Lantana DVD > Reviews > What many other films should have been...

Author's product rating:   

Did you enjoy it?	Loved it
Story	Good
Characters / Performances	Outstanding
Special Effects	Weak
How does it compare to similar films?	Outstanding

Advantages:	see op, please
Disadvantages:	see op, please

Recommend to potential buyers:

yes

Full review

I'll admit to the release of Lantana having passed me by entirely, but I am indebted to the friend who pointed me in the right direction. This film is a familiar spin on many tried and tested themes, so not particularly original, but at long last the technique of interweaving lives has been handled realistically and sensitively.

Lantana tells the story of a group of people (in Australia) who are inextricably linked through therapy, infidelity, neighbourly acquaintance, work and basically unhappiness. The main character is policeman Leon Zat (Anthony LaPaglia) in the midst of a midlife crisis. His wife Sonja (Kerry Armstrong) is having therapy in secret, with Dr. Valerie Sommers (Barbara Hershey) a recently bereaved psychiatrist who's husband John (Geoffrey Rush) is acting ever more distant, while a new patient is unsettling her as her life seems ever more the subject of their sessions. Meanwhile there's the woman Leon is cheating with, Jane (Rachael Blake) and her complicated relations with her neighbours, Nik (Vince Colosimo) and Paula (Daniella Farinacci) and her clingy ex-husband Pete (Glenn Robbins). The key to the film is not a discussion of any of these things, although the natures of infidelity and grief are touched upon. The central questions, however, are: what happens to this group of ordinary people when something extraordinary - a mysterious death- happens in their midst? How much can people heal themselves, and how much do they cling to normality when everything familiar is gone?

The film opens with an oppressive, lingering shot through the undergrowth, with the ever harsher and louder screeching of insects, until finally we close in on a dead woman, her clothing ripped, face down in the dirt. Immediately we cut to a completely incongruous sex scene. I tell you this as I think it best illustrates the structure of this film, the quick juxtaposing of certain elements. While this makes you think, it is never jarring, and the symbolism that holds the plot together is never clunky, but runs as a subtle undercurrent; it is visible in the "back road"- it's off the beaten suburban track, and mysterious things happen when people try to change direction- also in the dense, tangled brush that the body is hidden in, so much like the complicated relations of chance and coincidence that exist between these people. The best thing about this film, though, is that it is entirely character based. Based on a stage play (Speaking in Tongues) by Andrew Bovell, the characterisation is solid and interesting. It's not that these characters are unusual, but that Bovell has captured what we might think of as stereotypes, and invested them with depth, famliarity, and realism.

LaPaglia and Rush effectively walk away with the film between them. LaPaglia, with a competent Australian accent, is not afraid to make his character dislikable, but what's really interesting about Leo is that he is a man whose essential honesty cannot but allow his feelings to surface, even while he is telling all manner of lies. He is brusque, sometimes violent and always awkward and boorish. But he is fuelled by confusion and even love, and at certain parts of the film, with just a mild change of expression, LaPaglia steals all the focus for himself. Armstrong bears the brunt of that; next to LaPaglia's performance, she is only able to shine in the scenes with Hershey. Rush is an equally dislikable character but this time, the circumstances of his introvert, bruised nature- the loss of a child- are such that his portrayal of the cold academic John Knox is kept vital and fascinating. It is essentially men that power this film, the main women are all victims- one dies, two are betrayed, by the same man, though in different ways, and one is constantly on the defensive. The most likable male character, unemployed househusband Nik, is simple and effective, and rounds out the cast.

The direction, by Ray Lawrence (Bliss), of the film serves to emphasize the bitty structure, fading in and out, simple, realistic lighting, with much of the film taking place in the dark. All this is accompanied by a tinkling, slightly folky score, that is subtly used- silence is the most effective tool in Lantana. The direction is oppressive in the way that real life is, and the sex scenes in particular are cleverly handled- there's no graphic element to them, but an acute awkwardness. There is a little volence, a little blood, but again, it is always filmed just out of sight. The point of the direction is not to bring all the violent machinations of human existence into the foreground to shock and alarm- it is to accept that these things happen and to look at the character before and after the event. This is not a murder mystery- the suspense builds up after the mysterious disappearance, time is not spent lingering on dead bodies and forensic evidence. For those of a sensitive dispostion it is quite manageable (certainly a correct classification of 15), though there is plenty of swearing, so anyone offended by that should probably give this a wide berth. For the record, I have put that a comparison of other films by the same director is n/a. He has directed one other feature, but I haven't seen it, so comparison is pointless.

There is a strong vein of humour running through the film as well- a chance encounter between the dopey but hilarious Pete and gruff, morose Leon (probably the only slightly unnatural coincidence) leads to a very funny "manly" discussion as well as an unlikely but highly amusing later encounter. Leon's younger teenage son is as manipulative as his father but in a different, more gentle and amusing way.

The only complaint I could make about this film is that, at 2 hours, it is a tiny bit overlong. With the repeated fadeouts, it's a little hard to tell when it has finished. However, I'm eternally grateful for the fact that this is not one of those Myth of Fingerprints type films where the issues are set up, not dealt with, and then the film suddenly grinds to a halt in a depressive miasma of problems. There is a vaguely explanatory coda to this film- for most of the characters, what happens next is hinted at, there is a definite resolution. And despite all the grief and cruelty the characters inflict on one another, my impression was that what the film was trying to say was that if you are forced to strip away the outer layers of habitual deception, and look at your life with clarity, for some, though not all, hope remains.

This sensitive, funny, interesting and memorable film is highly recommended.

Alex :)

(Please ignore ratings for extra features- I saw this in the cinema, but I had to put something in)