Perfume

This was my kind of flick, from someone who loves films but rarely finds one to rave about, simply stated, "it suspended my disbelief." Don't believe the other user comments, Perfume takes you on a ride not only through the fashion world but also through life's obstacles in careers, love, and most importantly family.

Taking on the fashion world- not a difficult thing to portray as far as shallowness and alienation. The only actor who is well used is Michelle Williams, as the disaffected daughter of a vain self-centered NY fashion magazine (or ragazine) editor. Think Helen Gurley Brown, or read the NY Times review of Ms. Brown's take on younger generations (in her case this means at least five) and the selfishness as they don't offer her a seat on a NYC crosstown bus. Good for a few laughs. However, I digress.

Jeff Goldblum is usually very good, but comes off as a whiny unsympathetic player; Harris Yulin is wasted as a fashion maven, who recruits young talent. Paul Sorvino portrays a Versace-like designer, whose partner is Peter Gallagher; unintentionally comical. Sonia Braga is also wasted, as she is not used for more than twenty minutes of the film.

The worst segment by far is the sequence with Mariel Hemingway- ..."you know pashminas are so out now, don't you"?"... some gofer for the fash mag tells her; the tone is affected and the camera angles disturbing.

Narcissism really isn't funny anymore. Now that we have it 24/7 with reality TV and other trash cranked out regularly for the public, the only way to make a film with this subject matter, is something along the lines of "Pret a Porter" (ready to wear) which was utterly stupid, but at least made fun of itself without a futile attempt at cleverness.

I don't know what this movie was supposed to be about. Certainly the notes on the back of the box are, well, not very helpful. Something about the cutthroat fashion industry, I guess. It had potential and it was well acted, if only there was a plot. What a shame and a waste of talent. A great cast, half uncredited on the video box, stuck in a scattered, incohesive mess. Save yourself.

I really enjoyed this movie, and was surprised that a movie with such an all-star cast got such little recognition. Life is about relationships, and I felt that this movie showed a wonderful variety of family relationships without delving too deeply into cliches of "family life". Jared Harris gave a fantastic, understated performance, and Mariel Hemingway was phenomenal. I'm a big Jeff Goldblum fan, and was typically transfixed by his performance here. Joanne Baron played a caricature that was actually human. As for the soundtrack, I have to agree with the others who commented on the music. It was a beautiful blend of hip-hop and opera (most likely commenting on the budding relationship between Lorenzo Mancini and J.B.) that reminded me strongly of the diva's performance in 'The 5th Element.'

Wow, I never expected to find myself in the position of defending a film like "Perfume" which I only watched because Angela Bettis had a small role. But having recently viewed similar fashion industry/magazine films, "Fashionably LA" and "The Intern", I am unexpectedly well versed in this narrow sub-genre. Coming from that perspective "Perfume" is a lyrical masterpiece, both more ambitious and more successful than those two disasters. But since everything is relative this comparison may not translate into anything very useful for the prospective viewer.

First on the agenda is a cautionary statement about the trailer, the DVD cover, and the general promotional campaign. The cast is grossly misrepresented. Carmen Electra is given first billing but appears in only one short scene, a wide shot of her talking to Paul Sorvino. Supermodel Estella Warren is highlighted on the promotional poster but is just window dressing in two scenes. The five biggest parts are played by Rita Wilson, Leslie Munn, Joanne Baron, Jared Harris, and Sorvino, none of whom are even mentioned in the promotional materials.

But promotional misrepresentation, even to this extreme, has no relationship to the quality of the film. What "Perfume" has going for it (like Robert Altman's "Pret a Porter") is success working on two levels, as a glimpse inside the fashion industry and as a metaphorical extension (of what it reveals) to our day-to-day struggle in the competitive world. Whether we are artists, artisans, robots, or drones; each day is one of struggle with external competitors and internal demons.

How well the film works for individual viewers will be determined by the identification process, which will naturally be easier for those familiar with the world of high fashion or with other environments where creativity is exploited for profit.

Although "Perfume" was a scripted film there is considerable improvisation in the performances, with mixed results. For example, Harris and Mariel Hemingway do a photographer/model photo shoot where his improv is excellent and hers is somewhat lame. Although this initially seems like poor directing, on reflection it is more authentic than giving Hemingway carefully scripted lines and a smooth delivery.

"Perfume" is recommended for those who might identify with its setting or its themes. The production design, the editing, and the soundtrack are first class. But if you are annoyed rather than challenged by films with an elliptical storytelling technique and many characters you would do well to give this one a wide berth.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.