too short. It has some legitimately funny scenes (most of which involve Valentin's dog), a few touching moments, and one particular creative nightmare sequence that gives the movie a bit of an edge. The nightmare features sound creeping into Valentin's life for the first time, and stands out as one of the film's most creative sequences. Had there been more scenes like that, or had the script delved into the psyche of the characters a bit more, this could have been something really special. Hell, I imagine if they took the script of Silent Movie and combined it with The Artist's slick style and direction... this could have been a new classic. As it is, however, The Artist earns the designation as a well made and often entertaining, though predictable, gimmicky, and mostly forgettable homage to a classic era.

I'm definitely giving The Artist a recommendation, but not a hugely enthusiastic one. It's great to look at and fun to watch, but lacks the proper script to make it truly special. The Oscar nominations it received are mostly well-earned, but the thought of this being named Best Picture this year... yeah, I'm not exactly on board for that. See it and judge for yourself.