Review: Married Life (2008) *** 1/2
Rachel McAdams is the other woman and Chris Cooper
is the unfaithful husband in Married Life
Married Life is difficult to categorize. It takes place in a post-war America at a kind of crossroads; an era before the sexual revolution blurred the lines between gender roles, but a time when some of the forces that led to the social upheavals of the ’60s were beginning to manifest themselves. Change was on the horizon, but it was a simpler time when men still wore hats and people still drank martinis with dinner.
It also exists at an intersection of genres. First, like a Sirkian romantic melodrama, it’s rooted in a domestic arrangement where trouble brews just beneath a seemingly placid exterior. At the same time it’s darkly humorous with elements of a black comedy. There aren’t any outright laughs, but the film does have a wry smile and a gleam in its eye most of the way through. Finally, like a film noir, the plot springs from the inevitable gulf between a deadly plan and its eventual action. It naturally builds to a suspenseful climax, though on the whole it’s more gentle than hard boiled.
While aligning Married Life too closely with any of the three genres would be overstating the case, the film shares traits with all of them. In fact, it owes a lot to Hitchcock. That’s not to say it achieves Hitchcock’s level of greatness, but its anchored in a similar sensibility and it definitely flits around the perimeter circumscribed by the master.
Written and directed by Ira Sachs (Forty Shades of Blue), Married Life stars Chris Cooper as Harry Allen and Patricia Clarkson as his wife Pat. They seem a happy middle class couple, yet they’re not as content or compatible as they appear on the surface. He’s a stoic on the outside, but deep down he has a romantic soul. He wants true emotional love, but hasn’t much use for the physical kind. Pat is just the opposite. She enjoys sex, but can’t provide the emotional devotion Harry craves. Worse for her, she doesn’t work, has no kids to raise and has little to keep her engaged besides her hobbies. She’s a bit bored, yet she’s a good wife and she cares for her husband.
As people will do when they’re not getting what they need at home, Harry strays into the arms of beautiful young Kay played by a striking, platinum blonde Rachel McAdams. She could’ve been a femme fatale if Married Life were a true noir, but Harry’s romantic nature genuinely appeals to her. She lost her husband in the war and, unlike Pat, she’s a bit old fashioned and seems eager to give herself to a man.
Harry and Kay are a nice fit, except for the small fact he’s married. While a rational person would conclude that a divorce was in order, the late ’40s were a time before half of all marriages ended up in failure and Harry is convinced a divorce would devastate his wife; so much so he believes the only humane thing to do is to kill her. Of course, murder is never simple. In this case, Harry’s plan is complicated by his best friend Richard, played by Pierce Brosnan. Richard is something of a wolf and a life-long bachelor but he quickly falls hard for Kay himself. Also, unbeknownst to Harry, Pat isn’t exactly an innocent bystander. In fact, she has a few secrets of her own.
It’s a classic setup for tragedy and the irony is that, if everyone had spoken their true feelings from the outset, a rather large mess probably could’ve been avoided. Lucky for us, that doesn’t happen because the pleasures come from watching how Married Life twists itself up and then ultimately smoothes itself back out. In between, it’s a treat to watch Cooper, Brosnan, McAdams and Clarkson do their thing.
Cooper actually manages to make Harry somewhat sympathetic. His plan is unforgivable, but you believe that he thinks he’s doing the right thing and that he’s honestly torn up about it.
Brosnan meanwhile continues to prove he’s capable of playing more than Remington Steele or James Bond. His Richard is another potentially unsympathetic character. He’s a cynic and he doesn’t think twice about betraying his friend, yet you have the feeling he simply can’t help it. He’s enthralled by Kay and he’s struck by a kind of tunnel vision.
For her part, McAdams brings just the right note of innocence, earnestness and sex appeal. You don’t doubt for a minute that these two men would do whatever they had to do to have her for their own.
