Film

Abandon (2002)

Cynthia Fuchs

Cynical and beautiful. No wonder the boys can't resist her.


Abandon

Director: Stephen Gaghan
Cast: Katie Holmes, Benjamin Bratt, Charlie Hunnam, Zooey Deschanel, Melanie Lynskey, Gabrielle Union
MPAA rating: PG-13
Studio: Paramount
First date: 2002
US Release Date: 2002-10-18

First time director Stephen Gaghan (who wrote Traffic) says that he wanted to make a movie about "college students under far too much pressure" (The New York Times 8 September 2002). You might see some of that movie in Abandon, as it occasionally treats its young protagonists with some measure respect, allowing that they have concerns beyond parties, sex, and romance. Unfortunately, more often than not, the film lapses into basic thriller tricks, distracting from its gloomily convoluted visuals and focus on a particularly weird college-induced crisis.

At the center of Abandon is November's Cosmopolitan cover girl and Movieline's most recent designate as "Hollywood's Jackpot Star," Katie Holmes. Surely, she's due to break out, having done her time on Dawson's Creek, and survived the high school horror movie Disturbing Behavior, as well as a couple of pretty-girl parts in The Gift and Wonder Boys. Coincidentally, Dawson (James Van Der Beek) is having his own breakout moment just now, playing the odious college student Sean Bateman in The Rules of Attraction. But truth be told, Holmes' Catherine Burke (Katie to her friends) brings more pain than bad boy Sean might even imagine.

As Abandon begins, Katie is about to graduate from a small New England college (actual location: McGill University in Montreal). And, as usually happens on such occasion, all Katie's long-festering "issues" are coming to a head. Her thesis is due and she's having nightmares about her father leaving her when she was three (these stark and snowy scenes offer one angle on the film's title, though there are others, including the "abandon" she thinks she should be feeling as she looks out on a future so full of conventional promise). She has a hugely important and much-coveted job interview, to which she's been invited by a sleezy male executive, and she's seeing a shrink, Dr. Dave (Tony Goldwyn), who's acting too cozy, leaning in toward her and looking deeply into her eyes, just before he writes her a scrip after three minutes of conversation.

On top of all this, a local detective, the awkwardly named Wade Handler (Benjamin Bratt), appears on campus, asking questions about the mysterious disappearance of Katie's boyfriend Embry (Charlie Hunnam, of the U.K. Queer As Folk). Just why the investigation is re-opening at this moment is not so clear, as Embry disappeared two years ago when Joey -- er, Katie -- was a wide-eyed, hopeful sophomore, crushed by the fact that he never sent for her as he promised he would. Embry is somewhat notorious around campus. A wealthy, self-loving genius-poet-performer-archeologist-musician-whatever-else he decides to be, he disappeared on the night of his last campus performance, "Trip Hop Inferno." Most folks presume he took off for Europe or some exotic land, to spend his trust fund or seek the meaning of life. Or maybe he's dead. He hasn't tapped his trust fund, so Townie Cop comes calling.

Handler's questions have Katie feeling murky and frazzled, igniting flashbacks galore, some seemingly related to Handler, but others perhaps not. In these, Embry appears significantly less magnetic-rockstar-ish than everyone seems to think him, more obviously twitty and pretentious; such characteristics are, admittedly, hard to see when you're a sophomore. Katie recalls her first encounter with Embry, as he directs her in a chorus for one of his brilliant creations, zeroing in on her voice among the many, as a means to teach the group a lesson, namely, as he has them repeatedly yell: "I am the infantile center of the goddamn universe."

This speaks volumes about Embry's self-love, but Katie sees it as a sign of his genius, and looks suitably stricken as he gazes on her. Next flashback, he's in her room, rummaging through the contents of her backpack. Determining that she's a virgin because she's so hyper-organized, he tosses her planner and her finance textbook out the window, and instructs her to make use of her voice: she should sing, he says, though there's not a lot of evidence that she does it well. And then he has her up against the wall, introducing her to the immeasurable pleasures of sex with himself.

Bothered by these memories -- which may or may not be shaped by lingering desires -- Katie does her best to hold it together, only leaving the library where she toils into wee hours on her thesis when her friends drag her out. These are stock college movie friends: the scene-stealing roommate Sam (Zooey Deschanel), dorm neighbor and only black girl on campus Amanda (Gabrielle Union), and dedicated anti-corporate-globalism activist Harrison (Gabriel Mann). His major crush on our girl knows no limits, as he absorbs disses on a regular basis, as when Katie dismisses his politics. "Anti-globalism? You might as well stop oxygen or the sun coming up." Cynical and beautiful. No wonder the boys can't resist her.

This seems to go double for the hapless detective, who packs all kinds of vulnerabilities. For some reason, just when he's coming back to work after some "time off" to deal with his alcoholism, his lieutenant (Fred Ward) puts him on the missing kid case. As he's interviewing people who knew Embry, he's increasingly focused on Katie, dreamily ignoring warnings from Mousy Julie (credited as such, and played by perpetual good sport Melanie Lynsky) and about 12 other characters: "They think it's a coltish vulnerability," observes Mousy Julie of Katie's charm, "The pea-brain says she's in need of saving." This pea-brain persists.

Then again, he's only about as obtuse and misdirected as everyone else on screen. Sam "jokingly" accuses him of stalking Katie, then asks him up for a drink ("Bad Samantha!" she scolds herself); and Harrison acts out his jealousy of Katie's mutual interest in the cop by telling her he loves her: her rejection is cold as they come.

This is an old device, of course: like Dana Andrews in Laura, perhaps, or Humphrey Bogart in The Maltese Falcon, the detective falls for the chilly, visibly dangerous object of his investigation. Only this time, she's half his age and very clearly unhinged. Not a good or even very believable thing to do.

Katie's unhinging takes a trite and specific form: she starts seeing Embry on campus, at which point the plot descends quickly into nonsense. She heads into the requisite nearby scary abandoned building without a second thought. She cowers in her bed with the covers up to her chin when someone comes pounding at her dorm room door, then does nothing about it: no reports to school security or to the cop. She starts writing furious, cryptic notes to herself ("I have no grace"), and starts dropping by Handler's apartment late at night, to tell him she's "just afraid" of Embry. And it's a very strange thing that no one else notices Embry skulking about, given that he's something of a local legend.

Such illogic can certainly be forgiven, even useful. Slasher movies, after all, rarely make strict rational sense, but they can be metaphorically rich, viscerally effective, even politically provocative. At its best, Abandon is clever and ambitious, insidiously drawing you inside Katie's troubled, "under pressure" mind (or out of it: check the corpse's point of view from the bottom of a conveniently located and never-before noted pool of water, for instance). But where the film's inconsistency of tone and perspective is occasionally challenging, it eventually just feels like cheating.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less
6

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image