Review of Metropolitan

Introduction

There now follows a review of a DVD featuring High-Society dances and do`s, of young adults discussing existential `meanings`, of Dinner suits and gowns. Furthermore, this is a movie that features lots of talking, and not much else. Fans of all-shootin`, all-blastin`, all-explodin` action movies are therefore advised to `look away now`.

Back in 1990, when we were still getting used to a `United Germany`, yet still getting beaten by `West Germany`, a fellow by the name of Whit Stillman sold his apartment for fifty-thousand dollars, asked a few friends and members of his family for a `loan` (I hope he repaid them - you know how these `artists` are) and set about making a movie about a group of (mainly over-privileged) College students `doing` the debutante ball scene during their first Christmas home from University.

Surprisingly, only one of these characters has adopted the clichéd yet all too prevalent habit of becoming a full-blooded socialist during their first semester at college. However, despite his bedroom being sans Che-Guevara poster, Tom Townsend (Edward Clements) does not seem to be planning a Christmas break with the Wealthy New York people that he meets by accident, but finds himself thrown into a world of class discussion and unhappy young proto-capitalists, which he comes to find himself enjoying. Way to fight the power, Tom.

Of course, what would a film about young nubile New Yorkers be if it didn`t feature a love story? Audrey Rouget (`The Age of Innocence`s Carolyn Farina) is initially Tom`s intellectual sparring partner, her fondness for Austen`s `Mansfield Park` causing Mr Townsend much cause for concern. Although, somewhat predictably, he finds himself falling for Audrey, and the finale sees him and his pal fighting against the clock to rescue her from the clutches of famed-womaniser and all round `bad guy` Rick von Sloneker (Will Kempe)

Video

As I have remarked above, if you`re looking for CGI dinosaurs or controlled explosions, then you really have come to the wrong place. What is in evidence is a great use of a small budget, disguising the limited resources of the film maker. For example, those New York Apartment interiors look real because they are - lent to the director by rich acquaintances, and it is in these locations that much of the, ahem, `action` takes place.

Hardly taking cinematography to new levels, the picture still looks very good and, dare we say it, probably better than it would have looked had the locations been studio sets.

Audio

The sound appears in mono, unsurprisingly. This is not a problem as such, as most of the film is dialogu, backed by the kind of classical/jazz music that aficionados will tell you sounds `better` in mono.

By the way, ignore them. EVERYTHING is better in stereo.

The choice of music itself is `quite interesting` (as the unmatchable Stephen Fry would no doubt proclaim). Obviously, we get the normal piano tinkling stuff that you`d imagine, but there is a healthy dose of salsa throughout that keeps reappearing and becomes, in many ways, the movie`s theme.

Features

We get: A Director`s commentary, original trailer and the entire musical score.

Although there is not a vast abundance of extras, the idea of having a selectable musical score as an extra is a fantastic one. It might be that I`m easily impressed, but I`d really like to see more of this. A big `thumbs up` to Metrodome.

Conclusion

Metropolitan is a movie that is very easy to dismiss, even after having seen it. Too much soul-searching of the Upper Middle Class Ivy League set, and not enough genuine plot development means that you never really get to know the characters as intimately as you would hope - no, make that `long` - for.

Yet there is a charm behind the pretension; a shrill scream that still echoes after watching the DVD. You may have thought nothing of it at the time, but several days later, `Metropolitan` will be infiltrating your dreams, and unpicking your thoughts at the seams. I suppose it`s my job to explain why this is …

Consider the often tried method of `revising` that surfaces at least once in every series about High-School kids (think `Saved by the Bell`) involving recording your entire set of notes onto cassette, and sticking your walkman on whilst you go to sleep (even the ever-so-slightly sleep deprived will be grimacing at this point), in the hope that the information will `sink in` whilst the sandman does his rounds. Likewise, when you are faced with almost exclusively dialogue for ninety minutes, it is only after the event that some of it surfaces in your consciousness.

Consequently, the movie certainly demands repeat viewings, but only for those who can actually stomach it in the first place. The Writer/Directors apparent yearning for the Jazz-boom led faux aristocracy of 1930`s New York seems a little misplaced. After all, shouldn`t these kids be listening to Guns N Roses and analysing `Twin Peaks`? If you want an early 90s take on the aforementioned era, you`d be better off picking up Fry and Laurie`s Jeeves and Wooster …

Actually, maybe I`m missing the point. There`s a big chunk about the `mindset of the characters at this transitional period in their lives` that I`m probably supposed to chuck in here; something that not only justifies the setting, but reveals it to be the greatest stroke of genius in Cinema history. Such endorsement would, no doubt, reflect the projected intellectual ability of the characters in `Metropolitan`, and negate their occasionally one-dimensional or (whisper it) boring appearance. But I`ll pass on making such inflated claims.

After all, nobody likes a smart arse.