Film > Reviews > Matthew Vaughn > Stardust

Stardust

Director: Matthew Vaughn

Cast: Charlie Cox, Claire Danes, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert DeNiro, Ricky Gervais, Sienna Miller

(Paramount Pictures, 2007) Rated: PG-13

US theatrical release date: 10 August 2007 (General release)

By Daynah Burnett

Share
- Email
- Digg
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Buzz up!
- Del.icio.us
- Reddit
- Newsvine
- StumbleUpon
- Google
Print
Comments (8)
Feeds
- PopMatters
- Watch

Official Site

What Stardust wields in star power, it lacks in original, or even interesting, storytelling. Adapted for the screen by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, Neil Gaiman’s graphic novel sloshes around onscreen like a blender full of leftovers from Tolkien, the Brothers Grimm, and Shakespeare.

The focus would be Tristan (Charlie Cox), who seeks a fallen star to win the heart of the village hottie, Victoria (Sienna Miller). It’s never clear why he’s in love with this flagrant golddigger, and she prefers the bland but rich Humphrey (Henry Cavill), who effectively woos her with the promise of a ginormous diamond ring. Nevertheless, Tristan toasts his wished-for love with champagne (a luxury that costs him a week’s wages) and sets off to bring her a piece of the star from across the wall that separates the 19th-century British village of Well from a magical parallel world called Stormhold. That Victoria wants her star before her birthday, just one week away, makes her seem demanding. That Tristan blazes a trail towards Stormhold (and certain death) just to please her makes him stupid.

Almost right away he uses up most of a Babylon Candle, which magically transports its owner to any place he envisions. It’s significant that he sacrifices the candle for Victoria, because it’s a last gift from his mother, the only thing she left for him, tucked in his blanky on his father’s doorstep before she was enslaved by a witch (read: Tristan’s a Mommy’s boy with no Mommy). The candle takes him to Yvaine (Claire Danes), a persnickety blonde in a shimmery dress laid out in the center of the star’s crater. She explains that though she was once a star in the sky, her form on Earth is that of a woman, now injured from her fall. Tristan drags Yvaine back to Well against her will. What’s a little kidnapping in the name of true love?

It turns out that others would like to have hold of the fallen star as well. Lamia (Michelle Pfieffer) is one of three witchy sisters who can restore their youth and beauty if they jointly ingest the star’s heart while it’s aglow. Lamia ventures alone to capture Yvaine, but her determination is less terrifying than pathetic. Chasing down Yvaine across Stormhold seems a lot of trouble to go through for a facelift. Still, Lamia’s pursuit brings to Tristan’s effort a constant mortal danger and—oh yes—lots of special effects.

Tristan and Yvaine must also evade the power-hungry heir to Stormhold, Prince Septimus (Mark Strong), who just can’t wait to be king. Of course there’s a catch: on his deathbed, Septimus’ father (Peter O’Toole) explains that the only true heir is one who can recover and restore his ruby necklace, which he then throws out the window, up to the heavens, where it lands around Yvaine’s neck. Even once it’s revealed to all that Septimus wants the necklace and not Yvaine herself, she continues to wear the big target. It’s just so big and shiny, and it goes with her dress.

Even though it appears that everyone wants a piece of her, Yvaine remains staunchly unsympathetic, even when at last she stops complaining and falls in love. This shrew’s taming seems owed to Captain Shakespeare (Robert Deniro), a gay pirate who must remain in the closet to maintain the respect of his crew and ruthless reputation. DeNiro’s portrayal of a character so ripe for complexity is sadly (and frankly, shockingly) reduced to stereotype: limp-wristed, lisping, and dancing in drag, the Captain uses his queer eye to give straight guy Tristan a manly makeover.

Stardust is thus a kind of “fairy tale,” but it is also lazy and often offensive. Like Snow White or Cinderella, it shamelessly reinforces physical beauty as the only kind of acceptable measure of a girl’s worth, its grandiose CGI and contemporary jokes never challenging the genre’s well-known sexism. Women are either ugly and manipulative or pretty and pliable, while men do their best to protect and/or woo them. When Yvaine, left tied to a tree by Tristan (why she cannot simply untie herself is never explained), is finally rescued by a unicorn, she clutches its phallic horn to ride her way safety, all bareback and breathless and boring.

Rating:

— 10 August 2007

Stardust - Trailer

Stardust

By Bill Gibron

19.Aug.07

Where and when, exactly, did Neil Gaiman earn all his geek love credentials?

‘Stardust’ creator reflects on flights of movie fancy

By Mark de la Vina

10.Aug.07

Michelle Pfeiffer winning acclaim for her recent work

By Roger Moore

09.Aug.07

Monkey Business (Part 4: August)

Layer Cake (2004)

Comments

STARDUST is a novel featuring illustrations by Charles Vess. it is not, nor has it ever been, a graphic novel.

