The film Text copyright (c) Filmverdict 2006-present. Any film titles and artwork used are copyright of their respective owners.
In many ways, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button seems an unlikely project for David Fincher to tackle. Basically, it is a fantastical fable that revolves around a romance; far removed from the sort of violent, dark thrillers that have made Fincher's reputation. Certainly very much in evidence though is the director's famous meticulousness, especially when it comes to the visuals. Fincher is truly a pioneer in the employment of CGI, and no other film has exhibited this as much as Benjamin Button. The stunning aging effects, while not always completely seamless, are undeniably impressive, making Brad Pitt convincingly age over a span of eighty years. The effects are constantly in the foreground, so the fact that they only occasionally seem unreal (mainly when the old Benjamin is talking - something to do with the lip syncing) is quite an achievement.
The film is well-titled (named after the F. Scott Fitzgerald short story that inspired it) because it is indeed a very curious tale. Basically, it depicts the life of the titular Benjamin, from his birth in 1918 and right through the 20th century. The curious part is that he ages backwards - when born he has the skin and physical deficiencies of a geriatric, and progressively becomes more youthful as the time passes. From early on the film positions itself as a romance between Benjamin and Daisy (the statuesque Cate Blanchett), but the romance itself takes a long time to materialise. With a running time of 166 minutes, there are numerous meanders and detours that tend to feel like padding despite some inspired moments, such as a run-in with a U-boat in World War 2. The comparisons with Forrest Gump are not unfounded, not least because this is also written by Eric Roth - Button similarly offers a personal perspective on many crucial periods of the last century.
Also like Gump, Button uses a framing device, but it is not Benjamin who recounts the story. Instead, it is the dying Daisy, on her deathbed in a New Orleans hospital as Hurricane Katrina rages outside. These segments prove to be a misjudgement, as they only serve to prolong the film without adding anything beneficial in particular. A major problem with the film as a whole is that the constant effects grandstanding, while always in service of the narrative, does become distracting. This is the first film Fincher has made that requires thorough emotional involvement to succeed, and the obvious precision of the filmmaking and the waiting for the next visual trick acts as a barrier to that involvement.
Nevertheless, despite these criticisms, the film isn't a waste of time by any means. The performances are uniformly excellent and the film treats a difficult (one might say unfilmable) premise with great care and heartfelt seriousness. There are plenty of touches that offer a glimpse of Fincher's genius, such as a novel "what if" montage, and once the central couple do hook up, the film finally achieves that emotional connection for which it strives so long. Unfortunately, that emotional catharsis is only sustained for a short period. Eventually, the outlandishness of the premise proves to be something that not even David Fincher can overcome.
The summary
A sprawling, ambitious odyssey that may yet prove to be revolutionary but it ends up feeling more like a technical exercise than a true tearjerker. David Fincher is out of his comfort zone and for arguably the first time he just misses the mark.
Agree? Disagree? Say so in the Guestbook!