Leo 2008

Leo is a film made up of two story strands, one detailing the experiences of a newly released prisoner and another tells the tragic tale of a bored 50's housewife whose life takes a downward spiral. Gradually, these two story strands weave together in a predictable fashion, but the film loses none of it's power despite this rather obvious 'twist'.

Leo had been sitting on the shelf for a couple of years untill it's recent release in the U.K. and in my opinion it's difficult to see why. From the stunning cinematography employed, to the universally excellent performances, it's a small winner all round. Obviously not a commercial film but so much rubbish is dumped into cinemas nowadays there is a lot of room for films like this.

As stated above, the film has two plotlines running together. The way in which the director takes us to one, and then the other is done cleverly and in no way detracts from the flow of the picture. The cinematography is a times breathtaking. In the scene in which the character of Steven is released from prison, the barbed wire fences behind him look almost beautiful in the sunlight's reflection. Combined with quick edits of his character running against a clear blue sky, the sequence is quite exhilirating.

The performances in Leo also deserve praise. Joseph Fiennes as Steven is excellent, watch out for the scene in which he confronts Dennis Hoppers character in the back room of a diner.

Elisabeth Shue is as good as in Leaving Las Vegas, if not better. Her descent into alcoholism from straight laced housewife is acted perfectly, her reaction to some devastating news delivered by two policemen is heartbreakingly delivered.

Even if the final revelation is painfully predictable, (though there is a quite unexpected plot point revealed late on) and some of the supporting characters are drawn in very broad strokes, Leo ultimately delivers. It's well directed, well acted, looks gorgeous and is quietly moving in it's own way. And you'll still be thinking about it as you walk away from the theater.

How many films can you say that about these days?

Why had I never heard of this movie until I saw it sitting on the video store shelf? I hadn't seen Elisabeth Shue in anything really good lately, and I hadn't seen Joseph Fiennes in anything since Shakespeare In Love, so I didn't have high hopes for this movie. But I'd have to say it's one of the best I've seen in a long time.

This is one of those movies in which different story lines converge into one towards the end of the film. Fiennes is a recently released convict, having served 15 years for murder. Shue portrays a lonely wife and, later, a seemingly heartless mother. While both actors are great in this movie, Shue in particular is shocking (in a good way). Shue is unfailingly likable, whether playing a babysitter or a hooker, so seeing her as Mommy Dearest is both unsettling and refreshing. Having been in the industry for nearly 2 decades when this movie was released, it's exciting to see the (still gorgeous) actress making yet another Leaving Las Vegas-style breakthrough.

I don't want to give away any important plot points, so suffice it to say that this movie left me with the same disturbed, depressed, yet greatly moved feeling that I get from movies like American Beauty. Don't let the fact that most people have never heard of it keep you from picking it up during your next trip to the video store.

Joseph Fiennes is a fine actor, and the consistency of his performance is very much the centrepiece of this movie. There are elements of the script which don't seem as coherent, but I could gloss over these because of his consistency.

I like the look of the movie, and the direction costumes and sets complemented each other well, and this was maintained in recounting present day and 'flashback' experiences.

There are comparisons to other films which could be made, especially to Blue Velvet. Indeed Dennis Hopper could have made the two films without changing stride. And Fiennes' character is similar to that played by his brother Ralph in Cronenberg's masterpiece Spider, without the same degree of madness.

I picked up fairly early on the way the plot would head, and I was right. The late novelist Kurt Vonnegut used to often tell the reader how the book would end in the first chapters, and yet the books were compelling. I found this equally so.

Actually, I likened Leo to the Mickey Rourke film Angleheart as both films turned out to be a search for self.

In Leo you have a young, troubled boy named Leo who as part of a school assignment begins writing to Joseph Fiennes, who plays a convicted felon in prison.

When released from prison, Fiennes character sets out to meet the boy, Leo,and help both himself and Leo in the process.

Outstanding performances by Elisabeth Shue, who reprises her role as an alcholic from Leaving Las Vegas and Dennis Hopper who rules the small town's diner as Capt. Bligh ruled the HMS Bounty only with a lot more violence and sexual tension thrown in.

Sam Shepard's role serves as the Greek chorus and keeps the viewer aware of the progress of the other characters.

All in all a very good film that will captivate and entertain.

A quiet man who's a gifted writer (Joseph Fiennes) gets out of prison in Mississippi and immediately starts writing in his motel room while working at a nearby restaurant where he has to deal with the local loudmouth (Dennis Hopper). Meanwhile a woman struggles with her moral failings as she lives in an antebellum mansion (Elisabeth Shue). Sam Shepard, Justin Chambers, Deborah Kara Unger and Mary Stuart Masterson are also on hand.

"Leo" (2002) is Southern Gothic that mixes elements of "Sling Blade" (1996), "Blue Velvet" (1986) and "Two Moon Junction" (1988) with a little "Forrest Gump" (1994). While nowhere near the entertainment level of "Forrest," it's arguably on par with the others. It was Mehdi Norowzian's only feature-length film and his (currently) last one, which is a shame because it certainly shows that he knows how to make an aesthetically appealing motion picture.

If you appreciate those movies, give it a try. I value it for its artistic style and the quality cast, but the storytelling could've been more compelling and less ambiguous on certain points. I'll have to view it again soon to try to figure out those muddy aspects. I'd say more, but I don't want to give anything away.

The film runs 1 hour, 43 minutes, and was shot in Oxford, Mississippi, and Charleston, South Carolina.

GRADE: B-