There is only so much matter in the universe. So at some point, simple physics dictates that James Franco must come to the end of the hitherto unending supply of goodwill that has been extended to him in recent years, unless he generates some more by making something that we can all agree is not just interesting, not just full of potential or ambition to be good, but actually, genuinely good. You know, anything—a book, a painting, a cheese whip commercial, an expressionist dance routine, even a movie—that his long suffering fans can point to and be vindicated by, at which point his detractors will only be able to look at their shoes and shuffle about shamefaced. “The Sound and The Fury” is not that movie.
Based on the extraordinary, complex Nobel Prize-winning William Faulkner novel of the same name, Franco’s 101 minute film version is immensely truncated, but somehow manages to feel self-indulgent nonetheless, particularly in the first of its three chapters, which is told from the point of view of the Compson family’s shame, the idiot Benjy. Starring Franco’s halfwit bucktooth dentures in the role, and also Franco himself we suppose, his Benjy roils, spasms, groans, gurns and flails his way through an interminable first third which is surely destined to be listed as the precise filmic definition of the “Tropic Thunder” meme of “going full retard.”
Taking an elliptical approach to the storytelling, clearly in hopes of evoking Faulkner’s own masterfully deconstructed, non-linear, stream-of-consciousness style in the book, what we really get is childlike, whispery, enigmatic voiceover (I don’t know how many times we had to hear that “She smelled like the trees” but it was far too many), myriad shots of the childhood and grown versions of Benjy’s adored sister Caddy running in slo-mo, looking back over her shoulder through a curtain of strawberry blonde hair, and half an hour of Franco drooling onto a gate.
Chapter two fares a little better, though perhaps only because we were so relieved that the gate/slobber section was past. It follows the sensitive intelligent brother of the once-great Compson family, Quentin (Jacob Loeb). To be honest, we’re relying on our memory of the book for most of the characterization because here, with the woozy camera work, the omnipresent ambient drones and ticks of the soundtrack and the frequent cuts back to Tim Blake Nelson’s drunk old codger patriarch spouting incomprehensible homilies about time and virginity and what not, there’s just not a lot of room left for anything as uncool as actual character. Quentin’s tragic arc, from quasi-incestuous love and possessiveness over Caddy, to starchy miserable Harvard student, happens in the blink of an eye, so it’s hard to invest in it at all.
Thirdly we get the Jason chapter, which is maybe the most straightforward (as it is in the book). The choleric, mean spirited brother, Jason (Scott Haze) is bitterly resentful of Caddy’s illegitimate daughter Miss Quentin (Joey King), steals the money her mother sends her and attempts unsuccessfully to police her increasing promiscuity. Throughout all these sections, we jump around in time seemingly randomly, though in case you’re worried, this section too, is largely free of turnstiles and dribble. However, Seth Rogen turns up as a telegraph operator who’s a Babe Ruth fan and Danny McBride does nice work with his single scene as a local lawman.
The rest of the cast are decent—the standout is Loretta Devine as the redoubtable servant Dilsey, while Nelson and Ahna O’Reilly, who plays Caddy, and at one point wears absolutely the ugliest hat we’ve ever seen, are more or less members of the Franco theatrical troupe by now, both having shown up in his last assay on Faulkner “As I Lay Dying.” We weren’t exactly fans of that film either, but while “The Sound and the Fury” is probably a little more polished, it’s also less experimental, more familiar, so it’s hard to say whether it actually marks a step forward.
That’s perhaps the biggest disappointment of “The Sound and the Fury”—all of its inescapable ambient soundtrack (by Tim O’Keeffe), all of its cinematographic style (DP: Bruce Thierry Cheung) feels derivative, like we’ve seen it before especially from neophyte filmmakers wanting to imbue their movie with some kind of aesthetic shorthand for “poetic.” With ‘Dying,’ Franco tried split screen, fractured images and repeated bits of action, and while it didn’t work it at least showed bravery. In fact if ‘Dying’‘s main issue was a surfeit of ideas, ’Sound’ feels like it suffers from a paucity.
