Hey folks, Harry here... My good buddy Joey - the biggest Madonna addict I've ever met - will be oh so very happy to see this review, meanwhile, Dorothy Parker's eyes will roll into the back of her head when she reads this, because it will mean hours of talk about the upcoming Madonna film that she will have to endure. Hehehehe... Just kidding all! Here's a Madonna MegaFan and his review of SWEPT AWAY...
Before I go on writing this review, I should let you know that I am not a studio plant. What I am is an unabashed Madonna "mega-fan". With that having been said, I did NOT go into "Swept Away" entirely confident. Initially, I thought that the negative buzz surrounding the film had to have been generated by the studio in an effort to undermine people's expectations (lest us not forget that Sony is distributing the film, just over a year after being exposed for reviews from a "phony critic"). But then I saw that horrible, horrible theatrical trailer…easily the worst I have ever seen, and something so painfully unfunny and uninteresting that I was borderline suicidal by the time they offered up the release date. And THEN I saw Lina Wertmueller's 1974 original "Swept Away" and was so stunned by its richness, power, and beauty that I could not fathom it being remade by anyone, ever.
So when a friend lent me the opportunity to attend an early morning trade screening just outside of Boston, I was more than a bit skeptical. I truly believe that Madonna could be the greatest actress in the world with the proper training and direction. However, I couldn't predict ANYONE being able to top Mariangela Melato's superb work in the original, and if Madonna failed to do so, we all know this would mean another opportunity for critics and cynics and everyone outside of her camp to hound on her acting and wobbly film career.
So I started watching the film, and before long my fears were...dispelled. Yes, it's true, Guy Ritchie's "Swept Away" really is a good movie. In it, Madonna plays a rich, vitriolic socialite named Amber, and Adriano Giannini plays a poor, bitter sailor named Giuseppe. I'm not going to bother spilling the plot itself, because most of you know it anyway, and frankly, it sounds pretty stupid: the idea of a rich woman and a poor man trapped together on an island seemed stale when the original hit screens in 1974, and it's infinitely more tired some three decades later. But what makes both films work so well is the complexity of these two characters, and the notion that the confines of society, as opposed to innate human nature, may be the reason for human frailty. Neither character is particularly appealing alone, but together they spark in each other a sense of passion and intense sexuality that is rarely seen in conventional Hollywood love stories.
The film stays surprisingly faithful to the source material, despite my early fears to the contrary. The much talked about "Come-On-A-My-House" sequence was certainly not even hinted at in the original, and I'm still not sure how I feel about it; isolated, it's entertaining and certainly a showcase for Madonna's undying talents as a consummate entertainer, but within the movie it honestly feels rather inappropriate, if not downright silly. And the biggest omission (an unwise removal, in my opinion) is the original's famous sodomy scene. It would have been great to see Madonna's take on this most erotic of film sequences, but I'm guessing that this had more to do with husband Guy Ritchie's own uncomforability than anything else. This is a shame, because this is a great scene to begin with, and wouldn't it be nice to harken back to the days of unrestrained, borderline pornographic sex onscreen? Sigh.
For the most part, though, I was surprised at how well Guy Ritchie adhered to the original film, and I commend him for it. Furthermore, he has not been bitten by the "Americanization" bug in translating the film to a new generation; in other words, the sumptuous characterizations of the first film are not simplified to appeal to younger, dare I say far less intelligent, audiences. Admittedly, the lengthy discourses on Communism versus Capitalism have been toned down (to say the least), but the clashing of ideals is still ever present enough, and this alteration is actually justifiable considering the vastly different sociopolitical climate of today versus Italy in the 1970s.
As some one who was never very interested by Mr. Ritchie's film work in the past, I have to admit to being converted after this movie; he struck me as far more talented, and capable of a greater deal of depth, than "Snatch" or "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels" had led me to believe. Attempting to remake a classic film is hard enough, but attempting to remake a classic European film for an American film market is about five times more challenging. And after years of lousy American remakes of great European films, I was happy to finally enjoy a solid translation.
