home | art & architecture | books & cds | dance | destinations | film | opera | television | theater | archives
For movie connoisseurs and critics, a films
style is often as important as its content if not more so. After all, content comes in
many forms, but whats the point of loving film if the presentation can be delivered
just as fruitfully in a different medium? Of course style comes in many forms
elegant (Luchino Viscontis The
Leopard), lyrical (Terence Malicks Badlands),
kinetic (John Woos The
Killer), realist (Vittorio De Sicas The Bicycle Thief), minimalist (Tsai
of the Neon God), or deadpan (Stanley Kubricks Dr.
Strangelove) to name a few. Mastery of style is an easy measure of
authorial aptitude for critics because in many ways, its as hard to land properly as
the most difficult gymnastic vault. So many elements and so many tasks by so many people
go into making a movie, that getting all that to cohere into the pitch-perfect style is a
minor miracle. Paul Pavlikovskys My Summer of Love looks like its going
to perform just such a miracle during its first half, but then the content gets in the
In the opening moments, young red-head Mona (Nathalie Press) lies in the grass amid the hazy midday sun when she opens her eyes to find a figure on horseback looking down on her. The way Pavlikovsky shoots this, the audience is Mona, with all the attendant repose followed by intensity of light, heat, and momentary confusion. Working-class Mona has just met Tamsin (Emily Blunt), a beautiful and wealthy young woman home from boarding school for the summer. Soon the two are commiserating over sorrows Mona over her older brother Phils Jesus obsession since he left prison and Tamsin over her sister Sadies death from anorexia as well as her fathers adultery. After some swooning, Heavenly Creatures-like bonding, the two women declare their undying passion for each other.
Pavlikovsky keeps this working as a visually sumptuous tone poem, a free-spirited, youthful, joyful romantic idyll between the two women. But midway through, he decides to switch the emphasis to narrative. While initially joining Mona in her mockery of Phils Jesus fanaticism, Tamsin appears to find interest in what Phil (Paddy Considine) has to say about finding meaning through Christ while also noting how attractive he is. She gets the hesitant Mona to join Phil in a ceremony putting up a giant crucifix on the mountain above their small Yorkshire town. But is Tamsin serious or is she just playing Phil? Or is Phil playing her?
Unfortunately, the more the plot takes over, the more Pavlikovsky falters, until at the end, he reveals one of those now all-too-common twists that makes everything that came before a convoluted conceit. In hindsight, the movie is primarily about lies and fakery, but only in hindsight. Once this is clear, it is equally clear just how contrived the plot was just to make these points. Pavlikovsky ends up falsifying everything his style was working so effectively to create, and only because he ultimately chose content over style.
- George Wu