Perhaps it’s time to reiterate our belief that Franco, when he’s not slavering over a fence, undoubtedly has talent in many arenas. But do we really believe he is such an unprecedentedly gifted polymath that he can create multiple projects simultaneously and turn in something truly great in any/all of them? For all his energy, like ‘Dying’ before it, ‘The Sound and the Fury” feels like it just didn’t have enough care taken over it, like Franco has mistaken his enthusiasm for Faulkner’s novel for time spent actually working out the best, most inventive way to bring it to the screen, and it’s a novel that deserves at least that respect. Of course, Franco probably has eight other things on the go at the moment (among them no fewer than three upcoming directorial features) which could account for why his "The Sound and the Fury" feels like maybe an eighth of a film. [C]
I\’m one of those unwaivering fans who\’ll see almost anything he puts out there….cuz he\’s so darn handsome.
why does it appear that James Franco wrote the first post…which he does quite often?
@FRANK (sorry, it's long response…..)
"What about this struck you as an argument, or even something worth stating? Reviewers differ in opinion about the film – gee, there's something that doesn't happen constantly, for all kinds of media and products!", we currently live in a society where some moviegoers can't seem to think for themselves (truly sad).
They believe every single review is gospel no matter what and are not open minded to at least seek the movie out for themselves (because, the movie got a bad review or low on Rotten Tomatoes, then I will not make the effort to watch it, because this is my favourite site for movie reviews, so I MUST believe them). Again, at least take the positive reviews with the negative ones and make a fairer assessment, instead of hating the movie before you see it or Franco for at least trying to be faithful to the novels.
Some don't seem to understand that sometimes the critics haven't read the novels that Franco adapts (by reading their reviews much more carefully), critics might have an agenda in the form of hating Franco (some fans are blinded by hate of Franco's solid achievements or other stars that they lap it up as it's negative), that they review the man himself and not the actual movie they were paid to review.
That is why I noted that comment. I clearly, understand it's obvious, but sometimes the moviegoers need a little reminder, because they seem to play into the hands of the critics instead of experiencing the movie for themselves (having open-mindness).
"Franco probably didn't do Benji very well, and so I am inclined to take the reviewer at their word.", again, everyone will have different interpretations on what all the characters in this movie should be like once on film, but again others that have actually viewed this new movie (without jumping on the hate campaign), have noted that Franco's performance is Oscar worthy and worthy of other awards, hence the ridicule stating it's like âTropic Thunderâ.
So what, I loved Tropic Thunder, Jake Gyllenhaal new performance is currently being compared to Taxi Driver for the TMZ generation in Nightcrawler (you know I'm watching this movie as soon as possible), does it mean he doesn't deserve an Oscar or other awards recognition, because some might deem it as slightly copying a little Taxi Driver or other movies? The answer is NO!
Again, critics seem to always take shots at Franco to build up other stars acting, especially near awards season, and once award season is over; then oh yeah, Franco indeed deserved some awards love after all (we just wanted to get our person in instead of Franco).
I can understand we all have favourites but the constant attacking on Franco is not always right. I remember, when Franco played Alien in Spring Breakers and Aron Ralston in 127 Hours, the critics in particular and some fans undertook every method possible to undermine Franco's iconic performances, just to again gain awards attention for others, luckily some awards voters saw through the bullsh*t of the media attack on Franco and most probably watched Franco's movies in fairness for them to judge.
