Carnage

source: Carnage

This film is mildly recommended. Move over, George and Martha! Good-bye, Nick and Honey! Not since the powerful screen version of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf , almost half a century ago, has a blistering film adaptation from a highly praised play about the disintegration of marriage made it to the big screen. Sadly, the sound and fury of the written word has fell silent to the relentless onslaught of superheroes, teen angst, vampires, and such. Now there's a new couple or two bickering away into your hearts. It's Get the Guest Time once more! The class war has heated up in Roman Polanski's film treatment of the Tony award-winning play, God of Carnage. Co-written by its original playwright Yasmina Reza ( and the director ), and shortening its title to Carnage, the basic story is still left unscathed, but the core of the drama and the over-the-top hysterics are too forced and heavy-handed to support the action. Meet Michael Longstreet and his wife, Penelope, an upper class couple with the middle class values to prove it. Their son was injured in a schoolyard scuffle by another boy and his parents, the upper upper crust Alan and Nancy Cowan have decided to formally apologize for their son's violent misdeed. Nothing goes as planned as conversation and blame escalates throughout the visit. This film version is fairly faithful to its original source ( although the names of the female characters have oddly been changed to protect the guilty ). Polanski cleverly opens the film with a distant shot of the altercation between the two boys, but never reveals the cause or argument leading to the violent act. Most of the action, as in the play, takes place in the spacious New York apartment of the Longstreets with much of the fun being the slow dissolve of the superior-minded one percent's resolve as they gradually become less civil and more savage to each other by the day's end. Yet, with all of Raza's witty remarks and ironic touches still on hand and the dialog zinging along, the film remains inert and not as entertaining as the play. Polanski's direction is solid, but the satirical edge has been blunted, sacrificing the comedy for the melodramatic flourishes with certain monologues either abridged or removed entirely in this new translation. ( Sorely missing is a wonderful ending speech by one of the characters that efficiently summarized the play's theme. ) There is a disparity, a lopsidedness in this film adaptation. Perhaps, this is a vehicle for strong actors who are ideal for these demanding roles. The right casting is so essential to achieve Carnage's vitriolic sting. Polanski has wisely cast Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz as the rich intruders. They bring their baggage with them in full force, even if it's the Louis Vuitton variety. But the director seriously miscasts Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly as the other warring couple, causing a delicate imbalance of the comic elements to suffer in the process. The credibility of each couple is so crucial for the film to work, and it just doesn't here. One never truly accepts Foster and Reilly as real spouses.  Physically and emotionally, they are a mismatch, with Foster emanating classy strength and intellectual superiority and Reilly underplaying his role as more of a schlep rather than a controlling bullying type. This unevenness sets the wrong tone for the wordplay that follows. Carnage is supposed to be a bumpy ride, a dark comedy about our human foibles. But this film version more often fumbles in its clumsy staging. This farce has become far too sobering, even with all the booze being shared. Pour me another. GRADE: B- NOTE: Visit my movie blog for more reviews: www.dearmoviegoer.com

Carnage is Roman Polanski having tons of fun! You've probably read the plot summary, and then saw the cast and decided that it was worth seeing. It definitely is! It's a very short film, and that's a good thing because a setting and plot structure like this can't be too long or else the wit dies down. Thankfully it never did, and Carnage had me laughing really hard, and very often. The entire cast is great, and hard to rank (Reily is definitely the weakest if I had to choose). The cinematography is also brilliant, as it is focused on the right subjects at the right time. I don't expect this to be a big hit at the Academy Awards, but I do wish that Waltz, Winslet, and Foster get some attention, as well as the marvelous script. A minor little masterful film from Polanski. Also, great ending.

The investment broker Nancy Cowan (Kate Winslet) and her husband, the lawyer Alan Cowan (Christoph Waltz) visit the aspirant writer Penelope Longstreet (Jodie Foster) and her husband, the salesman Michael Longstreet (John C. Reilly) in Brooklyn, New York, to amicably discuss the incident between their eleven year-old sons. Zachary Cowan (Elvis Polanski) hit his classmate Ethan Longstreet (Eliot Berger) on the face with a bat in a Brooklyn Park and the injured Ethan will probably miss two teeth. Nancy is a stressed woman; Alan is an annoying workaholic that is more interested in taking work calls using his new cell phone; Penelope is researching Africa and was the mentor of the meeting, based on her idealistic sense of justice; and Michael tries to accommodate the situation. Along the discussion, they eat a cake and drink whiskey, and change their civilized behavior, revealing their real feelings about the situation in a clash of egos and war of the sexes. "Carnage" is a theatrical dark comedy by Roman Polanski about the relationships of parents, sons and a hamster. The cast could not be better and the ironic conclusion shows that in fight of sons, parents should never interfere unless requested. My vote is six. Title (Brazil): "Deus da Carnificina" ("God of the Carnage") Note: On 12 Oct 2020, I saw this film again.

