Christine Vachon: Kids and Safe

So the lack of posts corresponds directly to a rather large upheaval in my personal life which consists of moving countries. I'm now happily settled in Paris, after 10 nights on various people's floors across the city before finding my own place (actually a flatshare with some cinephiles). Luckily, despite the urgency for finding a flat and job (well, one out of two so far isn't bad), I've still managed to catch a couple of things, although sadly it wasn't at Paris' famous' 'Printemps du cinema' where tickets are all €3.50 for 3 days (worryingly, the last time I was living in Paris, 2003-04, I remember €4-4.50 being the normal price for a cinema ticket). Anyway I saw In the City of Sylvia and Frozen River, which I hope to write about separately. I also stepped back in time and watched the whole BBC Pride and Prejudice series, and their version of North and South - will discuss them later.

I've been off reading for a while, partly due to general restlessness in life, partly due to only bringing one book to Paris with me ('Metrostop Paris' which is disappointingly dry so far). But when my sister popped over to Paris last week she managed to bring me one of the 2 Christine Vachon books I'd ordered before I left home - 'A Killer Life' (the second book). I've raced through it (as I tend to do with all books on film production) and am about 30 pages off finishing so far. I've read about her before in Tim Adler's The Producers (please note deliberate boycott of linking to Amazon since #amazonfail furore) and so know a bit about her approach and oeuvre. She's consistently produced provocative films - sometimes I've felt they might be a bit too provocative - a bit angry for the sake of it, but I really haven't seen that much of her work to judge fairly.

So I set to work on it at the weekend. First up was 'Kids'. Before I'd made the decision to watch it, I'd read a few things about it in the book, notably about the death of Justin Pierce, who killed himself aged 25 in 2000, 5 years after Kids was completed. This warped the watching of the film for film me slightly - not least because somehow I thought that actor who played Telly was Justin - so I was watching it and wrongly thinking that he was dead.

I actually really enjoyed Kids. I've had friends tell me they thought it was horrific and sensationalist, but I just found it gritty and real. More than any of the activities shown, I was troubled by the dialogue between the boys - both Telly and Casper on their own at the beginning, and then in the flat. Nothing else really fazed me. Notably, in this post-Sex and the City world, I wasn't shocked by the girls' language whatsoever. The other shocker was the assault on the guy in the park which I found quite distressing. More so because I felt conditioned to expecting some kind of remorse, which never came.

The choice of real actors has to be applauded. Vachon talks at length about the problems this posed during shooting, with many of them failing to turn up, shoplifting, taking drugs on set and generally causing no end of trouble. But all their hard work is clearly visible on the screen. I don't know if they could have extracted such great performances from real actors. Interestingly, a real actor was cast for the part of Jenny, but dropped at the last moment when they found Chloe who was up and coming as New York's hottest, but reluctant it-girl.

I had a real 'Romeo and Juliet' feeling towards the end when you're desperately hoping that Chloe Sevingy's character Jenny will stop Telly from giving the virus to Darcy. I felt a terrible sense of hopelessness. However, although the justification is that she is too 'out of it' due to the drugs, and consequently she'd be feeling the effects of it the next morning, I wasn't entirely convinced that she wouldn't have stopped Casper. This scene - due to the sex between minors - was one of the most difficult to get past the censors. But more so than the act, it's his 'Jenny, it's me, Casper, it's OK' refrain that's the most haunting.

Meanwhile, Safe, released in the same year, was an altogether different story. I've always admired Julianne Moore for her astute role choices and it's interesting to note that Safe was her first leading role. Also interesting to note that she got her first lead role aged 35 and has gone up and up since then - while most actresses are lamenting the fact that after 35 they only get poor/supporting roles (if any), I would suggest that this is the difference between working with the studios and going independent, or at least making choices with integrity.

So I was sad to find 'Safe' a bit of a let-down. Its 2 hours felt more like 3 1/2. In fact I actually fast forwarded through many of the later scenes which I only do very very rarely. Most of all I just found Moore's character Carol, incredibly flat. Haynes drags the narrative along like a sack of potatoes, revealing very little along the way. Meanwhile, Carol is far too manicured to make any breakdown convincing. I felt like I was rolling my eyes each time she fainted or found herself paralysed to communicate. Honestly, when I like about it I feel so lethargic that I almost can't find the energy to even review it.

The art direction combined with the long, wide, lingering shots really communicate the coldness and alienation of Carol's world very well. But as a spectator they left me uninspired. I guess after just watching a film so resplendent with energy as Kids, Safe felt like the aftermath of their wild party where everyone had just gone to sleep.

What's probably more interesting is to look at how this sowed the seeds for 'Far from Heaven' - testament to Haynes' continuing fascination with unmasking suburbia. I saw it when it was released but would like to revisit it. I've also just grabbed 'Savage Grace' and so will feed back on these soon.