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.)
What's amazing is seeing Moore use the energy wasted in Magnolia to particularize the fearful expectation behind that glassy smile--she loses her composure time after time with a slapstick jolt. In the opening sequence, for instance, Audrey reassures her client with professional compassion that a last-minute switch of the other side's attorney can only be a good thing for them. The movie then cuts to Audrey calming a panic attack in a bathroom stall by stuffing a Hostess Sno Ball into her mouth. It isn't just the juxtaposition that's funny, it's that Moore makes the jump without losing her highly articulated skill. (She seems to be able to roll her eyeballs separately.)
Losing it with new variations on her style, Moore is like Julia Roberts gone dizzy in My Best Friend's Wedding (1997) but with the pointed technique of a stage-trained actress. And she's brittle without seeming as damned fragile as she usually does. Plus, comedy extends her emotional range at the same time it limbers her up physically. In Laws of Attraction her disappointment is grounded in palpable romantic and sexual longing. Audrey's not just another frozen sufferer; she may be a high-powered control freak, a priss with only a professional interest in her own glamor, but she's averse to emotional risks not because she lacks feelings but just the opposite. In the course of the movie she changes from a woman who maintains perfect control in public and private to a woman who stands to lose something personal she can't bear to lose, and for once I was able to identify with her. This is the best female-yuppie comedy since Diane Keaton was startled back to life in Baby Boom (1987), but it's also as shrewdly judged a use of an actress's dominant characteristics to enliven her screen image as any since Bette Davis put her melodramatic punctuation to comic use in All About Eve (1950).








Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
excellent job Alan, very subtle and thorough analysis of Moore, I learned a lot - thanks!
2 - sadi
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
3 - visualsimplicity
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.
4 - Alan Dale
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.
5 - mb
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.
6 - Dave Nalle
So I guess I'm the only one who finds her pompous, creepy and irritating?
Dave
7 - Alan Dale
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.