|
|
WONDER BOYS
Movie Review
|
|
I have no idea what "wonder boys" are. I
assume it's one of many questions that are answered in the novel but which go ignored in
this film adaptation.
As it turns out, it doesn't really matter who the WONDER BOYS are. The film has enough
substance and, especially, ribald and dark, dark humor to carry it despite a few minor
flaws like this.
A very deep character study, WONDER BOYS revolves around Pittsburgh professor and novelist
Grady Tripp (Douglas), now struggling with his second novel, which has stretched into
2,600 pages and years in the making. Daytime, he teaches writing to the likes of James
(Maguire) and Hannah (Holmes), while attempting to hide his affair with the (married)
University Chancellor (McDormand) and keeping his unfinished novel from the grubby hands
of his editor (Downey).
Grady's relationship with the talented (yet nearly sociopathic) James becomes the focus of
the picture, as Grady tries to coax the hidden writing talent out of James, all while they
take a wild ride together through a Pittsburgh winter storm.
The depth of character development in WONDER BOYS defies any hack film critic's
two-paragraph description of them. Suffice it to say that WONDER BOYS is often deep and
invariably quite funny, especially if you're a fan of black comedy. Case in point: The
film really gets going when James kills the blind dog that is attacking Grady's leg. I
never knew a dog's carcass could be so funny, and I'm something of an animal lover.
That said, WONDER BOYS is no KINGPIN. This is a sophisticated movie for a sophisticated
audience. The cast is universally outstanding. It's especially good to see McDormand in a
good role again, and Douglas and Maguire turn in very memorable performances, redeeming
them both for some recent, lackluster pictures.
Go. Laugh. Enjoy a little intelligence at the movies for once.
Copyright © 2000 filmcritic.com