Finally there is Patricia Clarkson. She’s not the definition of a classic beauty, but she’s pretty and there’s always something alluring and sexy about her. Beyond that, she sparkles with a bright-eyed intelligence and there’s often a warmth in her voice like she’s just finished laughing or she’s about to start.
Beyond the fine acting, the rich period production design is first rate and the drowsy, almost melancholy score by Dickon Hinchliffe (founding member of the British band Tindersticks) punctuated by late ’40s pop tunes sets just the right tone and is really the glue that holds it all together.
Some may find that Married Life feels a little writerly as often seems the case when someone directs his or her own screenplay. It’s true, there’s an unnatural, stagy quality to the dialogue at times and it is magnified by Brosnan’s frequent voiceover narration, but it works. The movie seems set in an almost dreamy remembered time rather than reality anyway so a little abstraction works well.
Add it all up and Married Life isn’t terribly deep, but it’s sturdily mounted and smoothly entertaining. Some may find the straddling of styles scattershot while other will see it more charitably as a refreshing unwillingness to be pigeonholed. I found it engaging enough to go with the latter. If nothing else, it will entertain you and it just might leave you wondering what’s really going through the mind of the person curled up next to you at night.
Married Life. USA 2007 (released 2008). Directed by Ira Sachs. Written by Ira Sachs and Oren Moverman based on the novel Five Roundabouts to Heaven by John Bingham. Cinematography by Peter Deming. Music score composed by Dickon Hinchliffe. Starring Chris Cooper, Pierce Brosnan, Patricia Clarkson and Rachel McAdams. 1 hour 30 minutes. MPAA rated PG-13 for some thematic elements and a scene of sexuality. 3.5 stars (out of 5)
Filed under: Reviews
Tags: Chris Cooper, Dickon Hinchliffe, Ira Sachs, John Bingham, Oren Moverman, Patricia Clarkson, Peter Deming, Pierce Brosnan, Rachel McAdams
Related Posts: - Review: Elegy (2008) *** 1/2
- Movies You May Have Missed: 8/30/08
- The Watercooler: 3/10/08
- Weekend Forecast: 3/7/08
- Review: Rachel Getting Married (2008) ****
I cannot wait to see this. The cast alone {okay, minus Pierce} is very exciting.
I originally wasn’t so interested in this, but it’s been getting sturdy reviews (if not quite raves) all around, and I’m intrigued. And Patricia Clarkson is always a treat, she was the highlight of Lars and the Real Girl for me.
I don’t think this is going to end up in anyone’s DVD collection, but it was a decent time at the cinema. That sounds like faint praise, but based on the huge servings of crap I’ve been dished up at the multiplex, apparently ‘decent’ is not in style this season.
I like decent from time to time. I have gorged myself on brilliant for a while now; I am ready for some decency or even crap for that matter. My brain cannot function on No Country levels forever.
Thanks, Craig–only read bits and pieces of your review. I’ll see this sometime in the next seven days and get back to you. You’ve become my biggest cinematic tour guide, pointing me in the right direction… Hope you don’t get me lost with this one. Just kidding, I’m sure it’s as stable as you say it is.
One certain theme I’m discovering with 2008 thus far is brevity. I’ve seen more 90-minute films in the last two months or so than I think I had seen in a couple of years put together. Sometimes films should be compact and as succinct as possible and it’s been fairly refreshing to see so many shorter films recently. In the end, running time doesn’t matter much, but with films of a vaguely slight nature, not allowing the film to run out of gas can be crucial to the film’s success.
Nice review, Craig. I always enjoy new shots at the noir genre. It would be great if a filmmaker could come along and singlehandedly revive noir with a new masterpiece. The Coens gave it a shot, something could be said for Memento, and I did enjoy Brick, but all of those are either too gimicky or fail to appeal to a large enough demo.
Enjoying the site. I’ve added you to our blogroll, for what it’s worth.
When I finally steer you wrong Alexander, I look forward to you raking me over the coals in the comments section.
