Nicole Kidman can be so ravishing, even with minimum makeup, so riveting, that she can shine through almost any conservative attiring and any demands for demureness...she manages that in Fur, which is "an imaginary acount" of the life of photographer Diane Arbus. Yet, one cannot help feel that the role of the wide eyed, pursed lipped (photographic) ingenue she plays is too well-crafted, too credible...and she, too "gullible", too impressionable, as it were...Maybe that is how it was in the real life of Diane Arbus...but in the movie her moving away from her husband, whom she apparantly loves and there is nothing hinted at any discord, any real dissatisfactions...and her kids, drawn inexorably by Lionel Sweeney seems a little bit of a stretch...contrived...
Spookily enough...the NYT carried an article today on a book on the photographic works of her daughter, Amy:
FASHION anarchy looks almost quaint in Amy Arbus's portraits of downtown Manhattan denizens in the 1980's. Their style was witty, tilted, nose-thumbing, a result of practical concerns about the cost of clothing and an expressive desire to invent a persona of one's own.
...
Inevitably Ms. Arbus's work will be compared to that of her mother, Diane. "I'm flattered if people see some correlation," Ms. Arbus said. "But my work is much more intentionally and less technically sophisticated. My work is less confrontational. It was clear to my subjects that I adored how they looked. I tried to make them feel like they were getting an award for their creativity."
No comments:
Post a Comment