The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Much like the main character of THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON, I felt this nagging sense of deja vu. Here we have a wannabe epic, a story spanning some nearly 90 years, filled with a myriad of fantastic events and emotional mountaintops and valleys. Brushes with fame, and famous people, occur with calculated regularity. Serendipitous meetings, a love for a wayward woman, a yearning, melancholy narrative, a wide-eyed perspective. Yes, it all reminded me of several Big Movies of Hollywood's recent past. Mainly, FORREST GUMP. That one loomed very large over this project. One of the screenwriters of BUTTON was GUMP's Eric Roth, so that's no accident. His tale follows much the same formula, as a somewhat naive man floats through life. There is a slight twist this time. Benjamin is born with an elderly man's face and physical limitations (though unlike the F. Scott Fitzgerald story upon which this is based, he is still the size of an infant and has the brain development to match). He begins his life in a nursing home after being abandoned by his natural father. His early years are denoted by arthritis and a variety of impairments.

As he ages, strange things happen. He gets stronger. His face becomes more youthful. The lines fade. His formerly brittle, grey hair lightens and becomes fuller. He gets younger as he gets older. Along the way he meets a girl who ages in the traditional way. They part, rejoin, separate, reunite. They have many rendezvous of increasing emotional resonance, until an effective weepy finale. But the similarities to GUMP continue. Too many to list, really. I won't even mention that magic dragonfly that hovers around ala that magic feather from the earlier pic. 

I'm not saying that this reminder soured the film for me, but, I found BUTTON to be more of an Eric Roth film than that of director David Fincher. Expectations are high for any Fincher film, especially one of this magnitude. The wide canvas was ripe for his unique visual sense, his inventiveness. While there are individual moments of greatness, evidence of his wizardry, the weight of the project was just too great. The seeming efforts to achieve grandeur make this film feel like a latter day warm over of juggernauts like TITANIC, THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, THE GREEN MILE, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, and of course, FORREST GUMP. Fincher just seems wrong for this sort of fantasy; he's far better at grim heightened realism. ZODIAC, as an example, was a stunning epic, not quite as grand scale as BUTTON (financed by two studios) but certainly a major work.

 BUTTON might've been better helmed by Spielberg, Burton, Zemeckis, Darabont, and others. That is not to say that BUTTON is free of some dazzle. The "chance" sequence, detailing a series of seemingly unrelated events that lead to one of the characters being hit by a taxi, is an enjoyably dizzy bit of cinema magic (even as it reminded me of the opening of MAGNOLIA). Precise editing and typically meticulous Fincher direction make the sequence memorable. A recurring memory of one of the other nursing home residents-being struck by lightning 7 separate times-also allows Fincher to have a little fun (if perhaps one too many times), namely with film stock-like appearances, even though BUTTON itself is shot on high definition digital. The camera moves just as freely as in other of the director's films. Nonetheless, I had the sense that certain restrictions kept the director from really cutting loose. Restrictions of script, and perhaps the iron fists of the studios? Despite the latter, this movie is a nearly 3 hour challenge to the kidneys. 

Brad Pitt is fine in the title role, looking appropriately glum and perplexed at first. As his situation points toward inevitability, his disposition gives way to a resigned sadness. Cate Blanchett alternatively delivers one of her few disappointing performances as Daisy, Button's "childhood" crush who becomes a vital part of his middle age. The complexity her scenes with Pitt in the later decades requires is only somewhat realized. Strangely muted. She seems more adrift in the part, not really completely emotionally invested. If she isn't, how can the audience be? I did find more to appreciate in Tilda Swinton's brief role as a Russian countess with whom Benjamin has an affair. Her effect on Benjamin's life seemed more genuine to me. I was also disappointed at how the film rushes through the closing scenes, as Benjamin enters old age, appearing as a child. As I mentioned, his cerebrum ages just like that of a normal human, and having this child suffer dementia is an intriguing idea, but not satisfactorily developed. To me, these scenes could have really been the crux of the story, a fine point of ideas discussed earlier on. 

BUTTON could have ended as an emotional powerhouse, simultaneously stirring the heart and mind of the viewer. As the closing scenes play out, I was nonetheless moved, but I wanted more. I did (and do) think about age progression a little more pointedly, but I wanted still more from this movie. Another debit is the framing device: we begin the story in a hospital room in New Orleans as hurricane Katrina threatens. A 40ish woman is reading from her mother's (who lies dying) diary, recounting a life story. Benjamin's. How does the old woman figure in the Button saga? Shouldn't be too difficult to crack that one. Devices like this are meant to provide a latter day wistfulness, an emotional wellspring of nostalgia. Instead, it marred PRIVATE RYAN, THE NOTEBOOK, FOR THE BOYS and does much the same here. Just unnecessary, and un-Fincher-like to boot. Perhaps he was merely a director for hire? I felt like this after watching Scorsese's remake of CAPE FEAR too. Seeing how many other movies I referenced in this review, it occurs to me that maybe I would've thought more highly of THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON if I'd not seen so many.