The Shape of Things
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.82 You Save: $8.16 (54%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $1.50 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Shape of Things
Movie Review: Labute at his best
Summary: 5 Stars
Deception. Hate. Cheating. Heartbreak. For some, these are aspects of life and relationships best not explored in films. For all others, there is Neil LaBute, a writer/director who's fearless when it comes to exploring the darker side of human nature. LaBute exploded onto the scene in 1997 with the controversial "In The Company Of Men," a film about two young men who play a devastatingly cruel trick on a deaf female coworker. Subsequent efforts such as "Your Friends And Neighbors" and "Nurse Betty" showed LaBute continuing to push the envelope while enlisting A-list actors such as Morgan Freeman, Renee Zellweger and Ben Stiller.
"The Shape Of Things" shows LaBute at the top of his game. Paul Rudd plays Adam, a shy, nerdy college student who works part-time at a local museum. While working one day he meets Evelyn (Rachel Weisz), an attractive graduate art student who surprisingly takes a liking to Adam. The two begin seeing each other, later embarking on an ill-fated double date with Adam's former roommate Philip (Fred Weller), a cocky jock who delights in mocking Adam; and Jenny (Gretchen Mol), a fellow student who the gregarious Philip "stole" from Adam.
Before long, Adam has fallen hard for Evelyn, who fulfills his every sexual desire and slowly begins transforming his physical appearance. She changes his hair, gets him to lose weight via a new running regiment, overhauls his wardrobe and more. As Adam's physical transformation progresses, he changes emotionally as well, gaining a newfound sense of confidence. His new demeanor catches the attention of Jenny, and flirtation ensues. From there the games of deception begin, and it all builds to a brutal climax in which more than one character experiences the ultimate in humiliation.
It sounds like the potential stuff of soap opera. But LaBute is the rare filmmaker who strikes a raw nerve with his words and cinematic style, and he uses the setup to make one stingingly perceptive observation after another about art, humanity, and relationships. The film, adopted from LaBute's play (which starred the same actors) sometimes feels stagy, but with dialogue this sharp, who's complaining?
Each actor is standout. Weisz, the most well known of the crew, is surprisingly good, even delivering lengthy monologues about the nature of art with ease, and looking stunning every minute. Rudd, who had a long-running role on "Friends," makes the transformation from nebbish nerd to sharp-dressed stud with impressive ease. Weller also makes a strong impression as the classic slimy-male LaBute character. The solid Mol, another future star, rounds out the impressive cast. My only complaint: Where's LaBute regular Aaron Eckhart, one of the best actors in the biz?
Stellar acting aside, the movie belongs to LaBute, who with each of his films continues to show that's he one of the most unique voices in American cinema. It may not be perfect, but it's still exciting to watch LaBute climb out on a limb and take chances. This is a film, like LaBute's incendiary debut "In The Company Of Men," that's guaranteed to divide audiences and promote debate. Where else can you see a film where the lead actress flips off the audience during a pivotal scene? Whether you're flipping her the bird right back or cheering her on, "The Shape Of Things" is one film you don't want to miss.
Movie Review: Greatly Misunderstood
Summary: 5 Stars
I think that many people are surprised at this film and do not view it in its intent because they do not know the story behind it. The film is actually a stage play and is therefore set up as one. The actors performed the play onstage for several months before beginning shooting and therefore their portrayal of the characters is much like that of actors onstage. The delivery of the lines is a little overexaggerated because the script is written that way. The scenes are comprised of long chunks, not like films are made today. With modern movies, there are cuts everywhere, usually not allowing many scenes to last longer than five minutes without cuts back and forth between character and giving more of an illusion of movement. However, becuase this film is based on a stage play, it is shot very much like it has been staged in a theater, not cutting back and forth between the characters every ten seconds and giving more of a lingering view on the characters. This is not to highlight physical movement, but to allow the viewer to absorb the main focus of the film: the dialogue. The key to understanding and enjoying the film is to listen closely to what is being said and the subtleties of the language. As far as film to screen transition, I believe the director did well, considering he was trying to preserve the feel of the film as a staged play. It is executed very well, especially since it was shot in under twenty days and is an independent film. I would agree that if I had not known that this had been a play before it was a film, I would be greatly confused. It is clear that the purpose of the film was not to make a big motion picture based on the play, but to preserve the feeling and nuance of the play in a film version. Knowing that this is the motivation behind the movie, I feel that people would be able to enjoy the film more and really allow themselves to think about the issues it raises, for that's what the purpose is; not to impress, but to inspire thinking.