Comment by Mark Parsons from Los Angeles — August 12, 2007 @ 12:56 am

I could never take seriously the opinion of a reviewer that uses that absurd, virus like neologism ‘ginormous’ that is seducing all imbeciles alike on a pandemic scale when, really, ‘enormous’ or ‘gigantic’ are good enough. I know, perhaps I should just ‘chillax’ or something yeah?

Oh, and it’s Wall, not Well. You, because like the village is next to a WALL separating it from Stormhold.

Comment by Si from Bristol, UK — August 13, 2007 @ 3:57 am

Did you even see this movie, nearly every plot reference is incorrect. Next time try to watch the film instead of reading a synopsis.

Comment by 8bit from us — August 13, 2007 @ 10:10 am

? I’m not even that sure I liked the movie that much, but THIS review is a mess! Safe to say that if the review makes you think you won’t like the movie, you’ll be pleasantly surprised…

Comment by dilford from Bloomington, IL — August 13, 2007 @ 3:37 pm

You’re an idiot.

At some point in life we reach a stage where we have become so jaded that everything seems like some kind of recycling of past encounters/experiences. This movie was something of a spoof - it is expected to contain and poke fun at various aspects of other fairytales. What we’re looking for in a movie is feeling and expression not necessarily a work of complete originality.

You’ve complained about the movie abusing and reusing every stereotypical aspect of the various types of sexuality pervasive in this society, yet never realized that you introduced some of your own. Read: “Tristan’s a momma’s boy with no mommy.” Apart from the idea that the movie, conveyed during the opening scenes no less, is about Tristan’s coming of age, you’ve presented a stereotypical view of a particular type of young man - demeaning only yourself, mostly, for even stooping to present such an opinion. He is a grown boy intertwined with the expectations of society - not a man with the expectations upon him to act as such.

Now let me explain a few things, namely the metaphorical “tar” to your expressed “p(l)otholes”, that seemed to have evaded you during the movie.

First of all, the witch went alone and on foot to capture Yvaine because 1) they used up their last Babylon Candle a while ago 2) there wasn’t enough power left from the star to afford a trip for the three of them. Also, the special effects are there for a reason: we have the technology to create them. Get used to it.

Secondly, the necklace was never revealed to Tristan and Yvaine as the target of the prince’s pursuit. In fact, by the time it would become acceptable, plot-wise, to do so, the prince has already settled on another pursuit: Yvaine’s heart for immortality. This gives credence to the chase even without the necklace.

Third, the captain was not a simple “limp-wristed queer guy”. As I recall, he taught Tristan to fight quite well - a lesson he would tribute later in the movie.

Fourth and finally, Yvaine couldn’t untie herself from the tree for the same reason that Tristan’s mother couldn’t untie herself from the buggy. It’s an _enchanted chain_.

As far as the simple measures of a girl’s worth, screw you. You’re digging for underlying meaning that just isn’t there. It wasn’t trying to undermine the female “will to power” or portray women as nothing more than their stereotypes. She didn’t clutch a phallic horn (though it sounds as though you may need to more often than you have - maybe around a nice furry donut) on the unicorn any more than _witches_ being portrayed as manipulative is out of the ballpark. Note: the women in the market weren’t manipulative, were they? Granted, more women could have been cast, but I can’t imagine where - there weren’t that many rolls to begin with.

Summing it all up? I’m guessing that you sat around for the first half of the movie and made a snap judgment after the inn scene (you know - the part where the interesting dialogue let up and the chase ensued?). After maybe talking to a friend for a while in the theater until the characters caught up with each other, you proceeded to view the rest of the movie in a rather biased and slightly confused state.

Reinforcing stereotypes? You’re not presenting the role of the critic in either a positive or purposeful light.

BobClown

Comment by BobClown from Earth — August 14, 2007 @ 6:20 pm

I’m not gay. I jsut enjoy fashion and dressing in drag. Leave me alone, and Tristan is COOL.

Comment by The Gay Pirate Shakespear — October 19, 2007 @ 12:08 pm

Wasn’t it written by Jonothan Ross’s wife?
and it wasn’t a graphic novel.
Also,
it was enchanted chain,
that is why she couldn’t untie herself from the tree.
try watching it properly and getting your facts right next time?

Comment by Beth — October 21, 2007 @ 6:44 am

I would have said more but BobClown seemed to round it all off. I would be happy to read a review written by him. Your an Idiot

I hope too many people where not out off by your review. Your a disgrace to all movie reviewers.

Matt Murray

Comment by Matt Murray from UK — October 31, 2007 @ 4:07 pm