Movie 21: Stigmata

Starring: Patricia Arquette, Gabriel Byrne, Jonathan Pryce, Nia Long, Thomas Kopache.

Director: Rupert Wainwright

I had forgotten I even owned this film until probably a few minutes ago.  I saw it once when it first came out in the theater.  My friend told me how important it was to stay through the credits because it'd be "like walking out on a curtain call at a play," which was something I hadn't really thought about at the time.  That's pretty much all I remember about this movie.  I've probably owned it for years and never got around to watching it again...probably because I didn't care much for it the first time.  But, it fits the current "possession" movie sub-genre run, so I might as well take a run at it.

Oh, wait, I do remember something now:  Billy Corgans annoying MTV score.  It literally sounds like the death of innocence and dignity.

I can't quite tell if the opening sequence and the irritating, overly stylized credits sequence makes for good contrast or just is poor film-making.  I'm leaning toward the latter, really.  It's been five minutes and already I find myself regretting the decision of dusting this off.  

The opening, with Gabriel Byrne scowling at a great deal of religious iconography worked well enough for me.  Byrne is a mostly fine actor, depending on the film, and his character is actually an interesting profession, which is always a plus in horror films.  Maybe even film in general.  But the profession of "Guy who investigates miracles for the Vatican" is a neat concept, and Byrne has that staunch, skeptical appearance to make that really work.  But, then again, there are some real turds starring Gabriel Byrne.

Gonna go on record now: I have never, and likely never will, liked Patricia Arquette in anything.  I never saw the appeal.  Is it the halting, breathless voice?  The unappealing way she performs?  Well, okay, there was True Romance.  She was pretty good in that.

Catholicism does have some of the prettiest stuff, doesn't it?  It almost seems lazy to make a Catholic film: cathedrals and statues and all that...it kinda just does the work itself.  Makes for a pretty picture.

Jonathan "Professional Dick" Pryce does his professional dick stuff well.  It also always seems like cheating when you make a Catholic film and cast them as the villain.  It just seems too easy and, honestly, counter-productive.  Church conspiracies never strike me as terribly logical.  

So, wait, is sainthood transferable via object?  That doesn't make much sense, either.  That being said, the actual scene of her suddenly manifesting the wounds of stigmata in the bath wasn't too bad, despite the overly grungy stylized way it's done.  Actually, this movie is very nineties. Every frame (save for when we're in a church) is grungy and gritty, music score is thumping and dirty, cuts keep being signified by light and color...everything is flash bulbs and fluorescents, and every lead character needs to be "punkish."  Lots of rain.  It's like Seven but without, y'know, the talent.  Not that I have anything specific against director Rupert Wainright...no, wait, I have a LOT against him.  He made that terrible remake of The Fog.  

This movie is very much in love with montages.  I mean, sure, why write stuff when you can just cut through stuff?  

This movie actually kinda has me on edge.  I have no idea why.  It's not a pleasant edge, like a good scare or whatever...it just irritates me.

No sooner had I written that when a surprisingly charming Gabriel Byrne scene occurred.  The sequence when he comes into the salon is actually pretty good: I didn't know Byrne could muster that kind of charm and charisma.  He's usually so angry and scowly, which is good for a character actor.  Arquette plays off of him well, too, surprisingly enough.

The general concepts of the wounds of stigmata isn't a bad one.  It's not played with much in fiction, despite it having some basis in reality (though your belief on the subject is your own.  I don't buy into it much as an agnostic, but it's an interesting idea), but it's a rich subject to be mined for some sort of drama.  I'm not sure why Aquette has a shit attack and bails on Byrne in a coffee shop...

The crown of thorns bit would be really horrifying in a different film...but having the overly stylized club scene and Corgans shitty synth-industrial score pretty much undercuts it.  The weird splices of her wearing an actual crown of thorns doesn't help matters, either.  I would have just gone with Frankie being in a nightclub, sound drops out, and she just starts bleeding from the skull as she freaks out.  Byrne in the alleyway could have been a great sequence, too, but the film can't help but overdo it with spinning camera moves and cliche blue filters.  I think that edge I keep feeling is that scratching in the back of my head that tells me this movie might have had the potential to be something special in better hands.  I figure that movie, in whatever alternate reality it exists in, features Nia Long with better hair.

Aquette did pretty well with possession, actually.  She showed some pretty good chops.  Who knew she could pull something off if she just, y'know, spoke in a grown-up voice.  I like that she maintains scar tissue, too.  It's a nice touch to have her wandering around looking like Abdullah The Butcher.

Ooh, nice history moment!  Byrne telling her about the inaccuracy of the traditional crucifix is neat.  History for the win, yo.  So, there is that: the movie does like to play with accurate information.  Not exactly intelligence, though: If I had the tendency to suddenly start spouting painful and debilitating wounds, I don't think I'd ever bother leaving the house until I had that shit handled.

The scares just leave something to be desired.  It's irksome.  They kind of almost get there on occasion, but they never seem to be able to establish any real sense of sustained tension.  There's stuff that isn't bad, stuff that manages to be suitably interesting...but nothing really seems to hit the mark.  The eye effects on Arquette when she's writing on the walls, and the brief moment of tension as she shuffles past Byrne, that stuff works.  Not as well as it could, mind you, but it doesn't entirely fail.

Yet another moment of Byrne being charming.  He does a really good job showing some real humanity and characterization...it's a shame that it doesn't quite carry over into other scenes when he's stuck giving exposition.  He manages to do every scene with an appropriate sense of gravity and intensity, it's a good but uneven performance.

Is it wrong of me to say "That's what you get for wearing socks with sandals" when her feet get pierced?  'Cause I totally did.

Oh, yes, I forgot: this kinda was an expansion on that bit from Dogma wasn't it...the secret church conspiracy to keep the actual stuff written by Jesus away from the public because some reason.

I couldn't help but laugh out loud during her round of beat-the-gabriel.  It wasn't that it was a bad scene-actually, it has some stronger moments as it goes on-it's just that Byrne doesn't register pain or fear on his face, he just looks perpetually confused as she's bashing him into walls and mirrors and lockers.  He literally looks like he wants to say "wait, what?  I'm sorry, I didn't catch what you were saying."  Every decent scene is at least half-derailed by some sort of overly-stylized decision (more slow motion and flashes of light) or musical choice (this score really is the worst).  Every scene seems like it's halfway there and someone just decides to cut it's hamstrings.

So the great catholic conspiracy is what other religions have been saying for awhile?  That churches are basically just pretty buildings you gather in to worship together?  Seems pretty flimsy movie.

Final Thoughts: Well, it's not a completely terrible film.  Byrne and Arquette both give fairly strong performances, even though they aren't given the best material to work with.  The whole thing is a decent premise with a flimsy plot, which is an odd combination.  In the end, it's worst sin is the need to present itself with that nineties "hipness" that is so unbelievably uncool (and it was then, too).  Also, too many visual cliches and a cataclysmic shyness about going for the scare.  Not a strong outing, overall.

Final Rating: 2 and a half stars.