Film Reviews:
Side Effects
***** An Ubiquitous Mantra - "There is no issue."
March 1, 2006
by A. Redmond (New York, NY, USA)
If you were living in Madison, Wisconsin and Lucifer appeared at your front door, offered you a Mercedes, jewelry, and lots of "mad money" in exchange for your soul, would you accept the offer? While no one is likely to enter into such a bargain with a horned man in red leotards, consider what happens when the "he" is a she employed by a major pharmaceutical company. The twist on the temptation scenario is only one of the unexpectedly fresh innovations of Side Effects, an indie film written and directed by Kathleen Slattery-Moschkau. The innovations are some of the film's most significant accomplishments and failures. They deserve mention because they highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both the writer-director and cast.
One startling aspect of the film is how many innovations it contains. For example, the big money corporate drama unfolds in don't-blink-or-you'll-miss-it Madison, Wisconsin. An educated sales woman, Karly Hert played by Katherine Heigl, wrestles through a Faustian struggle. Lucifer in this case takes the form of a stylish, attractive, sales executive named Jacqueline, played by Dorian DeMichele. On Karly's other metaphoric shoulder sits an angelic influence in the form of a romantic suitor, Lucian McAfee's convincing Zach Danner. Throughout the story women are on top of the power structure. The main male is a stay at home character. These items are dramatic strengths that set up the drama and propel it in a way that a documentary, for example, could not sustain.
The weakness of the film is how ineffectively its strengths are exploited. The first third of the film meanders through the start of the romance between Karly and Zach, but Zach all but disappears during the second half. The conversations between the lovers about the pharmaceutical industry are preachy and overwrought. Meanwhile Jacqueline, whose soulless complexity is subtly rendered by Dorian DeMichele's elegant craftsmanship, isn't even introduced until the second half. The delayed insertion of her influence undermines the triangular Zach-Karly-Jacqueline dynamic that is the primary source of the film's dramatic tension. The linchpin of Karly's entire struggle rests in her relationship to Jacqueline's utterance "There is no issue." When she says those words Jacqueline shoulders the thematic weight of the film and its central issue with her post-modern perky delivery. The phrase is a ubiquitous mantra of modern society. It reverberates on every level of human interaction including individuals in denial, communities' attitude toward the marginalized, and politician's defense of failed policies. Yet despite the timeliness of Jacqueline's comment, which she delivers with megaton force at the moment of Karly's final surrender, Karly barely responds. Consequently the impact of the film's final resolution is diluted.
The tensions between the first third and second half of the film may reflect Kathleen's own Faustian struggle. Perhaps she was uncertain whether to make a whistle-blowing documentary or a money-making feature film. The way that she handles individual components of the film demonstrates that she understands the differences between the two. However the irony of the final product is that the first third has the look and feel of a docudrama. The latter two thirds come off as a relatively compelling thriller. Either way the film introduces us to two women faced by momentous decisions, the character, Karly, and the filmmaker, Kathleen. The difference between Karly-the-character and Kathleen-the-filmmaker is that by the end of the film Karly has made up her mind.
