Watched The Power of the Dog recently and wasn't sure what made it Oscar-worthy. The key characters felt two-dimensional and story did not get into a good flow-state until half the way in. By then Georgie had decided to marry Rose while George's brother Phil was being habitually nasty and malcontent. Rose's son Pete was gay. That's how far you got into the heads of anyone that mattered in the story.
Cumberbatch has done very complex roles before so clearly he was not the reason why his character failed to communicate. He was able to deliver Stephen Hawking with as much authenticity as Patrick Melrose so lack of range is clearly not his problem. Watching the out-takes where in one scene Jane Campion directs him, she comes across as someone who is hard to work and collaborate with.
So perhaps she was stifling his spirit and that of Dunst - she failed to impress as well despite having a lot to work with in the character of Rose. The rest of the story drags along in a lifeless way and gets to be somewhat interesting in the end. Learning about Thomas Savage, the author of the book, was way more rewarding that the movie itself. Maybe this is one of those stories that are not easy to turn into a movie despite all the latent potential. Or maybe Campion is past her directorial prime.
Comments