In a word: ugh.
Straw Dogs is a remake of the 1971 Sam Peckinpah film of the same name starring Dustin Hoffman Susan George. It was itself based on a novel, but this rabbit hole is getting too deep already! Basically, Peckinpah faithful consider this one of his best efforts, a tricky mix of violence and psychological thriller set in a sleepy (fictional) Cornwall town. The remake is a tricky mix of violence and scenery chewing.
This time around Hoffman's David Sumner is played by James "Cyclops" Marsden which makes me miss his turn in The Box. His wife Amy is Kate Bosworth and this time around the two are a Hollywood A or B list couple (screenwriter and actress.) Joining them are that big tall Nordic Vampire from True Blood and James Wood in one of his most uninspired performances ever.
This film lost me about 5 minutes in with the heavy handed characterization of the locals as backwoods Southern idiots. I'm not even from the South and I was offended by the lazy and over the top stereotypes smeared onto the screen. Then you had the "Hollywood" couple and their white pants and "fancy ways" and the vitriol that was directed at them just for showing up to the town was ridiculous and presented without motivation. The line that killed the whole thing was in an early scene where a waitress tells David she can't accept his credit card because they only take cash and she punctuates it with (paraphrased) "you know cash, that stuff us poor people use." It came from nowhere with no prior setup and was completely misplaced dialog. The writer should be lashed for such clunky a clunky exchange. I've heard better lines on "Real Housewives."
After that, Straw Dogs and I were at opposite ends. I wasn't a big fan of the original either, but everything from the blocking to the script to the score were grating on me this time around.
David's character is probably the biggest flaw. Hoffman's portrayal 40 years ago was a man flirting with madness and pulling himself away from his wife through his intellectual pursuits. There was a decent and a logical connection of dots to get from reel 1 to the end credits. Marsden plays a bit of a twat and replaces the educational obsession with a few scenes of him working at a desk. This does nothing to set up the infamous rape sequence that punctuated the original. That time around you could believe Amy's choice to both give in and silently reject what was happening to her, but this time it just felt hollow. There was no gravity to David so there is very little gravity to the pulse of the movie. Basically, I could care less about anyone.
I also could not believe David was a screenwriter. First of all, you wouldn't write your scene list on a big chalk board labeling each one "Sc 1" or "Sc 12" etc. He knows its a fucking scene, he doesn't need the chalk equivilent of a file extension. And do I need to say it, "chalk?" Also, a Harvard sweatshirt? What screenwriter came from Harvard?
Honestly, I watched the last hour of the movie in fast forward and even at a new image for every minute or so of film, I understood the whole story and it sucked. Motivation was kicked aside in favor of getting the Nordic vampire to strip whenever possible and then there's a random killing and some fire bombs and a bear trap and we're done. Which, is pretty much how the first film went too, so I guess I can't dock it too many points!
The original never really stuck with me either, but it was much better at the atmospheric tones and slow pitch storytelling. I think people shy from remakes because of half ass jobs like this one. Does it simplify the story? Yes, which can be a good thing, but in the end it was cast improperly and the technical achievements were limited. Unless you need to satisfy a raging curiosity, I'd avoid it.
Grade: D
Posted by: |