And yes folks, Madonna, looking as good here as she did in "Desperately Seeking Susan", is very, very good. I won't say "excellent" or "brilliant", because it's not her very best work nor is it quite as dynamic as Ms. Melato, but she proves that she is a damn good actress capable of much more than she is often given credit for. One of the few problems that I had with the original film was the 180 degree turn in the Raffaela character on the island; it may have showed off Melato's range as an actress, but for the character, it did not feel entirely believable. Madonna & Ritchie have ironed out this kink quite nicely, and Amber's "evolution" on the island is easier to swallow and ultimately much more impressive; it adds dimensions to both the character AND the actress that were not present in the first half of the film.
Similarly impressive is Adriano Giannini, whose father, Giancarlo Giannini, played the same role in the original (which I, for one, found strangely creepy). Giannini Jr. is not quite as good an actor as Giannini Sr. (who headlined many of Wertmueller's best works), but he's some one to look out for. He's much more strapping than his father, and he also boasts a tangible sexual presence that should take him far. I hope that the bad press the film has already endured won't stilt his career, because I'd be very interested in seeing where this chap is headed in movieland.
Michel Colombier's emotionally turbulent score is superb, and brilliantly showcases the emotional journey of these two characters. In fact, I found it so personally stirring that I was reminded at times of Michel Legrand's legendary music for "Summer of '42", and this is particularly true during the final minutes of the film; fans can rest assured that the scene at the telephone is damn near as heartbreaking this time around as it was in the original. Having glanced at his filmography on the IMDB, I cannot say that I am too familiar with much of his work (although he did do the music for, of all movies, "Purple Rain"!), but I wouldn't be surprised if he earned the film's sole Oscar nomination.
All in all, I was pleasantly surprised, and wholly satisfied, by Guy Ritchie's take on "Swept Away". True, it does not match up to Lina Wertmueller's original, but that's understandable; hers was a great film, his is a very good film. As for its box office response, only time can really tell, as today's audience might not understand the merging of black comedy, social commentary, and a love story in one film (one wonders, then, how they would respond if "Harold and Maude" were released in 2002!). I'm guessing that mainstream audiences are going to judge this film either as a romantic comedy or a melodrama, rather than accepting it as both, and this could hurt the film's appeal. And even if word of mouth is stellar, the enormous number of new releases coming out on October 11th could easily torpedo its chances of snowballing into a hit. Furthermore, Madonna has not enjoyed unanimous critical approval since "Truth or Dare", so I very much doubt that the critics will be making matters any better. I'm afraid that "Swept Away" will ultimately find its audience on home video, where it can be appreciated outside of the hype and the debate and comparisons to the original.
So why, then, do I even bother writing this review? Well for the same reason I was so inclined to tell everyone how much I loved "Shallow Hal" and "Frailty" immediately after seeing those films. Last year, I thought that "Shallow Hal" was the quirkiest, sweetest, and most deceptively complex American comedy I'd seen in ages, and I wanted to do my part to deflect the unfair criticism it was taking from people who clearly did not understand the notion that a movie from the Farrelly Brothers could have depth and morality at its core. And "Frailty", which I assume is by now enjoying cult status on home video, was, in my opinion, the best American horror film since "The Silence of the Lambs"…and yet it seemed that NO ONE heard of this movie when it was playing at the local multiplex. So with "Swept Away" probably about to face the firing squad of critics and the kiss of death of poor promotion and massive competition, I hope that my voice can be heard by enough people to see this movie and love it as much as I did. I would heartily recommend seeing the 1974 original first, as it will surely enhance your viewing of the remake. However, Guy Ritchie has managed to put together a memorable, entertaining, and refreshingly unconventional film that can stand quite nicely on its own, and thus I enthusiastically recommend "Swept Away".
Madonna MegaFan
