Across The Universe Hits Video: Lennon and Harrison Glad To Be Dead
Last week, 
I rented Across the Universe -- y'know, that new Beatles movie that doesn't have the Beatles in it. Or any stars. Or a coherent storyline. I'm still reeling from how much I disliked this movie. And part of the reason I'm so pissed off is because there's another part of me that really enjoyed it. The part that likes anything involving the Beatles. The part that couldn't help being sucked in.
I don't even know where to begin. The movie is so all over the place it's impossible to talk about it in an organized fashion. For the uninitiated let me give you the conceit of the film: "Hey, what if we make a movie that only has about 40 lines of dialog and fill in the rest with lyrics from unassociated Beatles songs?"
Did they pull it off? Well, let's examine the plot and you can decide. At this point, I'd normally say SPOILER ALERT to those of you who still want to see the film, but that would be like giving a warning about a possible fecal odor to someone who was bent on diving headfirst into a pile of manure.
The Plot And Characters Of Across the Universe
The movie relies upon ridiculous archetypal characters, hoping that their mere recognizability will spare the producers from actually having to flesh out their identities through writing. That works out great because the script is not about Mean Mr. Mustard or Maxwell Silver Hammer and, therefore, with little exception, the filmmakers can't actually use the Beatles lyrics to tell us anything about these characters.
Here we go:
Jude (a dude from Liverpool who looks like a ragged Paul McCartney, acts like John Lennon, and sings like Ewan MacGregor) leaves England to find his long lost American Dad.
Once there, he meets Max --- a Princeton student who is James Dean in Rebel Without A Cause. (His stodgy dad is tearing him apart too, but instead of being played by the dad Jim Backus, dad is played by Doc Connors from the Spider-Man movies. Oh, and Max's uncle is Mr. Noodle, but I digress.) Anyway, Jude and Max become instant best friends for no clear reason and Max drops out of school so they can both go to New York.
Once in New York, they find a loft for rent from a very sensual landlady named Sadie (or "Sexy Sadie"). Sadie, by the way, is Janis Joplin. Why wouldn't she be?
The producers apparently thought there weren't enough disparate elements so they also added ---I shit you not--- an Asian lesbian cheerleader who runs away from home, goes to New York, and crashes with Jude and Max after she "comes in through the bathroom window." You could eliminate her from the movie completely and nothing would change, except that her name is Prudence and if you cut her then you wouldn't be able to sing "Dear Prudence" which apparently was a song the producers really wanted in the movie.
Moving on, Janis Joplin Sadie has a black guitarist boyfriend coming to town. Any guesses? That's right, it's "JoJo." And when I say "JoJo," I mean, of course, Jimi Hendrix.
Around this time, Max's little sister Lucy comes to live with big brother so that Jude and she can fall in love. This is like 40 minutes in, which is a problem considering this is supposed to be a love story. But you have to admire the producers' restraint. Her character's name was originally just "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds and/or love interest."
Then Max get's drafted and the best scene in the movie happens when we see the enlistment office to the tune of "I Want You/She's So Heavy." That scene actually takes the lyrics to a Beatles song and recreates them in a way that advances plot. It's one of only two or three songs in the movie that does that:
O.K. back to the crap. Before Max goes off to war he, Lucy, and Jude go to a hip NY party thrown by "Dr. Robert." Loser Beatle fans like me get a little hard from that reference because Dr. Robert is a Lennon Murphy John Lennon song about the dentist who first gave John and George acid at a party. But "Dr. Robert" is NOT a dentist. Instead this Dr. Robert is, apparently, Ken Kesey in full Merry Prankster form, and he's played by none other than Bono. I can't fully convey to you how much Bono sucked in this movie. The only thing worse than his American accent was his version of "I Am The Walrus." In fairness, it did suck slightly less than U2's version of "Helter Skelter" which is maybe the worst cover in the history of rock.
Dr. Robert takes Max, Lucy, and Jude cross country to meet another sixties acid-dropping radical, Dr. Timothy Leary. But they don't call him Dr. Leary. They call him "Dr. Geary," and it's Eddie Izzard and he sings a trippy version of "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite."
"Wait!" say those of you who enjoy parallel structure. If Ken Kesey was "Dr. Robert," why not make Dr. Leary "Mr. Kite"? Or if Dr. Leary is "Dr. Geary" then why wasn't Ken Kesey, "Ken Gesey?"
I have no idea. You might as well ask how the movie managed to make Eddie Izzard unfunny or why you would need two trip out scenes in one flick or how a hot Asian, lesbian cheerleader can't seem to get laid in the middle of New York during the age of free love.
