Purely Joyful Movie!

Fresh and Exciting

Fantastic!

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Marie and Bruce is a black comedy that stars Julianne Moore and Matthew Broderick.Tom Cairns directs the psychological comedy drama Marie and Bruce, adapted from the play by Wallace Shawn.The story was set over a period of 24 hours.It involves the troubled marriage of neurotic New Yorkers Marie and Bruce. What follows is a bleak psychological study of the breakdown of a modern relationship. Despite the interesting premise,the viewer might find this film not-so- interesting due to the fact that both Marie and Bruce are too unlikable to the point that one might hardly care about their characters.But nevertheless,I commend the performances of both Moore and Broderick.

"What do I know about man's destiny? I could tell you more about radishes." -Samuel BeckettMarie and Bruce tell me what I otherwise often take for granted about radishes, for me an apt metaphor for long-term relationships. Marie dwells on her disgust for her husband, Bruce, ad nauseam, and she continues to "bite" into him, taste the disgust anew, and "bite" again. This disgust seems to be the driving force behind the reverie that leaves her craving for that radish all over again. Bruce goes about his day, being the radish, knowing it, accepting it, even flaunting it in the face of Marie's disgust, vised between her gritted teeth. Some dialog reflects apt wisdom from John Gray's Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, and Deborah Tannen's You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. Taste for radishes may be something acquired, as is taste for theater of the absurd. Bravo Wally and Tom. I love Beckett, Pinter, Ionesco, Stoppard, ... and you.

As a young man, I first saw "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" and was aghast at such vituperative enmity shared by a married couple. As years passed, I understood that this shocking portrayal by Taylor and Burton (George & Martha) of a dysfunctional couple was just one way some couples manifest their undeniable love for each other. There is much drama and intentional pain to be inflicted upon each other to assuage their sado-masochistic tendencies. In the end, after bringing others down to their level of marital martial arts, they survive because they truly love each other. To outsiders, they express in in such an unpalatable way. On the other hand, "Marie & Bruce", while similar to George & Martha, with Marie's hateful and vituperative harangues (especially in public) against Bruce, who responds to her with indelicate personal thoughts about other women's tighter vaginas,etc., demonstrates a marital bond more consistent with the Generation X'ers propensity to see everything from ones own selfish and hedonistic point of view that leaves little room for even a flicker of true love within their marital foundation. Perhaps "M&B" reflects another casualty of our society as our moral-ethical boundaries have degenerated since post WWII changes in our society. This marriage is definitely worse that George and Martha's as there is no love residing anywhere behind their dysfunctional behavior. Even worse, Bruce takes the milquetoast approach as he receives his wife's spewings and calls her "darling" a million times in a demonstration of appeasement while he seeks the love he is missing from his wife through sexual fantasies with strange women and almost latent homosexual fulfillment with his lunch buddy, Frank. Marie and Bruce may represent the decline of dysfunctional marriages to an even lower point today than the Baby Boomer's era. There is no redeeming basis for this marriage to have ever occurred. The lack of intellectual capacity in M&B (as evidenced by the banal conversations at Frank's party) compared to George and Martha and friends is pertinent to today's minds as they proceed through trials and tribulations of marriage. The utter lack of any fundamental basis of love throughout M&B's marriage in today's arena may indeed reflect the lack of intellectual development, hedonism, amorality, and many other missing elements of our former culture that seems more prevalent in today's society. Marriage, even if practiced dysfunctionally, seems to be far more absurd and disgusting when there is no development of any basic love concept all while selfish,non-intellectual, mundane, banal, and all other dark forces have become so influential in shaping personality. I'll take George and Martha any day because I know they, at the very core, loved each other very deeply. Chazz

Wallace Shawn, the author of "Marie and Bruce", who wrote the original play in which this film is based on, is a man whose work in the theater leaves a lot to be desired. I don't wish anyone the experience we had with a play he co-wrote with a brother and that was seen at the Mineta Lane Theater in New York about three years ago, in which the audience kept leaving the performance because it was insufferable. This same quality can be said about this adaptation of yet another one of his works for the theater.Directed by Tom Cairns, who also translated the material for the screen, shows us a couple of misfits that have been together far too long and would have been better off dissolving their marriage some time ago. The main attraction for watching the picture was Julianne Moore and Matthew Broderick, both great actors that put in a brave appearance to be in front of the camera playing these people. One wonders why hasn't Marie left Bruce a long time before? It's easier to see why Bruce has stuck to the situation because he doesn't have much to offer anyone else in her right mind.The film can infuriate would be viewers who would not have enough patience to sit right through it.