Angelina Jolie has crafted a subdued persona
THE CURRENT incarnation of Angelina Jolie is so elegant, so businesslike and so entirely beyond reproach that it’s easy to forget about the unruly version of her before the big brood and the UN.Goodwill Ambassador gig. Leather pants and blood vial necklaces have given way to stately gowns and New York Times op- eds. And, as her public image has become more subdued, so too have her movies.
This weekend sees the limited release of “By the Sea,” which Jolie wrote and directed. Reallife husband Brad Pitt plays her onscreen spouse, and the movie follows the breakdown of their marriage set against a beachy French backdrop.
The critics haven’t exactly embraced the two-plus hours of gorgeous ennui. Variety called it an “unabashed vanity project” that “struggles to turn its own beautiful inertia into a virtue.” Meanwhile, Hollywood Reporter prophesied that “this languid piece of would-be art cinema will prove once again that even the biggest names in the world won’t draw an audience to something that, in and of itself, has no reason for being.”
Jolie spends much of the movie looking morose in designer sunglasses and silky negligees. In fact, “By the Sea” is most notable for its insistence on impassivity. Even the big thirdact reveal — when the source of the couple’s pain is supposed to explain their cruelty to one another — doesn’t supply catharsis or elicit sympathy, only emptiness. Much like the Jolie of today, the movie remains utterly beautiful and totally impenetrable.
It’s all enough to make you long for the good old days. Jolie could come across as slightly unhinged at times, what with the artwork she made for second husband Billy Bob Thornton using her own blood as a medium. But that fit into a larger framework; it was all a testament to her limitless passion.
Every interview and red carpet appearance was more evidence of the way Jolie felt emotions so deeply. Those feelings no doubt informed her startling, Oscar-winning role in “Girl, Interrupted,” not to mention the ardent kisses she laid on her brother during the 2001 Academy Awards. There was a vulnerability to her rebelliousness — the way she loved so deeply and so publicly.
There are downsides to that kind of extreme emotion, of course. Being so sensitive can be exhausting, and Jolie was open about her history of depression and self-harm. Plus, her behaviour made her a magnet for the media. The world wanted to know what she’d do next. She didn’t disappoint by getting together with Pitt.
Life on an even keel must be much less taxing, if only because her day-to- day life with six children doesn’t excite the public (and therefore the paparazzi) the way it once did.
But when it comes to making art, the detached approach falls short.
“By the Sea” marks Jolie’s third turn as director. This time last year, she debuted a very different kind of movie: “Unbroken” was a biopic about Olympic athlete and World War II P.O.W. Louis Zamperini, but its problems mirror those in her intimate domestic drama.
“Unbroken” was poised to be an awards season favourite, not to mention a breakout for actor Jack O’Connell. But Jolie’s dutiful portrayal was so stilted and drained of feeling that it made nary a splash in big categories when Oscar nominees were announced.
The movie held its own at the box office, at least. “By the Sea” won’t be so lucky, despite its primo awards-bait release date. Universal hasn’t done much to publicise the movie and opted for a tiny opening weekend in just 10 theatres across eight cities.
Considering how few domestic dramas are made at big studios, “By the Sea” is likely not what Universal had in mind when they clamoured — alongside many others — to scoop up rights to Jolie’s script.
Just look at the rest of the studio’s 2015 slate, which was dominated by powerhouses such as
“Jurassic World,” “Furious 7,” “Pitch Perfect 2” and “Trainwreck.”
The studio’s closest ally to Jolie’s drama is “Steve Jobs,” though that movie’s underperforming box office will probably seem like a windfall compared to the numbers “By the Sea” pulls.
Universal no doubt thought it was getting something electric, especially once Jolie revealed she and Pitt would be starring. After all, the fi rst time they appeared onscreen together, in 2005’s “Mr and Mrs Smith,” they were an alluring combo.
The movie, about a couple of assassins who are assigned to kill each other, brought in US$ 478 million worldwide, though it’s unclear if people came for the romance, the action or to judge whether the chemistry between the stars was enough to plausibly break up Pitt’s marriage to Jennifer Aniston.
With “By the Sea,” things have come full circle. Reporters have asked Jolie whether the troubled couple at the centre of the fi lm reflects on Pitt and Jolie’s relationship. As always, she’s responded with an insistent nothing to see here.
“Brad and I have our issues, but if the characters were even remotely close to our problems we couldn’t have made the fi lm,” she told the Telegraph. “To be clear: We have fi ghts and problems like any other couple. We have days when we drive each other absolutely mad and want space, but the problems in the movie aren’t our specific problems.”
Making her marriage to Pitt sound mundane is selfpreservation for an actress who relishes her privacy. But tempering her passion when making movies isn’t nearly so shrewd. — WP-Bloomberg