Anyway, Max goes off to 'nam and gets a head injury which doesn't seem to do much more than make him look like Kurt Cobain. (pre-suicide.) Then Janis and Jimi break up and reunite. Then Jude and Lucy break up because she starts hanging out too much with Jerry Rubin, or Tom Hayden, or Abbie Hoffman or whoever the bearded vaguely Semitic radical was supposed to be. Then they get back together when Jude sings All You NeedIs Love on the roof like The Beatles did in their Get Back performance. And Prudence smiles while she continues to wonder what the fuck she's doing in the movie.
And as much as it all sucked I watched it all. Twice.
Why? Because the Beatles wrote some of the greatest songs of all time. Most of the new arrangements were absolutely perfect. And many of the visuals were striking as well.
And that's really the reason I'm so mad. So much care and thought went into this movie in so many areas that it makes all the thoughtless, stupid decisions that much more offensive.
And you can bet everything you have that when it comes on cable I will watch it again while cursing the screen.
Check out some more Gladstone. HERE and HERE.
I loved this movie, but I also agree with you, Gladstone. So I understand your conflict.
ReplyOr maybe that just means that I love you even more than Across the Universe.
We'll never know.
Couldn't agree more with Emily down there...though I'll give you that Prudence was rather unimportant and it has probably the worst Eddie Izzard performance I've ever seen, but other than that the movie is fuckin' fantastic.
ReplyDude, if I were not young enough to make you look like a total creeper for hanging out with me we would need to be best friends. Keep on rockin', Gladstone.
ReplyI hate to disagree, but the movie was fantastic. I'm no hippie or drugee, but I got pretty much everything. To someone like you, this movie is silly and all over the place, because you don't feel any need to find a deeper meaning. When you saw "Happiness is a Warm Gun" and the seen with all the Vietnamese women, you had no idea it was related to the scene in the diner when max finds out he's going into the Army. The singing was excellent, the plotline was creative and interesting, because ever character's story sort of twisted together, and the characters were rich with well... character. this is my favorite movie, and I cannot let some arrogant know-it-all bash it because they don't get it.
ReplyHe never said that he didn't get it, he just said that it wasn't good.
Don't go flying off the handle just because you didn't GET the article.
Even though I thought the movie was okay, not great, but not something I'd swear on my future grave to never watch again, I thought your article was pretty accurate. I am a total Beatles fanatic and the thing that I liked least about the movie was that Paul and Ringo were no where in it, not even to make a camo. I only watched it because I hoped to see them, so not getting to was highly disappointing.
Reply"i want to hold your hand" was my favorite song. they slowed it down and the melancholy tone was perfect, really gave a deeper meaning to the song.
ReplyBingo. Theynailed it. Es**cially with Prudance, wtf was that about.
ReplyPerfect! I couldnt say it better... And i also watched it twice...
ReplyI actually love that movie. The plot isn't completely coherent of fleshed out, but sadly, compared to pretty much all musicals, this one did a good job with that. People I've talked to have either adored it or despised it, and there's no clear reason why either side falls the way they do. Sadly, most of the people I've talked to were idiot teenage girls who fell in love with Jim sturgess and only liked the movie for that reason and don't appreciate the beatles because they're ignorant, vain, idiots. Such is the plight of my generation, the one thats made Hannah Montana going shopping headline news even though they don't even give a fuck anymore.
ReplyYou actually make some good points. I adored the movie, great arrangements of the Beatles Tunes, great visuals, but the plot and characters were nothing spectacular.
ReplyI admit I enjoy the soundtrack better the DvD, but I'll rewatch certain scenes, like I Want You and Strawberry Fields Forever cause of the visuals.
Cack Says:
Reply"I hear Paul McCartney whole heartedly approved….that his response was, “What’s not to love?” If he loves it, who are any of you to criticize?"
Because if someone hears that Paul liked it, everyone and his/her mother should, too, right?
I don't rightly know who I am, but I'm damned sure that I'm not a sheep.
It's fine if McCartney and any number of his waxing-nostalgic Beatles fans approved of the film, but that certainly doesn't cause me or anyone else to be obligated to share their opinion or to keep quiet about ours.
Spot on, Gladstone. I just saw the movie recently, and you nailed this one.
Yes, I have to agree, the plot was cliched and somehow managed to make no sense at the same time, but it's still my fucking favorite movie of all time. That would be because I'm an aspiring director (read works at burger king) and the art and symbolism and shit is AMAZING.
ReplySo, unless you're a total flim geek or have never heard of the Beatles, don't watch it.