Thanks Evan, I’ll return the favor and I’ll add you to my feed list. As I’ve trimmed back my participation at places like Hollywood-Elsewhere I’m trying to keep up on more individual blogs. Kind of a new year’s resolution. So far I haven’t spent as much time reading other people as I’d like. I find I could spend all day going from blog to blog and never have any time to write anything of my own, let alone keep up with the comments here. Still, I hope to read you more and I look forward to having you back here. Your considered voice is welcome.
“Beyond that, she sparkles with a bright eyed intelligence and there’s often a warmth in her voice like she’s just finished laughing or about to start. ”
“The movie seems set in an almost dreamy remembered time rather than reality anyway so a little abstraction works well.”
Very fine read. Well done, my good man. You provide an excellent summation of the goddess Clarkson’s easily evident charms. She’s grand in pretty much everything, isn’t she? Also enjoyed how you dissected the crosspolinization of genres. Plus the Hitchcock reference. I caught that as well.
Sounds like we had much the same reaction. (Even down to the stars we gave it.) I was pleasantly surprised at how much it resonated with me. But there’s so little going on cinematically right now and I’ve never been one to sit home on Good Friday, so…
Nick, I think you’re going to like this one.
I had a feeling you might enjoy it Miranda, though one can never tell about these things. I’m glad you did.
And thanks for the kind words.
Thanks for another well written review, Craig.
“While a rational person would conclude that a divorce was in order, the late ’40s were a time before half of all marriages ended up in failure and Harry is convinced a divorce would devastate his wife; so much so he believes the only humane thing to do is to kill her.”
Your being an apologist here for homicidal intent/actions had me raising an eyebrow. But as I read on – ‘Cooper actually manages to make Harry somewhat sympathetic. His plan is unforgivable, but you believe that he thinks he’s doing the right thing and that he’s honestly torn up about it.’ – I realized that your penchant for romantic outsiders (or hardboiled with a soft centre) combined with a highly sympathetic performance by Chris Cooper to get the better of you :-)
Your being an apologist here for homicidal intent/actions had me raising an eyebrow.
Hmm, spoken like a true psychologist, sartre. ;-)
Then again, I sometimes had sympathy for the murderers in the Columbo series. In many cases they were truly nasty and/or greedy people. But in a few of the stories, you really sympathized with the killer. They were decent people who would never do such a thing and you really see them as being backed into a corner and believing that they had no other option. In fact, one story I’m thinking of guest-starred the great Faye Dunaway (see other thread) who played a mother who teams up with her daughter to kill the daughter’s boyfriend after he abused her and cut her throat (non-fatally). At the end she takes the rap for both of them and the daughter escapes to Italy.
But I digress. Excellent review, Craig. Maybe I’ll check this one out in the theater. I’m short on cash right now so I’m being very picky on what I see in the theater and what I wait for on DVD.
Sartre, I assumed the moral outgrage was a given and I was leaving it up to the reader. Harry is not a good guy at all, yet Cooper adds a layer of humanity to him. Truth be told,
Alison, if you’re budgeting movies, you could probably skip this one. It’s good, but it’s not a must-see.
Also, Columbo was awesome.
“Hmm, spoken like a true psychologist, sartre. ;-)”
LOL! Guilty as charged :-)
I’ve worked with undeniably likeable people who have done monstrous things. Including those who probably only had a proclivity for violence as a brand of stupidity under a particular set of personally demanding circumstances. To do such work well doesn’t so much require black and white morality, but rather a clear sense of the bottomline.
I have no doubt that if transported back into the late 40’s Craig would take the divorce rather than murder solution to a bad marriage.
I’d take the Pierce Brosnan route and steer clear of marriage altogether. Rachel McAdams might get me to crumble though…
You wouldn’t be smarter Craig under such circumstances… maybe just a little taller
:-)
I hope so Miranda :) I really, really like the cast, so we’ll see when it rolls into my town sometime in May.
