Never judge a book by its cover. An old cliché asking people to avoid superficial and pre-mature judgments based on initial impressions. The old adage doesn't always work for film however. A slow and never ending sequence of incoherent scenes could easily lose the audience's attention and turn them off to the viewing experience almost instantly. However, no one would imagine that the credits would get the job done more effectively, until they watch "Reaching for the Moon."
It seems that the title itself is no stretch when it comes to the production of the filmmaking. Before the viewer is allowed to experience the first shot of the film (a boat in a pond in Central Park), he/she is subjected to an interminable list of logos and company names that drags on for what seems like five minutes. While the list of foundations and financial support is certainly impressive, watching each company and group's icon is no means to entertain an audience. This opening would be forgivable if it were not a perfect indicator of what is to follow for the remaining two hours. "Reaching for the Moon" tests the viewer's limits with its languid pace, interminable padding, and lack of concrete conflict or tension to keep one engaged.
The movie attempts a panoramic and intimate portrayal of the romance between poet Elizabeth Bishop (Miranda Otto) and Lota de Maedo Soares (Gloria Pires). As the film commences, Bishop decides to run off to Brazil to take a vacation from her life in New York. She meets up with old friend Mary (Tracy Middendorf) and her lover Lota and stays with the two women in their home secluded in the mountains. At first Elizabeth and Lota do not get along, but after two scenes of bickering because Lota is obnoxious and Elizabeth is her polar opposite, the two begin an affair. The affair naturally creates a stir with Mary but Lota promises to fix everything by adopting a child. From that point on, Mary becomes a peripheral character whose only purpose is to stir up the pot and present new conflicts for the lovers when there is nothing going.
The film's biggest issue is that it has no main focus. On a superficial level, it attempts to convince the viewer that the film is about the love affair and the problems it encountered over the ages, but it jumps ahead in time randomly without sustaining any real conflict. Lota and Elizabeth hate each other, and then love each other in the next scene. Mary creates issues, but once her needs are met everything is good in paradise. Meanwhile Elizabeth has an alcohol problem that persists throughout the film but also exists to inject the film with "drama." Elizabeth gets upset about something, then gets drunk and Lota carries her home. They reconcile and the film fades to black only to jump to some other events where the cycle will begin anew without any fresh developments or insights. The result is a choppy, poorly paced mess that tries hard to force the viewer to identify with characters that are bland and uninteresting at best.
The reasons for alcoholism to kick in are often nonsensical and comical in their portrayal. At one point, Elizabeth's drinking is triggered by jealousy over the fact that Lota ate the lunch that Mary prepared instead of her own. Since Lota and Mary work together, wouldn't this be expected at some point?
The dialogue scenes are pitiful and usually underscored by a saccharine musical score that seeks to envelop the viewer in a romantic experience that again feels over the top. Moments that could speak volumes with silence are ruined with such classic dialogue as "Where did you learn to speak such good English?" and the clever response "By reading your poems honey." At one point, the characters argue because Lota has never heard Elizabeth tell her the all important three words that lovers need to hear to believe that their relationship is real, regardless of the sacrifices made over the years. Elizabeth initially apologizes but then says "I did say it once." She reminds Lota that she told her "I love you" while she was asleep. Is it really possible that after years of being together, Elizabeth never once told Lota she loved her? And is it really plausible that their biggest argument in the film would be the result of such adolescent bickering? The argument in this scene has a lot to do with their consistently ignored power struggle, but the focus shifts to a second-rate discourse on who said "I love you" and when. At another point, Lota gives Elizabeth a new desk. When asked what she thinks of it, Elizabeth looks over at Lota and delivers another line of Shakespearean genius: "It's a nice desk." The moment would have been equally effective if Elizabeth would have cut to the next line of dialogue "Thank you" and punctuated it with a kiss. This leads to the next point. It is understood that this is a romance, but why is it necessary to punctuate virtually every happy scene with a kiss between Lota and Elizabeth. It makes for a repetitive viewing experience and feels superfluous and unnecessary.
The performances do little to help matters. Pires, a renowned soap opera star, looks completely out of her depth in the film. She emphasizes every line of dialogue and her excessive facial gestures make it feel like she's trying too hard to impress the viewer and appear likeable; she does neither and becomes more and more irritating as the film wears on. Otto has a blank face throughout the film and remains equally expressionless throughout the entire running time. One might argue that her battle with depression would create such a somber attitude, but Otto's delivery of the dialogue is consistently wooden and uninterested. Middendorf is the weakest of the lot: she opens her eyes as wide as possible to emphasize her anger and overdoes the facial and oral gestures; she seems better suited to a soap opera than a subtle drama. However, it is hard to blame the actresses for their poor turns when the material is so shallow and directionless.
From a visual standpoint, this film probably works best if the gorgeous landscape images were spliced together to create a tourism video of Brazil as they are the only redeeming aspect of the film and the main attraction. The early stages of the film are littered with beautiful imagery of the Brazilian mountains and beaches, but their absence in the latter half makes for an underwhelming visual experience.
There is certainly an audience for this aimless and rambling work, but it is probably only for those interested in Lifetime movies. Those hoping for a mature portrait of a great writer will be agitated to find the creation of her works manipulated into hokey montages while those expecting a mature representation of lesbian relationships will be appalled at is adolescent and catty portrayal. For those expecting a riveting experience filled with unique characters and drama will be bored by the repetitive cycle that the film wears out. "Reaching for the Moon" never gets off the ground and crashes disastrously from the get-go.
"Reaching for the Moon" screens at the Tribeca Film Festival on Thursdsay 4/18 at 9 PM, Saturday 4/20 at 9:30 PM, and Saturday 4/27 at 11:30 AM.