Movie Review: A Real and Sophisticate Horror Movie
Summary: 5 Stars
Neil Labute's look at the way we let each other change ourselves to be the perfect mate is almost as good as his disturbing, and down right horrifying first movie "In The Company Of Men." Paul Rudd plays Adam, a dorky security guard that meets an outcast named Evelyn play by the beautiful and extremely talented Rachel Weisz. They begin to go out with each other, and Evelyn begin to change Adam a little at first in his appearance and demeanor. The change slowing gives Adam the confidence he always wanted and the people in his life begins to take notice in the sudden changes in him. Then the way Evelyn continues to change Adam becomes a bit extreme, even going as far as to have him go and get plastic surgery. In true Neil Labute fashion, nothing is what is meant to be, and the reasons for the changes in Adam becomes horrifying clear in the end, and nothing will ever be the same again for him, and the people around him.This is hands down Neil's best movie since In the Company of Men. The only problem I have with the film is the fact that it can't shake off it's stage roots and some of the scenes feel too off key to be real but besides that, its as scary and as disturbing as it's predecessor. Paul Rudd is great as the low maintenance Adam, and he brings a sense of humanity to his role and a sense of mischief as well. Gretchen Mole and Fred Weller are good as his bewildered friends, but It's the phenomenal performance of Rachel Weisz, who blends a sense of danger, insecurity, and deadly smarts in her role of Evelyn that makes this film as powerful as it is. Weisz is down right riveting, and you can not take your eyes off of her. She is so good in fact that in a way, you sympathize with her character, and kind of root for her even when you know deep in your gut that she is up to no good. Her performance is worthy of an Academy Award, and in my mind will not forgotten anytime soon.
Movie Review: Find this and watch it...
Summary: 5 Stars
Neil LaBute is known for making film where his main characters are forced into a very unfortunate position, usually by the cruelty and sadism of others. As I was waiting for the premiere of The Shape of Things, my friends and I were taking bets as to who was going to get screwed and by whom. I say this because as the events of the film unfolded, my group of friends was not only impressed with the film in spite of having those expectations, but that no one was able to even remotely guess what was about to happen, or how it was going to happen. This film was first written for the stage, and it was performed in both New York and London before being adapted for the screen. That's something that shows in the film, as the scenes within the film are lengthy, without a lot of movement of location within scenes. There are any scenes of characters walking from one place to another, every action happens within the context of that particular scene. This has an interesting effect of the film, one I enjoyed on the grounds that Neil elected to leave the performances and the dialogue as the primary fireworks of the film, rather than attempting to use other devices to express the story.
The cast was the same group as performed the piece on the stage, Paul Rudd, Rachel Wiesz, Gretchen Mol and Fred Weller. All of who give the film its depth, humor and ultimate message, which, rest assured, Neil has not lost his desire to engage the audience in questions concerning societal conventions, in this case, concerning the boundaries of love and relationships.
Movie Review: Quirky and weird, but worth it
Summary: 5 Stars
The characters spend a lot of time obsessing and arguing about things that hardly seem worth the trouble, but there's more than enough to keep you interested. First of all, it's nicely unusual in that it's more of a PLAY, which is what it was originally and they didn't tamper with that, yet it works well as a film; you don't find yourself wishing for more. It's basically just four characters, and you don't really need much of anything else -- just put them out there and let them go at it. Plus, as luck would have it, they're charming and attractive, which helps (actually one of the guys isn't necessarily that attractive at first, but he gets better as he goes along), and, in spite of themselves they're somehow interesting.
A major issue of the film is the question of "What is 'art'" (don't worry too much about this until you're done seeing it). To me, the question almost doesn't matter, because whether it's art or not, all I know is that I'm against it. But still, while many people find the portrayal troubling and I did too, I'm sorry but I also found it funny as hell. We don't hear this said very much, but I'm sure I'm not alone in it.
This was my first exposure to Neil LaBute, and I see that regardless of how we might feel about any particular one of his works, he's an original and interesting writer and filmmaker. You never know what you're going to get from him, except that it's going to be different than what you'd get from anybody else.