An early review of the Keira Knightley/Michael Pitt/Doc Ock period romance, SILK, spins in!!!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. We have, for your reading pleasure, an early review of the romantic drama SILK, from the director of RED VIOLIN and starring Michael Pitt (THE DREAMERS), Keira Knightley (MY DREAMS) and Alfred Molina (the badass supreme). Sounds like the movie was a little too slow in this early stage for our reviewer. I have to disagree with him on Michael Pitt as an actor, though. Sure, he has his thing, his personality is kind of set as an actor, but that's not always a bad thing. He was great in DREAMERS, HEDWIG AND THE ANGRY INCH and played really well with Steve Buscemi in the Sundance flick DELIRIOUS, hopefully coming soon to a theater near you. Let's get on to the lukewarm review. Hopefully there is still much time to tweak and perfect and we'll end up with a superior product. Light spoilers below.
Hey Harry, I caught a test screening for the new Francois Girard (Red Violin) film, SILK, last night here in Toronto. SILK is about a 19th Century French silk merchant named Herve who is dispatched to Japan to smuggle healthy silkworms back to his little town where everyone depends on silk production to make their living. While in Japan, he becomes obsessed with the concubine belonging to the head of the village that supplies him with the silkworms. The obsession threatens to derail his marriage and his sanity after he returns to France. The cast includes Michael Pitt as Herve, Keira Knightley as Herve's wife Helene, Alfred Molina and Mark Rendall. I'm a bit conflicted on the movie. I'm assuming that the pacing was meant to be slow and deliberate and I normally don't mind that as long as I feel like it's a means to an end, unfortunately, the film really lacked the drama it required to make me believe that Herve's obsession with the concubine was huge enough to have affected his life in the way the story is telling us it does. The stakes simply aren't high enough. We're made to believe that the obsession is this big pall hanging over the marriage of Herve and Helene, even though we see how devoted they are to their marriage and one another several times (for those of you that care, many of these scenes feature Keira Knightley in the buff) throughout the movie. Because of this, I was confused about what it was that Herve found so captivating about a concubine he has almost no contact with over the 15-year span of the movie. Apparently the film is based on a book in which Herve and the concubine communicate through several letters over the years but in this adaptation, there is one 6 word letter that passes between the two of them and they never actually speak directly to one another during the three or four times they see each another. One of the issues could be that the movie ran just under two hours, which is a great thing when you're bored but given the epic nature of the story-telling, I'm wondering if the film has been cut down for length and in the process, much of the drama was lost. Another issue is the cast. I'm not a huge Michael Pitt fan and although I didn't hate him in this role, he really didn't make an effort to change his facial expression or his monotone narration. Keira Knightley was completely miscast. She's far too young for the role of Helene and although they actually made an effort to age Michael Pitt's character to match the 15-year time span of the movie, Keira looks and acts 19 from beginning to end even though her charcter is supposed to be 34 by the movie's end. The supporting cast, including Alfred Molina (the scenes with him playing pool are the best in the film) are all great and the film is absolutely beautiful to look at. I really wanted to be along for the ride and for some scenes I was but I don't think the film really reached its potential. I'm hoping that after last night's test screening the film will be re-cut and some of the story issues will be fixed - although if the weeping man next to me is any indication, the info the producers gather from the audience may not be too helpful and the film will stay as is. Thanks for reading and if you use this, please call me Sugar Malone.
Readers Talkbackcomments powered by Disqus
+ Expand All
May 3, 2007, 5:26 p.m. CST
Now if only this was a topic I gave a shit about.
May 3, 2007, 5:27 p.m. CST
I'd watch KK read the phone book. Naked.
May 3, 2007, 5:29 p.m. CST
You bastard. Oh, and 3rd?
May 3, 2007, 5:30 p.m. CST
by Pound Sand
May 3, 2007, 5:35 p.m. CST
May 3, 2007, 6:10 p.m. CST
Do not love Keira Knightley... She needs to eat some yams and put some meat on them bones... them bones, them dry... (ok, I won't finish it). Indeed Molina has god-like acting skills so for that alone I'll be there.
May 3, 2007, 9:52 p.m. CST
I'll throw you the whip..
May 3, 2007, 10:39 p.m. CST
It's like, a law of nature or something.
May 4, 2007, 1:25 a.m. CST
His name is ALFRED MOLINA, and 'Doc Ock' is the LEAST of all the roles he's played.
May 4, 2007, 3:38 a.m. CST
Didn't you read the interview they did with him a couple of weeks ago? They worship Molina on this site (and rightly so) for his entire career. He's the only person other than Bruce Campbell that I've seen them frequently refer to as 'the Man-God ...' for pity's sake.
May 4, 2007, 8:42 a.m. CST
by Grammaton Cleric Binks
If someone else can distract him from a naked Keira Knightley.
May 4, 2007, 3:06 p.m. CST
This plotline looks so outrageously boring. I bet it wins 9 oscars. I do like Michael Pitt though, i'll see it.
May 4, 2007, 3:51 p.m. CST
What's his appeal?
May 5, 2007, 1:59 a.m. CST
I'd like to wrap that tom-boy beanpole around my beanpole. OK, I need to grab some Vasoline. Bye!
May 5, 2007, 6:14 a.m. CST
It's a nice enough read, tragic romance with a twist ending. VERY short, I mean the copy I have is literally pocket sized. It's basically a short story - I don't know how it came to be published as a standalone, in a tiny little book, but there you go. It's very much a fable - characters are sketched out with just enough detail to give them pathos. Everything is looks and glances and implications, with love-at-first-sight between characters who are then immediately seperated (for years? for ever?). Anyway, the reviewer wondered why it was only 90 mins long - it's cos the source really is that slender.<p> One question - who plays the Japanese male and female leads in this? The Shogun (?) and his concubine?
- JJ Abrams reveals a rusted out, beat up awesome looking X-Wing in new video! -- 529 total posts 143 posts
- Idris Elba to play one of Guy Ritchie's KNIGHTS OF THE ROUNDTABLE! -- 313 total posts 135 posts
- 4th Week of July 2014 PICKS & PEEKS: Werewolves, BLUE RUIN, Nordic Noir, ALL CHEERLEADERS DIE + more! -- 100 total posts 100 posts
- For your viewing pleasure, a 5-minute clip of Star Lord and his GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY! -- 232 total posts 87 posts
- Edgar Wright's Next Project Revealed! -- 81 total posts 81 posts
- Will Ferrell and Adam McKay to bring you MANIMAL: THE MOVIE! -- 72 total posts 72 posts
- Could This Be The (Barebones) Plot Of STAR WARS EPISODE VII?! SPOILERS! -- 1499 total posts 56 posts
- A Recently Recovered Gene Roddenberry Interview Leads To A Kickstarter About The Early Days Of STAR TREK!! -- 53 total posts 53 posts
Longest. Marathon. Ever.
FXX To Air All 25 Years Of THE SIMPSONS Over 12 Days Starting Aug. 21!! -- 84 total posts 51 posts
Only Seven Episodes
Of LOUIE Next Year!! -- 60 total posts 50 posts