Note – tweets are generally positive:
1. Doing Faulkner proud, James Franco and the cast of #thesoundandthefury #tiff #tiff14
2. @etowlin4 @ScottHaze @JamesFrancoTV yes he is very kind 🙂 and Scott's and James's interpretations in The Sound and The Fury are perfect 🙂
3. I was curious to know how you will make the chapter of Benjy: amazing editing and acting! Congratulation @JamesFrancoTV #TheSoundAndTheFury
4. #tiff14 #thesoundandthefury @jamesfrancotv Awesome performances and directing at the N.american premiere in Toronto International Film Featival
5. Loved seeing @JamesFrancoTV's wonderfully original, compelling, haunting adaptation of The Sound & The Fury! #TIFF14
6. A picture of the cast, incredible movie #TheSoundAndTheFury #TIFF14
7. #TheSoundAndTheFury was a trippy film, I must say. But really stunning. Also, something I would watch and analyze in my English program.
8. I really LOVED the movie,you were all amazing,THANK YOU SO MUCH @JamesFrancoTV @ScottHaze @ahnaoreilly @JoeyKingActress #TheSoundAndTheFury
9. @MoVernie did you watch it ? #sogood #TIFF14 #TheSoundAndTheFury
Anyway, why do I get the feeling some critics are doing it with this particular role also and the whole movie as a whole. I can't wait to judge for myself but note Franco's on words on Benjy (research):
âAs an actor, I looked to the book,â says Franco. âI have no idea if Faulkner knew someone like this, or had any basis in the way the character is depicted, but I just thought Iâd play it like he was writtenâheâs mute, he bellows, and heâs obsessed with certain things like light and flowers, since they remind him of his beloved sister, Caddy.â
Finally, as @ADAM mentioned it wasn't De Niro in the classic Rain Man but most definitely Dustin Hoffman.
Jason is not the eldest brother. Quentin is the oldest, then Caddie, Jason, and Benji the youngest. Couldn't read this review after that mistake.
Why doesn't this review surprise me, when it comes to Franco and this site. I suggest everyone go out and view this movie and judge for themselves, once it comes out. Because, one reviewer will say one thing and another will say something different.
An example:
âThe Sound and The Furyâ is not that movie.", interesting enough another reviewer states the following "Thatâs likely to change now because this, Francoâs most ambitious project, is his best film by far."
I totally thought he was extremely faithful to the novels of As I Lay Dying and Child of God also. Franco is a brilliant director and has made quite a few classics under his belt.
âThe Sound and The Furyâ is not that movie.", the other reviewer goes on to say "In these moments Francoâs appreciation of the novelist is most apparent. Finally Franco the director is on the road to gaining legitimacy."
"Starring Francoâs halfwit bucktooth dentures in the role, and also Franco himself we suppose, his Benjy roils, spasms, groans, gurns and flails his way through an interminable first third which is surely destined to be listed as the precise filmic definition of the âTropic Thunderâ meme of âgoing full retard.â"I thought Benjy was retarded so it looks like Franco played him correctly, anyway still the other reviewer further advocates that "Franco has given himself the plum role of the mentally incapacitated Benji. He moans, salivates and moves heavily in what is a largely impressive performance of the type that often wins awards, although the part is not big enough for him to be considered for anything other than supporting actor." Here that award worthy role.
So before, the haters are quick to jump on this site reviewers back, just remember that Franco at least tried to do something different with this movie, hence his Venice Award.
Franco will obviously not please everyone when you take on adapting novels but I think majority of the fans who are willing to give this movie a fair chance might be pleasantly surprised.
Because, at least this movie will actually follow the novel more than the 1959 version, even though Yul Brynner, Joanne Woodward, Margaret Leighton and Ethel Waters gave brilliant performances in that version.
Why does always he choose such brilliant works that even masters are weary to adapt to make films of? What a waste.
You didn't like it!what a surprise!you should just stop making big fuzz everytime Franco got himself a new film,because obviously everyone just get disappointed every time.
Or maybe he just has no talent PERIOD. He struts around thinking he's Andy Warhol but he can't act, paint, write, direct, etc… It's sad to think he is what passes as talent nowadays. What's even worse is we, the public, have to put up with his inbred looking brother too.
P. S. I didn't even start to read the article when I saw the top picture, and the 1st thought that popped in my head was "Simple Jack"!