This is not only a movie for the thinking man. One is allowed to sit back 80 minutes, laugh a lot and leave the cinema satisfied. There is no need to discuss and interpret, the message is delivered in nicely-served bits of satirist speeches which are easy to follow. Our civilization is based upon lies. So how does Roman Polanski achieve it to present us this cheerless idea in such an incredibly cheerful way? It's the actors and the characters they play. They are rich, they are cultivated, but not too aloof. One still is able to identify with the characters. The woman with the big heart for Africa played by Jodie Foster and married to the slightly corpulent shop-owner played by John C. Reilly. The other couple consists of the most charming investment consultant played by Kate Winslet and the busy yet stylish lawyer, wonderfully acted by Christoph Waltz. The reason for their little meeting is a fight between two boys. Two civilized married couples having a civilized meeting. If there's something negative, it's sad behind the other's back. But slowly the good attributes become ironically stretched, blurred, we know the roles of the single characters so well that consequently only hate remains. We hate the super-human Jodie Foster. We hate the darling Kate Winslet for her being blatantly drunk and not being able to control herself. We hate John C. Reilly for his diplomacy and simple-mindedness. Only Christoph Waltz remains jet-set. The scene in which he talks to John C. Reilly's mother on the phone is so great you can't draw a border between noble showmanship and sheer arrogance. Great actors, great story (it reminded me a bit of Clybourne Park, but it was better), not too thoughtful, not too thoughtless - but all chewed. I love the moment of cracking the nutshell of a movie, the moment of realization. Sadly, Roman Polanski left that nutshell out. What remains still is very delightful, though.

I expected so much more from this movie. But where was the scintillating dialogue? Where were the zingers between speakers? It was all so basic and obvious. That said, though, the performances were spectacular. Jodie Foster, especially, was wonderful. From the moment we see her on screen, we appreciate how tightly-wound she is, how hard she's working to keep up appearances of being one half of the "perfect couple". Her disintegration is spectacular. Next, kudos to Christoph Waltz. He is at his best when he's cynical, but the scene where he loses "everything" is a bit overplayed. While he certainly carries off the image of little boy lost without his toy - his lifeline - I think it was too much. I blame Polanski - or perhaps the playwright? - for this. Finally, the ending ****SPOILER ALERT***. Too pat, too Hollywood. Did we really need that feel good denouement? In short, great performances, but an overall disappointment.

In the face of such classics as Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby it would be a hollow statement to label Carnage one of Roman Polanski's best films; it's shockingly minimalistic compared to the rest of his catalog, and almost anachronistic in its old fashioned filmmaking style and stripped-down production. Many were probably disappointed by the film purely because of Polanski's name; it might have been better received if it was directed by a young newcomer. Case in point: 12 Angry Men and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, directed by young newcomers Sidney Lumet and Mike Nichols, respectively. Both are still considered among the best each director achieved, but also as experimental debuts that would lead to bigger and more ambitious things. Obviously this is not the case with Carnage, which is a veteran director returning to his roots, to a minimalism not seen in his work since the 50's. And yet, it's so much better than any of the more ambitious films he made in recent years - The Ghost Writer, Oliver Twist, The Pianist and The Ninth Gate all having their merits, but none a real classic or any kind of a surprise. Not to say that Carnage is as good as 12 Angry Men or Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, masterpieces of minimalism and cinematic landmarks. Carnage isn't any real news, cinematically speaking, but it's a wonderful exercise in acting and interaction, and if you're a fan of minimalistic cinema like I am you're bound to find interest in it. I never found it boring for a second - uncomfortable, yes, grating even, but never dull, I was completely drawn in by the wonderful performances of the leads - Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet, Christoph Waltz and John C. Reilly - who manage to covey four complex, fascinating, repulsive and very realistic characters, and by the ever-shifting relationships and alliances between them. While it's clearly a filmed play - and Polanski let the original text shine - he makes excellent use of the possibilities the film format allows, from the bombastic and melodramatic to the quiet and subtle, neither of which is possible on stage, at least not in the same way. Carnage isn't necessarily a masterpiece but it's a wonderful intellectual exercise and one of my favorite films of 2011. For fans of Roman Polanski or for anyone who loved minimalistic films with compact casts, from Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf to Tape and Cube, it's highly recommended.

