Julianne Moore in Laws of Attraction and The Forgotten: "Do I look happy?!"
Published October 24, 2004
Altogether The End of the Affair adds to the impression that it would be futile for Moore to work in a brisker popular form, but that's exactly what she does in Laws of Attraction, to spectacular effect. (Not that it was popular, but who can solve that mystery?) What's perfect for her is that the movie uses manic farce to crack the self-possession that usually keeps her so remote from us.
Her character Audrey Woods is a professional correlative of Moore: a top-shelf, Yale-trained, Manhattan divorce attorney who is too much of a control freak to have a romantic life. (In other words, she's playing the kind of woman most likely to identify with her as an actress.) In a high-profile case of the kind she's never lost, Audrey is thrown by the deceptively rumpled, low-key style of opposing counsel Daniel Rafferty (Pierce Brosnan), who enjoys discomposing her as they subsequently face off in a series of courtroom battles and subsequent media interviews (in which they speak in code to each other through the camera). They fall in love while breathing the toxic fumes of one failed marriage after another. They just might stand a chance--they've done all their fighting right upfront.
It's best to say outright that Laws of Attraction isn't close to perfect. If the details of the law and courtroom procedure and professional ethics strike you as odd (e.g., an attorney offering to settle a case for the amount of his own fee), the safer guess is that the screenwriters are just making shit up. On the other hand, much of the comic writing is first-rate, but not all of the lines or situations are as good as the best ones. And Michael Sheen and Parker Posey play a divorcing rock-star couple in a style that doesn't suit the movie and is grating in itself. (Posey, the most fearless comedienne of her generation, continues to baffle mainstream moviemakers.)
More problematic is that while Daniel falls for Audrey immediately, and keeps coming at her, that kind of amorous drive is beyond Brosnan, all the more so because it has to be inextricable from the competitive lawyerly tricks he plays on her. Daniel has to be anarchic, impulsive, manipulative, passionate, and steadfast. Brosnan, who doesn't have a star persona but doesn't fuse with his characters, either, isn't centered enough, isn't present enough, to be the embodiment of headlong romantic spontaneity. (It would have been a nifty, unironic pendant to George Clooney's peerless performance in the Coen Brothers' Intolerable Cruelty last year.)
Still, Brosnan is good at slyness and serves as a foil to set off Moore's tightly-wound, nutcracking A-student attorney. (She lays out an array of colored pens to take notes during trial and you know each color has a very specific application.) Frances Fisher as Audrey's 56-year-old mother, still very much interested in whatever game is afoot and dismayed by her stay-at-home daughter, also helps to bring Moore out by contrast. Fisher's smirk is the mother's sign of recognition that as difficult as life is, as much doing as it takes, it's still full of unexpected and intriguing opportunities. She may be a high-maintenance witch at some level (she objects to being called "Mom" in public), but she's right about her daughter, who should be taking a chance with Daniel, especially since she wants to, rather than sitting at home eating junk food and watching him on TV. (Fisher is teasingly smooth and has never been more effective.)
- Julianne Moore in Laws of Attraction and The Forgotten: "Do I look happy?!"
- Published: October 24, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Video: Art House, Video: Comedy, Video: Drama, Video: Family, Video: Horror, Video: Romantic, Video: Romantic Comedies, Video: SF, Video: Thriller
- Writer: Alan Dale
- Alan Dale's BC Writer page
- Alan Dale's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
Alan , thx for this. I've always admired Moore's incredible beauty and you describe that well. I actually thought The End of the Affair was a really good adaptation, but that's okay. It was true to the book and the chemistry between Fiennes and Moore struck me as quite real and believable - she's very comfortable with herself nude and that's sexy to me. but that said, i see what you are saying about her holding back a bit - that sounds true enough. I thought she was magnificent in Magnolia, as was (incredibly) Tom Cruise who did a remarkable job.
Thx for this - as a fan of Moore, it gives me a lot of information and other films to see as well.
Cheers,
Sadi
I never thought of Moore's acting in that way, but yeah, she does sort of have that restrained (maybe nervous) chuckle going. I'm going to have to disagree with Sadi and agree with you, Alan, on her job in Magnolia. However, I'm going to agree with Sadi on Tom though. I can't argue this point enough, but I thought he was completely robbed of the Oscar for his role in that film. As good as Michael Caine is, I felt Tom did much better that year. Oh well.
Thanks for all the comments. I feel a little guilty b/c Moore IS clearly talented and dedicated, way above average, plus she seems like a nice person. That said, I wish she could let loose more the way she does in Laws of Attraction. Is she really comfortable being naked on film or is it just that she does it if it fits her concept of the role (which is a way of not being in your naked body while it's being filmed)? I just can't see her shaking it in a movie for the hell of it.
As for Magnolia: I'm not a Tom Cruise fan. He's a hard-worker, with lots of energy and focus, but he's strictly "product." My favorite participants in that movie were Henry Gibson, Melinda Dillon, and the frogs.
Your not serious thinking your interruption of Julianne Moore is accurate. The two films that she's been chastise for, you think are her better performance? If you want to write a lengthy article about an actress then maybe next time you should do some research on what motivates the actress. Julianne Moore has publicly stated that she does not want to be a "movie star", she wants to be an actress. She does not want to be a larger then life character that saves the world, she simply wants to do stories about real people. Which she has done quite well.
So I guess I'm the only one who finds her pompous, creepy and irritating?
Dave
I think I can "agree" in some sense with both of the last two posts, though mb isn't going to like this "interruption" of Moore's career any more than my original one: the problem with Moore is that she cares far more about her art than she does about the audience's enjoyment of it. The exception is Laws of Attraction, in which she lets loose with an amazing blend of skill and instinct. I kept rewinding little moments just to relive the kick I got out of her expressions and gestures and vocal tricks.














excellent job Alan, very subtle and thorough analysis of Moore, I learned a lot - thanks!