 |
| Ben Foster, Daniel Radcliffe, and Dane DeHaan in Kill Your Darlings |
How do you go about telling the story of a generation of scholars who lacked all direction? Do you give them purpose, or simply allow them to coexist amongst each other until purpose presents itself? This seems to be the underlying intention of Kill Your Darlings, a film about a group of beat poets before beat poetry was even a concept. A journey of self discovery, filled with love, genius, wartime haircuts, literary genius and drugs (seriously so many drugs, guys), the film shows off an important time in writing and creativity, though falls into the trap of heightened self importance.
Centering around Allen Ginsberg and Lucien Carr, the feeling of young angst is constantly present during a time of war, frustration with establishment, and repressed homosexuality. I mention the last one, because sexuality is a huge part of growing up, and if you know your history, you'll know Ginsberg was gay. But he was gay in a time when it was considered a bad thing, and part of the intrigue of Ginsberg is seeing him shed his exterior, and realize who he is, and accept it. It shows a time when the world was afraid and angry at homosexuals. I mean, they couldn't even get married back then, guys!
It really is a performance of surprising maturity, and one that should help him be recognized as a real dramatic actor
As Ginsberg, Daniel Radcliffe is absolutely fantastic. Truly, he is working uphill, as he has to portray a well documented individual, and move past his Harry Potter image. He does this in spades, showing Ginsberg slowly go from a tightly wound literary perfectionist, to free wheeling artist, all while dealing with the inner turmoil of longing for human connection other than simply friendship. It really is a performance of surprising maturity, and one that should help him be recognized as a real dramatic actor. Particularly, the scenes with his parents (David Cross, who has also played Allen Ginsberg, and Jennifer Jason Leigh) before Columbia and during are fantastic. Dealing with the pressure of having a published poet for a father, who gives little credence to family life, and having a constantly paranoid mother, who thinks her husband is out to get her.
For those people who do not want to move past him as Harry Potter, do not see this film. Why, you ask? Well, I mentioned that Ginsberg is gay, and it's a search for who he is. So yes, Radcliffe has a couple of gay sex scenes. Normally, I wouldn't go out of my way to mention this, but the sex scenes are explicitly graphic. No, you don't see his wand, but he casts a few Patronus', nomsayn?
Of the two lead performances, DeHaan gets the much showier one in Carr, but it wouldn't be half as effective without the subtly of Radcliffe
Contrasting Ginsberg's earnestness is Lucien Carr's bravado, and Dane DeHaan matches Radcliffe's performance level perfectly. Carr is brash, cocky, and intelligent, but harbours a darkness and confusion, and DeHaan is able to show you all of that simply through the way that he looks or reacts. It's easy to see why Ginsberg is wiling to follow him to the ends of the Earth. Of the two lead performances, DeHaan gets the much showier one in Carr, but it wouldn't be half as effective without the subtly of Radcliffe.
Other faces that stop by are On The Road author Jack Kerouac (Jack Huston, stepping away from Boardwalk Empire and showing off his whole face), his girlfriend Edie Parker (Elizabeth Olson), William Burroughs (Ben Foster) and David Kammerer (Michael C. Hall). All these actors are fantastic in supporting roles though Olson easily has the least to do, due to her character not really being fleshed out more than the frustrated siginificant other to Kerouac. Huston and Foster are both strong as friends and mentors to Ginsberg, who show him the different caveats to his new vision of poetry. Hall is also very strong as David Kammerer, a janitor with the intellect of a literary genius, who is hopelessly and obsessively in love with Carr.
It definitely gave me a better understanding of Ginsberg than Howl, though not quite of his motivations or inspirations
My main issues with the movie revolve around the way the movie is paced and, occasionally, how it's edited. The editing can sometimes be jarring, and, at times, sacrifices fluidity for artistic merit. The pace is also an issue because, for a movie telling a story about those directionless writers, it can become directionless itself. Certain characters, such as Carr's mother, could have been cut out entirely.
Overall, the film is more of an actors showcase, than a showcase of beat poetry. It definitely gave me a better understanding of Ginsberg than Howl, though not quite of his motivations or inspirations. A film worth checking out, especially if you like his work
Grade: B
No comments:
Post a Comment