Struck by frus­tra­tion in ‘Won­der­struck’

Ideas and par­al­lel sto­ry­lines never truly con­nect

The Progress-Index - - LOCAL - By Ni­cholas Van­de­loecht Staff Writer

Won­der­struck, di­rected by Todd Haynes, was all kinds of dis­ap­point­ing. Muted cin­e­matog­ra­phy, some­times dim light­ing and sub­par act­ing fromone of the main char­ac­ters hurts the 1970s sto­ry­line, and the 1920s sto­ry­line ends up not go­ing any­where.

The movie also makes both of its­main char­ac­ters deaf,but­n­ever fully re­al­izes the par­al­lel sto­ry­lines that the premise was go­ing for. One char­ac­ter, you fol­low the world as she sees it as some­one who is deaf. Some­how that con­cept is not used in the same vein in the 1970s sto­ry­line when the boy­can no longer hear.

The mu­sic is good.Young deaf ac­tor Mil­li­cent Sim­monds, who stars in the 1920s story, is the stand­out here, and the ex­e­cu­tion of the 1920s scenes are fine, but they never lead to a sat­is­fy­ing con­clu­sion within that sto­ry­line.

Ideas just never con­nect, and the movie ends up feel­ing dis­jointed and hard to watch.

There were some as­pects with the 1920s story that make the movie too good to dis­miss out­right, but I’m not rec­om­mend­ing that any­one needs to go out of his or her way to see Won­der­struck.


This im­age re­leased by Road­side At­trac­tions shows Jaden Michael, from left, Oakes Fe­g­ley and Ju­lianne Moore in a scene from “Won­der­Struck,” which was fea­tured at the Cannes Film Fes­ti­val.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.