Cast: Annette Bening, Aidan Quinn, Stephen Rea, Robert Downey Jr., Paul Guilfoyle
Director: Neil Jordan
Producer: Stephen Woolley
Screenplay: Bruce Robinson and Neil Jordan, based on the novel "Doll's Eyes" by Bari Wood
Cinematography: Darius Khondji
Music: Elliot Goldenthal
U.S. Distributor: Dreamworks SKG
In Dreams, the latest venture into a nightmarish realm of horror by Irish director Neil Jordan (The Butcher Boy, Interview with the Vampire), is a disappointing, disjointed thriller that seems like it was cobbled together using elements from better films. Although Jordan's style, which recalls that of David Lynch in full Twin Peaks mode, generates an effective atmosphere, it's one of the few elements that works. But, frankly, what more should one expect from a high-profile movie thrown into the wasteland of January's dumping ground? This is the time of year when films are released only after being given a "no confidence" vote by their studios.
Annette Bening plays lead character Claire Cooper with admirable restraint. She never once chokes on the bad lines of dialogue she's forced to utter, and she avoids the temptation to go too far over the top when the opportunity presents itself (which it frequently does). Unfortunately, it's a portrayal that doesn't generate much in the way of character identification (fault Jordan and co-screenwriter Bruce Robinson more than Bening). There's nothing in Claire that draws the audience into a sympathetic relationship with her; she's just a plastic individual going through the expected motions of a beleaguered heroine in a desperate situation.
Claire is an artist, writer, and mother whose husband, Paul (Aidan Quinn), is away from home for weeks at a time flying 747's. Lately, Claire has had more on her mind than helping her young daughter, Rebecca (Katie Sagona), rehearse for a school play. She has been experiencing a recurring nightmare in which she sees a kidnapped child wandering through what appears to be an apple orchard. The dream obsesses her, and she becomes convinced that she has some sort of psychic link with a serial killer. After her own daughter is abducted by the man in her dreams, Claire loses her tenuous grip on reality. Her attempt at suicide fails, but, fearing for her sanity and on the advice of her psychiatrist, Dr. Silverman (Stephen Rea, using a bothersome New York accent), Paul considers having her committed to a mental hospital.
In Dreams repeatedly steals from other movies. Some of the dream material is reminiscent of the central conceit of A Nightmare on Elm Street (although Wes Craven's landmark horror film, in addition to introducing Freddy Krueger, took a considerably more daring approach to the dream/reality connection). Combine that with aspects of The Exorcist (possession) and Psycho (Mother's pernicious influence); add one gothic mental hospital, an underwater ghost town, unnecessary chase sequences, gruesome deaths, and a lot of applesauce; then blend until thoroughly mushy. It doesn't sound appealing, but that's the recipe Jordan followed to cook up In Dreams.
The film doesn't succeed on its own terms. Suspension of disbelief is nearly impossible to achieve because none of the characters reacts in a plausible fashion. It's hard to accept a pseudo-real world where the men and women populating it speak and act as if they were the creations of a writer. The narrative, despite starting out strongly with a potentially-interesting premise, doesn't hold together; there are too many coincidences and contrivances for a thinking audience to swallow. The villain's motives, once revealed, are disappointing, and his relationship with Claire is left woefully underdeveloped. There's also a lot of running around and pointless repetition - the same story could have been told more economically in about an hour, but then it wouldn't have had a feature-length running time.
In Dreams contains flashes of worthwhile ideas and there are occasional, effective scenes. The underwater sequences, with divers floating through the streets and buildings of a "drowned town," are genuinely eerie. There's a moment after a death when the movie touches on the most poignant aspect of the survivor's experience: sorting through the personal belongings of a recently-departed loved one. And it's interesting how Claire's dream-visions, rather than empowering her, leave her frantic and frustrated because she can't stop them from coming true. The problem is that Jordan does a poor job of conveying this frustration; we can see it, but we can't feel it. Ultimately, aside from the way the storyline devolves into mindlessness, that's the central flaw: the movie is visually interesting but emotionally cool and distant. Thrillers and horror films rely on the audience having a vested interest in the main character's success; with In Dreams, we stop caring.
© 1999 James Berardinelli