Venice: A Second Take on "Carnage"

[Editor's Note: Ferdi, pictured left, is one of our two correspondents in Venice this year. Which affords us the rare pleasure of reading two pieces on the same movie back to back. I hope you're feeling appropriately spoiled since we're getting original photography and everything! Here's another opinion on Carnage. -Nathaniel R.]

Carnage (2011)

80 acid minutes of poison, screams, metaphorical scratches, literal vomits and memorable laughs. God, this movie rocks. Maybe it’s the original stage material which is so funny, clever and so well translated to the screen. Maybe it’s the eye of European mega-auteur Roman Polanski, who has rarely taken a misstep in his career. Maybe it’s just me: I love movies where all the focus is on the actors branch. The fact is I can’t stop thinking of Carnage since this early morning press screening.

What else can I say? You have to sit and watch and have fun. You're taken by the tension of the story without even taking a breath from start to finish. It’s a pitch-perfect arthouse movie, a little, subversive masterpiece about verbal violence and adult hypocrisies; a complex, powerful, crazy kammerspiel that begins, as many of you already know, as a polished comedy of manners and ends as a cruel psychological massacre. 

Christoph and Kate are "best in show" says Ferdi

The pleasure of seeing these incredible actors going so over the top has no price. John C Reilly is surprisingly right for the part, hilarious and totally convincing. Christoph Waltz is once again genius and effortless as in Inglorious Basterds. Maybe the weak link is Jodie Foster who has some great moments that prove she can be very funny but she is too tight and anxious from the very beginning. (She is a great straight-forward physical actress but the part required something more subtle.) In fact, Foster doesn’t really seem to catch the satirical tone of the pochade; she goes more and more hysterical from one scene to the next instead of being multi-dimensional. This is were Kate Winslet excels. She’s the real standout, absolutely exhilarating without even doing too much.

All that said, I don’t see any Oscar play for anyone (Winslet aside, maybe, as supporting actress, but it would be a category fraud, because they all are leads), neither for the movie, which is possible too cynical, dark, weird and beautiful by Academy standards.

Kate Winslet in Venice © Fabrizio Spinetta

Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz in Venice © Fabrizio Spinetta

Comments

[James T]

Great! OF course, I can't know how I will react but the more opinions the better. And it's nice that at least one person thinks Winslet is best in show.

I think some people's problem with the movie/play is that it's not very deep or universal so I guess my reaction will depend mostly on whether I'll agree with that criticism or not. But almost everyone thinks it's at least very enjoyable.

[Gemma]

Most people have said Winslet is the weakest and that Foster and Waltz were the best.

[NATHANIEL R]

Gemma -- that's not what i've been hearing. I suppose it must be mixed because at least both reports here say Foster is the weak link.

[Alex]

I honestly don't care either way, but I had the same thought as Gemma. I'm shocked to have read the two reviews here diss Foster, since I've read otherwise elsewhere.
Still, it's a little suspect that pretty much none of the other reviews barely give a second thought to Winslet (and when they do, it's negative) while reviewers for Film Experience just happen to love her performance. I don't think I can call myself an actressexual but apparently Winslet is one of y'alls favorites, right? :=) Not trying to cause trouble, but the coincidence struck me.

[Steve G]

It's fun reading all these different opinions about who is 'best in show'. Can be boring when everyone agrees...

[James T]

Alex - I have read many reviews and I assure you not everyone likes Foster and dislikes Winslet in this. I think the only common thing in almost all the reviews is love for Waltz.

By the way, I'm an actressexual and Winslet is my favorite actress but I can totally take any negative thing any reviewer has to say about her.

[caro]

i dislike when critics reduce an ensemble of actors to "who is the best of the show or who steals the show?" when it only depends on what he/she must act

[Malcolm]

Before the release of Carnage, almost everyone thought WInslet would have the least something (maybe the weak link in terms of the characters). Now, Foster gets the not-so-good words.

Anyway, I am very excited to watch this film! When you have four very talented actors, you should not miss it. :)

[Gemma]

It's awfully funny how the most negative reviews Foster got were from this same site though. Variety was a little mixed, but elsewhere she won raves. She was the only one mentioned for Oscar too. Winslet has been mixed, but she gets bundles of praise here. Still suspect some actressexual bias, so I will see on my own...

I kind of agree with Caro. Critics and bloggers try too hard with seeing who is the weakest or strongest even when you have four excellent actors there. Also people walk in with preconceptions about what an actor is or they want to compare to what the actors on stage on the play did.

[Blinking Cursor]

As much as I like all four actors, I wish that the producers cast Marcia Gay Harden in the role of Veronica. She did after all win the Tony award for that role. Plus, she's also an Oscar winner too, like Winslet and Foster.

<sigh> Guess she wasn't considered bankable enough.

[goran]

After Foster's embarrassingly awkward 'slyness' in Inside Man, I'd be shocked if she wasn't the weakest link here.