Synopsis: From critically acclaimed writer/director Patricia Rozema comes the twisting tale of an aspiring young writer who has developed voyeuristic habits. One night, while prowling the backyards of an urban neighbourhood, he witnesses the rape and murder of a woman inside a large glass house. With the help of an eccentric street performer, Zelda (Sheila McCarthy), he discovers that the victim was the popular singer/poet Madelaine X (Margot Kidder). Attending her funeral, he notices Jane (Kate Mulligan), a strange, beautiful woman and resolves to pursue her. As the writer falls obsessively in love, he begins to suspect a bizarre link between Jane and the murdered Madelaine X.

***********************************************************************

White Room 8.5

After a slew of spooky films (some of which were pretty darned good, I must say – while others were tedious at best), I’ve decided to completely change channels. While looking at the films I’ve been meaning to watch, the ones that stood out the most were a handful of Canadian favourites of mine. In fact, these films are amongst the most memorable films I’ve seen in the last dozen years or so – Canadian or not.

I decided to start with ‘White Room’ because it’s the one I’ve seen the most recently and, thus, the anticipation isn’t as strong as with the others (I like build-ups; it’s more fun that way )

I saw ‘White Room’ for the first time three years ago. I had been a fan of Patricia Rozema’s ‘When Night is Falling’ for well over a decade (and so much of a fan that I have the DVD, CD, some stills, and even the poster on my wall ), but I had never seen any of her other pictures – not even ‘I Heard the Mermaids Singing’!

Then I discovered that the local library had both ‘White Room’ and ‘IHTMS’. Obviously, I made a point to borrow them. While I liked ‘IHTMS’, I was especially taken with ‘White Room’; it was my second-favourite film that year, after the phenomenal ‘The Machinist’.

I meant to buy it, as I tend to do, but only recently did I stumble upon a copy in a local Zellers and took the plunge (they also had a great Patricia Rozema ‘Retrospective’ DVD for grabs. And I did. )

It’s hard to categorize ‘White Room’, but I suppose I would consider it a dark romantic fantasy. It’s primarily a drama, but it revolves around a daydreaming young writer with a penchant for voyeurism. During one of his night-time adventures, he is witness to a home invasion. Completely incapable of doing anything to help, he becomes haunted by scream-filled thoughts of that night’s trauma. This becomes the impetus for leaving home to make a name for himself in the big city of Toronto.

While he’s there, he befriends a quirky artist and makes the acquaintance of an older woman. He quickly becomes obsessed with the latter and begins to follow and spy on her. Little does he know that he may actually be watched himself and that things are truly not as they appear to be on the surface.

Honestly, as I started to watch this, ‘Body Double’ came to mind. I may be completely off-base in making that parallel, especially since ‘White Room’ isn’t exploitative like the De Palma film can be – whereas ‘Body Double’ was a Hollywood thriller, and a pretty good one at that, this is an arty film with a completely different focus.

For one, it’s more about the characters than about the mystery behind it all. Although the performances by the film’s leads waver from exuberant yet inept to relatively subtle and palatable, the material is thankfully made of sturdier stuff. In fact, I think that this would have made a great book; I love the story. In my opinion, the characters are all well-defined, but the actors couldn’t fully support them (the exception being Kate Nelligan, who is pretty good).

I rather enjoyed these characters (which doesn’t mean that I liked them! ), even if all of them are clearly imperfect. I loved how they are all firm in their individuality even when they are frowned upon or mocked by outsiders. These are not carbon copy creations; they are three-dimensional beings that stand on their own, sometimes wobbly, feet.

The most interesting character might have been our idealistic voyeur, the wannabe writer who only manages to find inspiration after falling in love. If there’s a flawed person in this film, it’s him, as his intentions aren’t always mirrored in his actions. I found the older woman intriguing, if only because of the veil she’s wrapped around herself and her life. Watching her peel away the layers was a pleasant sight and I totally bought into the slowly blooming relationship between the leads.

What helps make this film seem somewhat fantastical are the narration which bookends it, giving it a sort of fairy tale quality from the onset, and the frequent inserts that represent our voyeur’s mental images during emotional moments. By the time we get to the final scene, these elements make it easy to accept the escapism that our characters engage in, faced with (seemingly) insurmountable adversity. But it does take the whole film to get us there; this same approach wouldn’t have worked early on.

It is a fairly low-budget affair. In fact, I’m surprised that they were able to get Margot Kidder for this (admittedly her career was past its peak by then and she only has a few bits in it, but still…). It looks and feels like an indie and there’s definitely no mistaking it for a big budget Hollywood picture. However, Rozema’s ambition is combined with just enough ingenuity to give the film its charm.

‘White Room’ has an artsy visual sense that I truly appreciate, that you can only find in such low-budget features. For instance, the white room itself has a very distinct vibe that you wouldn’t get elsewhere (the closest thing might perhaps be in a European or South American film). There’s also a way of dramatizing scenes with certain set ups which is unique to these quasi-DIY films – something that is lost whenever filmmakers start getting “real” budgets.

The only thing that doesn’t really work (aside from some of the shaky performances) are the fashion and pop music; they date the film considerably. But, otherwise, I’d say that it’s a timeless tale with plenty of replay value. I suspect, however, that this film would leave a number of people cold; it’s not for everyone. As for me, I liked it much in the same way that I dug early Egoyan films – there’s just something about it that I can’t quite put into words, that’s uniquely appealing.