In the wrong hands, this 'Dylan Thomas' biopic could have been a disaster.
The myth of the great, drunken Welsh bard has been covered by a million words and numerous documentaries over the fifty-plus years since his early death at the age of 39, but only a worthy TV film from the 70s has tried to portray Thomas on screen.
But with a well-rounded script, confident direction, stunning cinematography and top-drawer ensemble playing, The Edge of Love is a triumph.
None of those documentaries has ever got under Dylan's "robe of skin" properly; a pity, because the story of the poet and his tempestuous relationship with wife Caitlin is one of the twentieth century's great love stories.
A man of huge paradox - the home-loving Welsh-baiter, the womaniser with a vast love for his wife, the drunk who could nurse a pint all night - this apocalyptic genius of a writer is well captured in Sharman Macdonald's perceptive and lyrical script, and brilliantly brought to life by Matthew Rhys's superb performance.
His Dylan reflects all the wit, wisdom, machismo, grumpiness and vulnerability of the real man.
Yet his performance in no way overshadows those of the other principal players.
Sold by the marketing boys as a steamy menage a trois romp, this film is much more than that.
The vibrant filmwork, with myriad huge close-ups of the stars is never compromised by their combined beauty, and the gritty reality of war-time London looms as large.
With a by-turns lush and pounding sound-track, life lived on the edge in that horrendous, super-charged time is thrillingly rendered.
The 'facts', such as they are, at the heart of this story, mean less than the sum of the film's parts.
Ambitious, intelligent and seldom heavy-handed, John Maybury's direction allows the grand themes of love, friendship and genius, the horrors of war and its aftermaths, to float along on an uneasy, queasy sea of booze, sex and sudden violence.
The film moves from war-ravaged yet still faintly glamorous London to the stark rural splendour of the Cardiganshire coast, as Dylan, Caitlin and their friend Vera escape the capital with young children in tow, while Vera's new soldier husband William Killick returns behind enemy lines.
There is genuine physical and emotional tension between the three, as Dylan's wife and his childhood sweetheart become very close.
Sienna Miller and Keira Knightley have never been better, and Miller's portrayal of the complex Caitlin is especially impressive.
Mrs Thomas was apparently a difficult, wilful, disappointed woman, with a sexual "itch" she just had to "scratch" and a capacity for the booze that left Dylan floundering.
Miller gives the character a depth never explored in words or performance before, except perhaps for Phil Bowen's haunting one-woman show The Same Boat.
Miller's slim, ethereal beauty seems much heavier and more earth-bound here, and her Caitlin is sulky and sultry, yet alive and exhilarating.
Playing up to this standard are Keira Knightley, who shows here she's much more than just a pretty face, and Cillian Murphy.
'Accuracies'
Knightley's charged scenes with all three of the others are utterly convincing, as is Murphy's change from carefree soldier in love to traumatised war hero.
My only gripes with the film are a few rather unnecessary grainy slo-mos, and some quibbles with factual accuracies.
Dylan's statement in court when Killick is tried for shooting up the Thomas's bungalow, portrays the poet in an unfair and inaccurate light, and the substitution of the Thomas's son Llewelyn for daughter Aeronwy is perplexing.
Overall though, this is as good a film as any Dylanaphile could have wished for.
The man and his story are legion and legend, and there are many fine films that could be made about him. This is certainly one of them.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: SkyLight,
Posts: 216 | Location: space | Registered: April 28, 2003
Originally posted by MissyGal: This film was already an Oscar contender last year, only it went by the name of Atonement.
Ah, so that's why it says in the trailer "This year's Atonement, only better..." Is that supposed to be a complement?
2009 Oscars FYC:
Lead Actor - Richard Jenkins, The Visitor Lead Actress - Sally Hawkins, Happy Go Lucky Supporting Actor - Haaz Sleiman, The Visitor Supporting Actress - Amy Adams, Doubt Original Screenplay - Thomas McCarthy, The Visitor
Posts: 2263 | Location: Why Do You Want To Know? | Registered: November 21, 2006
Originally posted by Mr. America: That BBC review above was the only good one I could find for what looks like a major piece of suckness.
Really? I actually thought that the stills looked really nice; although I still haven't seen the trailer yet. My schadenfreudy hope is that it doesn't do well now if Miller is going to be singled out. I'm slowly beginning to well not like her but at least not be annoyed by her now especially after seeing the great photos of her as The Baroness. However, I still haven't totally forgot that all I knew of her for many years was as Jude Law's on-again/off-again girlfriend, the biting toes at the Oscar party which I thought was a rumor until I saw the picture, the ****tsburgh incident, etc. At least now she finally does seem to be more about her career and not just as a hanger on.
quote:
Too bad...guess I'm going to have to look forward to "Labor Pains."
Oh Lindsay will you never learn. It's nice to see someone like Miller go from being a tabloid fixture famous for nothing basically to a respectable actress, but I guess that Hollywood has to maintain some kind of balance since Lohan's career did the complete opposite. She had potential at one time, but I'm losing hope with every bad movie she does or news story (like they were really going to nominate you for an Emmy, pfft) that she'll ever be able to turn her life around since at this time it still seems that she's more interested in partying, getting high and drunk, and having her picture taken than having an actual career anymore.
Is that supposed to be a complement?
