Dolores Claiborne

Somehow this gripping, brilliantly-acted thriller was overlooked and underrated when it was first released in 1995, but it's probably the best movie ever made from a Stephen King story.

Kathy Bates has never been better. Her acting is so strong, deep, and subtle, it's outrageous that she wasn't even nominated for the Academy Award. I think it's because the film was released early in the year and was out of theatres already when the nominations were made. She's better here than about ten Oscar-winning actors I can think of, put together -- a one-woman textbook of how to act for the screen.

Bates won an Oscar for MISERY, but she's better here, because the story and the character are more interesting, complex and challenging. With flawless technique, and great depth of feeling, she delivers one of the finest screen performances of the 1990s.

Okay, the denouement's a bit strained, and there's a sprinkling of stilted, hokey lines (Stephen King was never good at writing believable dialogue, and his addition of forced scatology and cussing doesn't make it any less stilted.) But overall the complicated story, which flashes back and forth over a period of twenty years, is extremely well-told. The constant shifting from past to present is never confusing -- an achievement in itself!

This film never found its audience, somehow, and even some critics missed how good it was. I notice Maltin's book now raves over the film, giving it 3 1/2 stars, the same rating he gives to THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. The violence here is more psychological than bloody, but DOLORES is every bit as good a thriller as LAMBS, and Bates, quite frankly, can act circles around Jodie Foster.

I first saw "Dolores Claiborne" when it came out in 1995 and have seen it again some 3 or 4 times since, a practice I dedicate only to "certified" masterpieces. At first, I couldn't figure out why I kept revisiting "D.C." when it showed up on cable - it's not a cinematic wonder or a work of art (something it doesn't strive to be, by the way), not even a story that you can say it's really original. But as I became more familiar with the film, I could see why it always pulled me in: it's a triumph of story-telling, of the WAY and PACE the story is revealed in small precise doses much like slowly completing a puzzle, the kind of film you can only let go when the last missing piece (Selena's final flashback) fits into place.

How the story manages to make such initially repulsive characters (all of them!!) develop into sympathetic (or at least pathetic) ones is of course Stephen King's special talent, expertly translated by the fine jobs by the screenwriter, actors and director of "Dolores Claiborne". The cinematography is kind of obvious in its distinct color treatment of past and present, but the entire cast is inspired, including Kathy Bates' best-ever performance (she has stated so herself), especially in the flash-back scenes; delightfully virtuoso Judy Parfitt (you just keep hoping along for more Vera's scenes, and each one of them is a knockout); and reliable pros Christopher Plummer, David Strathairn (such an underrated actor!) and John C. Reilly. Even Jennifer Jason Leigh for once has her irritating mannerisms fit perfectly to build her terribly tormented character.

That's what good story-telling is all about: even if you already know the plot from A to Z, you just want to see once again the way it unfolds, like a good scary fairy tale. "Dolores Claiborne" is not without faults, but it's certainly worth your time, and even more than once.

When I picked up the DVD of Dolores Claiborne, I wasn't sure of what to expect. I remembered that a lot of people were complaining that this wasn't Misery, starring Kathy Bates, who stars here, and the pacing was a bit off. However, when I was watching it, I was fully gripped into it's very gripping storyline of "Did she or didn't she?" and Kathy Bates pulls off another stunning performance (she never dissapoints me). All the other actresses, from Jennifer Jason Leigh, Christopher Plummer, to a then unknown John C. Reilly, also put out great performances. The direction of Taylor Hackford is top notch, and probably the biggest thing here is the cinematogrpahy, which is stunning with all the period photography (dull and grey at present, colorful in the past) and the eclipse photography is nothing short of stunning. A very surprising and entertaining watch,

If there is one thing I always fear, than it must be movies about bad marriages, an abusive husband, child abuse ... How often do you get a good movie with such subjects. Not very often, because most of the time these are awful TV-movies that seem to be written at a rate of at least one an hour. Always following the same concept, always trying to make the poor viewer cry his eyes out while saying that that poor woman / child didn't deserve to be treated that bad. Now don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not saying that it should be tolerated. Men who do such awful things can't be punished hard enough, but the movies that are made about this subjects are complete crap most of the time.

"Dolores Claiborne" tells the story of a woman who is accused of murdering the wealthy woman she worked for as a maid in Maine. When her daughter Selena finds out that her mother is accused of this crime, she immediately returns home from New York, leaving her job as an important reporter behind for a while. But she doesn't return to support her mother as you might expect. No, she's almost certain that she did it and she seems to try to get a good story out of it. But gradually she finds out what really happened and in the meantime some awful things about Selena's troubled childhood, the awful family life,... come floating at the surface again.

I know that I said in the beginning of this review that most movies with such a subject are plain crap, but there are always expectations to every rule and "Dolores Claiborne" certainly is one of those exceptions. It was written by Stephen King and it shows. The man knows how to build up suspense and certainly can give you an uneasy feeling while reading his books or watching one of 'his' movies. And "Dolores Claiborne" has a lot more depth than you might expect at first. The only thing is that they have managed to disguise it, not giving away too much information at a time. Only at the end of the movie you'll fully understand what has happened and what the reason was for both women to react the way they did.

What I also liked, next to the story, was the way everything is shot. All the scenes in the present are shot in those cool blue tones, but these blend seamlessly into the flashbacks that were shot in vivid colors. This gives an extra touch to the story that certainly works. You know exactly what is the present and what is the past, but those colors also add a lot to the drama.

But the way a movie was shot alone doesn't make it good of course. That's what good actors who do some excellent things are for. And that's also exactly what you'll get from Kathy Bates, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Christopher Plummer... Jennifer Jason Leigh is nice as the daughter, but it's Kathy Bates and Christopher Plummer who give away the best performances in my opinion. Bates is stunning as the tormented woman who's personality seems so strong, while in reality she is a broken soul who wishes for nothing much but to die as soon as possible, so all her misery can end. And I also loved Plummer as Detective John Mackey who's hate against Dolores is so big, because she is the only spot on an almost spotless career. He has solved all his cases except for one and he'll not rest until he can send Dolores to jail.

All in all this is a very good and suspenseful movie that never tries to become a tearjerker, despite the heavy subject. It offers some great acting, nice photography and a good story. That's about all I can wish for in a movie and I give it at least a 7.5/10, maybe even an 8/10.

It isn't quite fair to say that 'Dolores Claiborne' is a one-woman show, but let's face it; it's pretty much a virtuoso performance from Kathy Bates. She dominates virtually every scene she's in, shows tremendous range, from tender to sour and bitter, to borderline maniacal, and leaves you wondering who else on Earth could possibly have pulled it off.

That's not to belittle the rest of the cast. The other actors are adequate at very least, and Judy Parfitt puts in a performance as the bedridden Vera Donovan, which is the one time that Bates is slightly overshadowed.

Briefly, a middle-aged, working-class widow (Bates) in a small Maine town (where else, for SK?) is suspected of murdering her rich, elderly employer (Parfitt) in an apparently open and shut case. Christopher Plummer is the nasty lawman who is convinced she also killed her husband years before. Meanwhile, her estranged daughter from New York comes up to cover the story for a newspaper, and... well, you don't really need to know any more details before seeing the movie.

It's adapted from a Stephen King novel, and being a drama rather than a supernatural story, it has a flying headstart, being in the company of 'Green Mile', 'Stand By Me', and 'Shawshank Redemption' rather than 'Christine' or 'Salem's Lot'. Whereas it isn't in the exalted league of those movies, it's miles ahead of most of the horror adaptation of King stories. Take Bates out and it might be rather ordinary, but as it it, Dolores gets a very solid 7.0 from me.