Boogie Woogie
Gillian Anderson, Alan Cumming, Heather Graham, Danny Huston, Jack Huston, Christopher Lee, Joanna Lumley, Simon McBurney, Meredith Ostrom, Charlotte Rampling, Amanda Seyfried, Stellan Skarsgård, Jaime Winstone
A savage, sexy art world satire, with an all-star cast.
Danny Moynihan’s 2000 novel Boogie Woogie was set in the New York art world, but it makes a smooth transition here to contemporary London. Indeed, the post-YBA UK scene of celebrity enfants terribles, manufactured controversies and billionaire Russian collectors arguably provides an even more fitting backdrop for this tangled tale of dealmaking and heartbreaking behind gallery walls. Art Spindle – played with wolfish relish by our 2008 Michael Powell jury president Danny Huston – is a rapacious dealer obsessed with acquiring one of Mondrian’s final Boogie Woogie paintings. The work is owned by elderly collector Alfred Rhinegold (Christopher Lee), who has no mind to sell – although his wife Alfreda (Joanna Lumley) is keenly aware of the difference that the £28 million price tag could make to the couple’s declining years. Rhinegold is the film’s sole bastion of integrity: a stickler for owning art because you love it. Tellingly, though, he’s on his way out – and the younger generations possess no such scruples. Hyper-prolific collector Bob Maccelstone (Stellan Skarsgård) amasses art as if it’s stocks and shares, while his languid trophy wife Jean (Gillian Anderson) is more interested in staking her sexual claim on handsome young artists like Joe (Jack Huston). Among the artists themselves, things are no more respectable: most depraved of all is up-and-coming video artist Elaine (Jaime Winstone), whose numerous sexual conquests also provide the raw material for her autobiographical work. Boogie Woogie makes highly enjoyable use of its big, star-laden cast, which comprises eye-popping juxtapositions (whoever thought that lads’ mag pinup Gemma Atkinson would wind up in the same film as theatre heavyweight Simon McBurney?), very stylish bit-part players (such as Charlotte Rampling) and the odd knowing nod to a performer’s past (including Heather Graham’s rollerskating breakthrough in Boogie Nights, the porn industry equivalent of this film and its future near neighbour in movie reference tomes). It’s safe to assume that director Duncan Ward knows whereof he speaks. An experienced director of art-themed documentaries, he is also married to the highly respected curator Mollie Dent-Brocklehurst. Perhaps it’s not surprising, therefore, that Boogie Woogie doesn’t attack the point or value of contemporary art, nor the sky-high prices it commands. Instead, it uses the art world the way Robert Altman’s The Player used Hollywood: not as the source of human corruption, but as an environment that provides particularly favourable conditions for its growth and survival.
2009 Archive
Festival Diary: June
Find Films By Strand
EIFF is split into Strands. Use them to help find your films.
Event Search
Suggest-o-tron
Use this fun gadget to help you navigate the Festival programme and find your festival feet.
Start Suggest-o-tron
Comments
Login or Register to post / report comments
#1 Mairi Fraser / Friday 26 June, 2009 / 22:10 GMT
#2 B HB / Saturday 27 June, 2009 / 17:17 GMT
#3 Paul Laird / Saturday 27 June, 2009 / 17:38 GMT
Unless one defines daring as persuading Jamie Winstone to show us her boobs...oh, but she did that in last years disappointing Brit-flick "Donkey Punch". Perhaps then by daring we mean encouraging a fine actor like Danny Huston to give us a caricature of the caricature he played in "Ivans XTC" is that daring or simply a criminal use of one of the best actors of our time?
I don't know that anything here was daring...we've seen these sort of satirical looks at the world of Artistic endeavor before in "Pret" and "The Player" and both of those films were genuinely daring and accomplished. There was no new ground broken here.
Accomplished doesn't just mean having lots of big names in a film. If that was the case then "Independence Day" would have been hailed as an "accomplished" piece of film making instead of as a big budget toy advert.
Accomplished doesn't just mean having lots of big names in a film. If that was the case then "Independence Day" would have been hailed as an "accomplished" piece of film making instead of as a big budget toy advert.
Maybe the fact that the YBA provided us with a real-life, technicolour satire on the savagery of the Art world means that this film already feels dated...whatever the reason this is not a film that anyone associated with it should take any pride in.
The over-riding emotion is that this was a film made for the people in the film not for an audience.
#4 Leona Campbell / Sunday 28 June, 2009 / 08:46 GMT
The fact that none of the characters are especially likeable is disappointing as some start out a little likeable and loose it very quickly.
All in all not my most enjoyable movie of this years festival.
#5 Hans von Tostov / Sunday 28 June, 2009 / 18:00 GMT
The humour wasn't laugh-out-loud at all times, but was continuously present, and brought very much to life by brilliant performances from a wonderful cast.
I highly recommend this film. Thank you, Edinburgh!
#6 Paul Laird / Monday 29 June, 2009 / 14:15 GMT
that review was almost as pretentious as the film itself.
Well done.
Paul
#7 Hans von Tostov / Tuesday 30 June, 2009 / 08:51 GMT
But yet he does not adhere to his own dictum. Like the barbarian who must seek to destroy that which he doesn't understand, he follows his unqualified (by his own admission) criticism with criticism of another's comments. When did this person become the arbiter of Art and Criticism?
It's so easy to find fault in art, and so very difficult to create it. I would like to know what Paul has accomplished that qualifies him to write off a film as unaccomplished. Oh, but he is not in any way qualified.
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent," Ludwig Wittgenstein.
#8 Karen Lonie / Wednesday 15 July, 2009 / 06:57 GMT