‘Anemone’ is Little More Than a Nepotistic Sizzle Reel
- Jared Huizenga
- Oct 2
- 4 min read
On paper, there are a lot of things to like, or at least be intrigued by with “Anemone.” You’ve got Sean Bean, two-time Academy Award nominee Samantha Morton, a first-time director with an impressive bloodline, and, of course, you’ve got the acting return of the great Daniel Day-Lewis.
Unfortunately, movies aren’t shown on paper, and by the time we hit the 30-minute mark, which felt more like 30 hours, the only thought I had in my head was, “Daniel Day-Lewis came out of retirement for THIS?”
“Anemone” sees Jem Stoker (Bean) venture into the wilderness to track down his estranged, and possibly insane, estranged brother, Ray (Day-Lewis), to try and persuade him to return to civilization for the first time in two decades to help his now-adult son during a particularly trying (and potentially dangerous) time.
The reunited brothers fall back into old times by drinking excessively, hiking, foraging, wrestling, swapping stories, and – everyone’s favorite – dredging up unresolved multigenerational family trauma that has destroyed both and stands to do the same to Ray’s son.
Let’s start with the good things about “Anemone.”
First, the cinematography and the work of the production designer, set decorator, and art directors are hands down the best part of the movie. Whether it’s inside a raggedy cabin, in the dark cover of the woods, or on a stormy UK beach, the visuals are the star of the show, with director of photography Ben Fordesman’s keen eye pairing with the surroundings to bring pretty much any tension that comes across on screen. Everything from Ray’s cabin to the surrounding woods to the nearby sea and beach come across as ominous and haunting, which ties in nicely to the gloomy narrative.
Second, the performances of Bean and Morton. Despite working opposite of Day-Lewis, Bean never looks overmatched and nothing feels forced. Jem is a flawed man that’s trying to be better, trying to do the right thing, and trying to keep his demons at bay. Those internal struggles come through every time he gets a monologue. Morton, in a much more supporting role, brings Ray’s ex, Nessa, to life. Nessa is a woman torn – she’s a mother, a devoted wife, and painfully aware of her ex’s flaws and the damage he’s inflicted. But she’s also very clearly still protective of Ray and people’s perspective of him, almost certainly both hating and being in love with him. That inner turmoil is also on full display.
Third, it’s great to see Daniel Day-Lewis back on the screen. I mean, six Academy Award nominations and three wins in 21 films (prior to this one), speak for themselves. As Ray, he’s as intense and passionate as ever and can flip the switch from terrifying to vulnerable and back again in the blink of an eye. Unfortunately, largely because of his own doing (either through his writing or reproductive abilities), he’s not given a whole lot to work with.
The gloomy narrative I mentioned above is the work of Day-Lewis and his son/co-writer, Ronan, who also directed film.
It’s clear what the duo was after, and tonally I think they accomplished what they set out to do. The biggest problems, however, are the awkward pacing of the film and the disjointed dialogue that happens throughout. There are long gaps of awkward silence, which is to be expected with estranged brothers reconnecting after 20+years, but it doesn’t feel natural. Everything, even the silence, is forced. And then the elder Day-Lewis launches into a long-winded monologue that may or may not actually progress the story, but minus the biggie near the end, but often just stalls any momentum that may have been building.
Somehow turning solid to outstanding performances and incredible visuals into a theatrical trainwreck falls squarely on the shoulders of the Ronan Day-Lewis. There’s zero cohesion, there’s zero direction, and there’s zero emotional connection between characters and audience. Don’t get me wrong, you see who these characters are and you understand their plight, but it’s hard to care because of how disjointed everything is – the second you start getting emotionally invested, there’s a silly cut, a random noise or attempted jump scare, or loud, terrible music.
And for a film that’s largely set in the middle of nowhere, in a cabin that looks more like where you’d hide a body than rest yours every night, there’s a whole lot of flashy techniques at play that show technical prowess but clearly displays a lack of understanding. An understated feel with more cohesion, combined with the good things this film already delivers, could have taken this to another level.
“Anemone” could’ve been very good – the ingredients are all there, but the chef doesn’t seem quite ready to put them all together. Instead, we’re left with a glimpse of what might have been and a 126-minute visual resume meant to show how good the younger Day-Lewis is at movies.
★½ of ★★★★★
Comments