Miranda is an excellent guide to all things noir. And is happily capable of personifying the style.
Good to know, Nick. I’ll be very interested in hearing what you have to say…and anxiously awaiting your review.
sartre, you’re wonderful. But I’m sure you hear that all the time. A well worded compliment from you is like a gift from heaven.
Hmmm. But Craig told me he was 6′2″, my darling sartre. Surely Pierce can’t be much taller than that…?
Seriously, though…
There is one thing I’d like to remind everyone that has any intention of seeing this. As Craig pointed out, the film is a blend of different genres. But it is ESSENTIALLY a comedy. If I had to categorize it (and I have to - I make a list annually of every film that I see) that’s where I would put it.
I imagine that’s why I was never morally outraged. It is a droll, wry, amusing film that you don’t take completely seriously and you’re not sure if Chris Cooper is actually going to put his plan into action. Though the INTENT is surely there.
I don’t think that murder is the solution to any well worn dilemma but Mr. Cooper’s character does believe that he is acting in his spouse’s best interests. He wants to spare her the pain of a divorce. His rationalization (I know, I know…) is that she would never get over it and that it would have a significantly negative impact on the rest of her life. I should point out that he is also the type of guy who has been married 20 plus years and had never even LOOKED at another woman until Rachel McAdams came along. He’s hardly the type for an affair, much less murder. He is an exceptionally soft spoken, gentle person.
Tone is everything. Mr. Sachs proves to be an exceptional director. You may have to see it to understand completely. But, as a woman, I wasn’t offended by this premise at all. Let’s just say that his wife (Patricia Clarkson) is not exactly what she seems either.
How does that saying go? “One of the reasons I have such mistrust for people is that I know deep down that they’re capable of ANYTHING.”
There we have it….
It’s comic for sure Miranda, but it’s hardly the “slip on a banana peel and laugh out loud” variety, so I’d be careful about the classificaton…but then the first sentence of my review expressed a difficulty in categorizing this movie…maybe it’s just me.
Well, I saw it and I liked it okay, though I guess a bit less than Craig and Miranda. The film excels in its attitudinal candidness and the performances are all very well grounded to be sure. Brosnan uses all of his post-Bond charm to make his character far less unsympathetic than he ought to be, as Craig points out in his review. Chris Cooper is pretty much terrific and deliciously understated. When he’s called on to finally emote, he does so in grand style and proves yet again what kind of a gifted actor he is. Rachel McAdams and Patricia Clarkson are both very good in their respective roles as well. McAdams in particular impresses with some juicy scenes, mainly with Brosnan, and partly because with Clarkson one is sure going in she’ll deliver the goods.
Craig, you’re dead-on right about the film being so Hitchcockian. Case in point: “The trouble with Harry…” as a line of dialogue. If you were to attempt to link Married Life to any film by Hitchcock, I think The Trouble With Harry would probably be the one to shoot for–a dry, morbidly humorous lark of a film.
Good call on Harry, Alexander. I hesitate to draw too strong a connection to Hitch, I mean, that’s a pretty loaded thing to say, but damnit the spirit is there.
Just re-read this after (finally) seeing the movie. I agree with you almost totally, though I maybe liked it a little bit more. And I just want to say that the phrase
“she sparkles with a bright-eyed intelligence and there’s often a warmth in her voice like she’s just finished laughing or she’s about to start”
is absolutely spot-on, the kind of observation that makes a writer worth reading.
I love it when people go back and read old reviews! Thanks for the kind words.
I may have liked the movie as much as you, but didn’t make it clear enough in the review. I liked it a lot, but it seemed kind of….slight….so it didn’t merit a rave. I don’t think anyone would claim that it’s perfect, but what is?
Some of the details are fuzzy for me right now, but the mood and the tone and the look have stayed with me. And of course the performances. Jeez, you may have convinced me I ought to watch it again.