Working on a "sense of community," the two couples in Carnage engage in slowly evolving urban warfare, precipitated by violence in the playground between their two sons. This adaptation from the Broadway play, God of Carnage, is a soberer (by a little) version of Edward Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Penelope (Jody Foster) and Michael (John C. Reilly) host Nancy (Kate Winslet) and Alan (Christof Waltz) in their Brooklyn apartment to iron out difficulties coming from their sons' fight, which resulted in Penelope and Michael's son's mangled mouth. What begins civilly escalates to a raw verbal mêlée with all players laying bare their prejudices and weaknesses while the issue of the repentance of Nancy and Alan's child becomes a vehicle for class and culture clash. As in director Roman Polanski's Rosemary's Baby, the action is almost exclusively in the small, one bedroom apartment, resulting in an uncomfortable crowding of bodies and egos. And it doesn't take long for the individual differences to surface as one is conciliatory, another confrontational, another detached, and another bewildered. Nor does it take long (only an 80 minute production anyway) for alliances to build (and not necessarily in the same couple) with the refrain "Why are we still here?" becoming the battle cry. Yes, it doesn't turn out well, nor would most confrontations except that the civil veneer usually stays intact for most of us. But when writers Yasmina Reza and Polanski allow the characters to speak their minds, albeit helped by Scotch, the drama gets good and the words become socially lethal. What I like best is the language, not elevated but sassy, smart, and colloquial: "Should we wrap this up?" Yes, it is a film to be wrapped, but there is no real end to the social jousting that goes on in our minds if not our mouths, which are sometimes beaten badly as careless children might do in their play.

"Carnage" is about the carnage that is left over as two couples get together to discuss their sons' recent altercation. It's a play. Not just based on a play, but I'm pretty sure it is the play, word-for-word, scene-for-scene. But make that just one scene. One room, one afternoon, four characters. What makes it even more unique, is that it's a comedy. I don't think I've ever seen a comedy this simplistic in its setting. Jodie Foster plays Penelope, she's the passive-aggressive wife and mother; her husband is played John C. Reilly and he just wants to make nice; their son was the victim. Kate Winslet's Nancy also just wants to make nice; her husband is played by Christoph Waltz and he's the aggressive-aggressive one; their son was the abuser. I know what you're thinking. Is it really that easy to declare one 11 year-old boy the victim and the other the abuser? Aren't they both somewhat to blame for whatever occurred? Well, you try telling that to Foster's Penelope. After the 1 hour and 20 minute straight verbal battle, I am staying clear. "Carnage" is funny because we know what each character is really thinking under their sincere, or false-sincere, passive cover. Eventually, once a bottle of scotch gets consumed, they admit to their feelings, and surprisingly, it still remains funny. That is where the brilliance of the writing comes in. You could apply the old adage, "it's funny because it's true." But there is something to these movies about the real human and family relations accurately displayed beneath a comedy banner. Being a comedy, "Carnage" fared well enough getting Golden Globe nominations, but I am a little miffed at the lack of screenplay nominations. Then again, that's what happens when it is written and directed by Roman Polanski. I don't blame Hollywood for not always wanting to award him. If you don't want to reward him either, then find the play version of "Carnage". I'm sure it's just as good.

Despite it's name, which should imply a very violent movie, this one is a wonderful little movie about social structures and the way its built within us to the point of forcing us to behave in certain ways. The concept for this movie is simplistic to the maximum level. Just 2 couples discussing terms for their kid's fight. What seems to be a nice meeting to solve the problem soon became a carnage fight (of words only, gladly). The movie allow us to explore the aspects of each of the 4 personalities, that's it, that's the movie, and it's great, superb, no music, no special effects, no induced drama, no additional details to color the movie. Simple, powerful, nicely done. From all the movies coming from Hollywood these days, this one is a nice gift, top notch actors, great comedy, nicely put together, what more could you ask. So, go on, see the movie, what are you waiting for!