MOVIE REVIEW

Frida  (2002)

Starring: Salma Hayek, Alfred Molina, Geoffrey Rush
Director: Julie Taymor

Rating: R

Studio: Miramax

Review Posted: 11.11.02

Spoilers: Minor

By Sara Michelle Fetters.

"Frida Doesn't Pain a Full Picture"

Salma Hayek has been trying to get a film about the life of Mexican painter and artist Frida Kahlo made for nearly a decade. In the process, she beat out rival projects being put together by such superstars as Jennifer Lopez (yawn) and Madonna (thank gawd). The movie about the talented painter was a labor of love for Hayek. Through sheer force of will, she was able to bring gifted director Julie Taymor (Titus) on board, along with full-fledged superstars Ashley Judd, Antonio Banderas and Edward Norton (Hayek’s boyfriend, whom also did an unaccredited rewrite of the script) all working for next to nothing.

It would be nice to report that the subsequent film, with all of the talent and perseverance that has gone into seeing it to fruition, was worth the heartfelt efforts of all involved. That would be nice, but, unfortunately, not going to happen. Frida is a perfectly ok film, nothing more, and fails to transcend much of the standard clichés of filmed biography.

The problems with Frida begin right away. After a luminous opening sequence where the bed-ridden Khalo (Hayek) is loaded onto a truck (in her bed, no less) to attend her first art show in her native country, the film whisks back in time to when a then 13-year old Frida was an art student interested in the work of the famed Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina). The problem is, the actress playing Khalo at 13 is Hayek, who looks nowhere near that young, and the result is incongruous at best. And Frida has many moments like this, where things are “just off” in ways that are almost indescribable.

Don’t get me wrong, Frida definitely has moments that sing and cry as to what the film could have been. Taymor, an amazing visualist justifiably lauded for her work on Broadway’s The Lion King and the Shakespeare film Titus, pulls some outstanding moments out of her bag of tricks that speak deftly to the unspeakable traumas Khalo had to endure. There is an astonishing sequence dealing with the tragic bus accident that changed and fueled the artist’s life, and Taymor uses animation of supplied by the Brother’s Quay to truly bring this horrific situation home.

Molina is also a standout here. He brings a real fiery presence to Rivera that the script sorely lacks. It’s through his own fierce portrayal that we really begin to understand how women were so uncontrollably drawn to him. The pathos he drips is so genuine; so heartfelt; your heart nearly breaks for him and Khalo as their relationship turns over and over in multiple directions.

Also quite good is Roger Rees (Next Stop Wonderland), who plays Frida’s beloved father Guillermo. He’s fabulous, sharing scenes of warmth and humility that rank as some of the finest I’ve seen this year. But, he disappears for long stretches of the movie, and just as he returns and brightens things up once more, he’s suddenly gone and completely forgotten. We never know what happens to him or his character, or what the effects of his passing had on his beloved daughters. It is jarring that the film would forget such a grand character – and obviously important figure in Khalo’s life – and it isn’t an easy thing to get passed feeling cheated about.

What about Hayek? She’s very good as Frida Khalo. It really should be noted that this is probably the role of career to this point. Unfortunately, the script (bad boyfriend, Ed) lets her down big-time. We don’t know any more about the enigmatic artist at the end than we did at the beginning. Her brilliance isn’t really shown as much as inferred. And while it is obvious – the film is so downbeat at times how could it not be – that Frida’s tragic life consciously affected the tone and style of her work, that doesn’t mean Frida the person comes into any better focus as the film fades out.

It should be noted that I normally try to go into a movie devoid of expectation, leaving them at the door. Sometimes, that isn’t always possible. I remember with The Phantom Menace, it was almost impossible not to bring my high expectations for the movie with me, as the original Star Wars was the second film I ever remember seeing (the first being Lady & the Tramp with my mother). My opinion was unavoidably clouded by my reverence for the first, making it difficult to take the epic on its own meager terms.

Taymor’s Titus was almost an orgasmic experience for me back in 1999. She revolutionized Shakespeare and shook up the status quo of filmmaking all in one, huge masterful picture. Going into Frida, knowing what I knew of the artist’s life and work, I was completely enthused as to what Taymor could do with such a subject to explore and bring life to. What was there was not the groundbreaking biography I had hoped – although there are moments that do astound – and I could not help but be disappointed. Frida is a perfectly acceptable biography of an astounding woman, and while I am giving it a relatively positive review based on that, I still have trouble giving it a recommendation. Whether the failure to be able to do that is the film’s or my own, I cannot say.

Rating: 2.5 out of 4

TOP