What I would love to see is a live action version of "Yellow Submarine" directed by Julie Taymor. I think her talents are perfect for turning two dimensional cartoon characters into live action spectacles.
ReplyBut Across the Universe? Total pap. As a life-long Beatles fan, thirty years old, it felt like I was watching some totally irrelevant people jump in and take credit for the Beatles' great songs and legacy. Everything great about this movie was already in the songs and everything not already in the songs wasn't great. It didn't feel like a tribute or a celebration of the Beatles at all. It felt like f**king plagiarism.
What I sincerely hope is that all the kids who have been introduced to the deeper cuts from the Beatles catalog through this movie will, with time, come to realize how little this film has to do with that greatness. I hope they'll be listening to Abbey Road if they want to hear "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" and not this movie's soundtrack. There's hope. I remember a time when I thought Belly's cover of "Are You Experienced?" was superior to Jimi's original...
truly, this movie was incomprehensible to me, as i was not born until the 80's
ReplyYou completely captured how that piece of crap movie made me feel.
ReplyFor anyone who truly loves the Beatles, and wants to see an amazing show made out of their music, check out Cirque Du Soleil's "Love". I don't think it's out on DVD yet, but I saw it in Vegas with my husband (in the front row, I might add), and it was the experience of a lifetime. As close to a Beatles concert as I'll ever get...
Okay, if nothing else we have to admit that this is one of those rare movies that elicits a STRONG response, one way or the other. I confess to being a 60's survivor ... I actually saw the Beatles perform ... and I loved the movie. It certainly wasn't perfect ... as much as I love Eddie Izzard, he should have ended up on the cutting room floor, and Bono was incredibly fucking annoying as only Bono can be. But there were some moments that were simply sublime. For example, the arrangement of "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" was magical (although Prudence was pretty much irrelevant after that). There was so plot, but so fucking what?? Moulin Rouge wasn't exactly Shakespeare. I think Julie Taymor is a genius, and you either love or hate her work (I loved Titus, most people hated it). I gotta agree with everything that Lucie said in her post. I also think the review contained a lot of truth, but I have to say the movie actually moved me!
ReplyI second Lola, I've only watched it stoned and so the plot line, or lack of, didn't matter given that I couldn't follow one if it was there. The art and music aspect of the movie blew my mind, I still don't know how they wound up with Eddie Izzard in the middle of no where singing Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite and I, frankly, don't really care because it was fantastic. I haven't found any one of the renditions that I liked better than the original and didn't really expect to, nor did their throwing the songs together in hopes of making a movie really make much sense with quotes from me to my roommate (who watches it sober and loves it) such as "how can you watch that sober, it doesn't make sense, some random asian chick walks through the middle of a football game and doesn't even get slammed and then has randomly locked herself in their closet and then bam! they're singing to her while floating in the sky surrounded by clouds... which was awesome but seriously wtf?".
ReplyI guess since I was baked I never really questioned how insulting this poor plot line is to the amazingness of the part of the movie I paid attention to. Now that I'm looking at it from a sober point of view.. you have a very good point.
the movie was crap, the movie was soooo bad EVERYONE watched it more then once (almost, anyway)
Replyi think the movie was awesome.. not particularly as a movie itself but because it made me fall in love with the beatles all over again. probably because i could not entirely relate to their songs all that much. The fact that the movie put THEIR songs into normal.. i don't know.. these situations where.. everyone had something to relate to, something which made them feel.. something. i dont know.
it was quite abstract.. the story didnt really have much of a direction, wasn't going anywhere. but i thought that was cool, you know? because you take whatever you want from it. i mean the characters themselves didnt have much to them, they were kinda lost in whatever they kept getting themselves into. which is fine..
YES, i didnt get what prudance... erm.. WAS. she was just THERE. in fact everything was just happening.. and THERE. but.. its always interesting to have some abstract kinda view of.. things.
yes, the movie wasnt any good without the songs. which is sad cuz the songs did well without the movie.
but again.. i liked it!
i think strawberry fields forever was amazing.
I absolutely adored the movie.
ReplyThat being said, everything in this review is true also.
And as an added note, my reasons for liking the movie were NOT because I'd never heard any other Beatles song besides "All You Need is Love" in my life. I've been a Beatles fan my whole life and when this film came out, I was pushing pre-pubescent teeny boppers out of the way so I could get my ticket.
I proceeded to buy the DVD upon its release.
Yeah, this movie isn't a Citizen Kane. But were you honestly expecting it to be? I thought it was great for what it was worth.
I love the movie very much, even though I have to admit that a couple of actors really annoyed me. If they were replaced with better actors, I would have loved it 10 times more.
Reply