Ma vie avec Liberace

By sheer coincidence, just two nights prior to the debut of 'Behind the Candelabra', I had the pleasure of viewing one of my favorite films, 1965's 'The Loved One', in which Liberace played 'Mr.Starker', a casket salesman. So it was with Liberace's voice, image and mannerisms fresh in my mind that I encountered Michael Douglas' portrayal of the man and boy, did he nail it.

The story itself is pretty much by the numbers with the kind of shorthand one expects from a TV movie bio; it's the performances that bring this to a certain level of greatness. Douglas all but disappears into the role, right from the start. It's truly an amazing thing to watch, and considering the subject, a brave and unapologetic performance. Matt Damon is equally impressive and while I have no idea if he does the real Scott Thorson justice, his transformation from an eager and innocent young man to a jaded, coked-up and surgically altered paranoid boy-toy is stark and convincing. Add to these chameleon-like performances an unrecognizable Debbie Reynolds and a truly unnerving Rob Lowe and you have two hours of truly compelling, master-class performances.

Highly recommended.

This is a first-rate piece of work by Mr Soderbergh and his team (kudos to Ellen Mirojnick's flamboyant costumes and Howard Cummings' outrageous interiors). The otherwise excellent screenplay by Richard LaGravanese loses a little steam around two-thirds of the way through, but recovers to give a genuinely touching conclusion.

Nominally this is a biopic. In fact, it uses the biopic format to examine a particular relationship in depth. The narrative focus is on the dynamic between two people rather than the inner turmoil of one. This, as well as the director's good taste, has kept at bay the sprawling pretentiousness and sentimentality which usually infest the genre, regardless of how good the central performances are: films as diverse as LA VIE EN ROSE and MILK have been scuppered in this way. Not so BEHIND THE CANDELABRA, which is an altogether more sophisticated affair.

The acting is dazzling. Michael Douglas, in a beautifully-written role, communicates the complexity of a real human being, not just a two-dimensional celebrity. At the same time, he gives full value to Liberace's famous showmanship. A star performance, sure - the subject demands it - but also much, much more.

Matt Damon is a revelation. For me, up till now, he has represented the worst kind of dead-behind-the-eyes, don't-dare-express-anything movie acting. The nearest I came to thinking any different was his turn as the scout in the Coen Brothers' remake of TRUE GRIT. In BEHIND THE CANDELABRA he displays a range I never thought he had in him. The character moves from naivety through rage to despair and on to quiet understanding. Really, really terrific.

The two leads create a totally believable relationship between their characters, in all its aspects. A triumph.

The icing on the cake is the supporting cast, led by Dan Aykroyd and Scott Bakula, and spangled with cameos from Rob Lowe, Debbie Reynolds, Bruce Ramsay, Cheyenne Jackson and Paul Reiser.

Here in England we're fortunate to see this film on big screens. As is well known, it was financed by a TV company (HBO) and will not be released theatrically in the USA. That tells a sad story about the American movie industry, from which an independent-minded artist like Mr Soderbergh is wise to walk away.

It's starting to look like 2013 is Soderbergh's year. Side Effects and Behind The Candelabra seem to be my favourite of his career so far, though that's only relatively, as I'm not a big fan of him. I do have Out Of Sight on my to see list coming up soon and I do need to give Traffic another watch before I make any final assessment on him. Although Soderbergh is frequently the director, cinematography and editor on his projects, he may be efficient but he's far too clinical, pushing the audience as an observer that it's difficult to feel emotionally involved in his films. I can't get excited for his half-baked premises that most likely haven't been fulfilled to their potential. However, Behind The Candelabra may be the first film I've seen of his that suits his style ideally. His style is still distant and voyeuristic, but in this bizarre world where Liberace adopts his lover for a son and pays for plastic surgery to make him look like himself, it feels more deliberate to keep us at a distance.

Instead, the scenes of dramatic conflict, decision and choice are played off for jokes and it's really effective, always earning belly laughs with its brilliant one-liners without feeling like it's silly. Perhaps its nervous laughter but it makes for an entertaining and interesting film. Michael Douglas is terrific as Liberace. I've never seen him take a character on like this. He's nearly up there with Sean Penn's Milk. It feels like it's been a while since Matt Damon has been in films I've wanted to watch and with this and Elysium, I've forgotten how reliable a lead he is. The characters inhabit a flashy world, but its kept on the costumes and sets which are incidental more than anything and the style of the film is kept subtle, besides a great choice of swooping cameras. It does have its flaws with nearly soap opera-esque structure and conflict but my expectations were very low so this is a pleasant surprise. I think I even prefer it to Side Effects.

7/10

I was born in the 50's. The honest truth is I have never liked Liberace. I always, even as a child, found him creepy and smarmy.

I understand that as the writer Scott Thorson would paint himself into a somewhat sympathetic light and that is to be expected. Some of the things portrayed would be needed to be taken with a grain of salt. The fact is that Liberace did have plastic surgery on Thorson trying to clone himself.

To me that lends credence to everything else.

Michael Douglas's portrayal is spot on. Matt Damn is also very good.

I could not watch this in one sitting but did it in two. The creep and yuck factor just would not allow me to do it.

As a gay man I have known many wealthy gay men who flatter, control, use then toss out younger men. It is very sad. That Liberace in the end did not plan anything for Thorson is sad. He tells him "he was the love of his life" but still did nothing.

Liberace died with an estate of $115 million dollars with very little family.

So that in itself says alot.

I feel bad that Thorson has had the troubles in his life that he has had to endure. Turned into a drug addict by the plastic surgeon and living a life ruined. Not even left with a face he can call his own.

I can't honestly say that I know very much about Liberace. I was a teenager in the 70's - Liberace really wasn't my cup of tea. Still, I know about him. His flashiness, his sexuality, his ability with the piano - and I'm familiar with the "palimony" suit launched against him by his much younger lover, Scott Thorson. "Behind the Candelabra" is the movie adaptation of Thorson's book about the relationship, so it needs to be viewed with a grain of salt; it's hardly unbiased. But unbiased or not, it is a fascinating look into the glitzy, showy, and sometimes degenerate world inhabited by Liberace and Thorson, who was almost 50 years younger than Liberace when the relationship began.

The "world" is fabulously portrayed. The costumes and sets seem very authentic, and - with the above note about bias being kept in mind - the basic story of the relationship is believable enough. Liberace and Thorson were together for four years, and in those four years, things got weird. Liberace supposedly promised to adopt Thorson; and Thorson was given a part in Liberace's show. The movie portrays the relationship's breakup (due to Liberace's infidelities) and the final reunion between the two, as Thorson visits Liberace on his deathbed. It all seems very realistic, and provides an almost voyeuristic experience into the relationship between the two.

The highlight of the movie, though, has to be the performances offered by Matt Damon (as Thorson) and - especially - Michael Douglas as Liberace. Both were brilliant and totally believable in the parts. These must have been difficult roles. Two guys - both obviously straight - playing these parts in a movie which includes a lot of very passionate scenes between them could have come across as awkward, but credit goes to both of them for the fact that it never seemed awkward. They came across as natural together in what must (at times) have been very uncomfortable roles for them. I gained a new appreciation of the talents of both from this movie.

It's very enjoyable and it certainly offers a glimpse into a world that the vast majority of us will never see - and that the vast majority of us probably wouldn't want to see. (8/10)