Still Alice (12A)
four stars
Dirs: Wash Westmoreland, Richard Glatzer
With: Julianne Moore, Alec Baldwin, Kristen Stewart
Runtime: 101 minutes
IN any chiller one might see in the cinema this year, none will freeze the blood more than this outstanding drama starring Julianne Moore. Her titular character does nothing so predictable as jump out of the shadows in a hallway, or leap from one tall building to another. Instead, she goes to the doctor's and has a memory test for early-onset Alzheimer's.
As the medic asks her to remember a name and address while he poses further questions, it will be a brave soul in the audience who is not ferreting away the details with her. When it comes to Alzheimer's, there can be few who do not look into the future for family, friends, and themselves and worry. For many, of course, it is not a case of future woes to come but all too present ones.
This might be reason enough for one to slap a good old Glaswegian "haud me back" label on Wash Westmoreland and Richard Glatzer's picture. Why see this study of one woman's descent into senility when you could be doing something far jollier instead? Who needs the grief?
That would be a pity, for in missing Still Alice one would not just lose out on watching Moore on magnificent, Oscar-winning form, but on seeing this cruel condition dealt with in a way that dignifies the sufferers and enlightens those around them. Yes, this adaptation of Lisa Genova's novel is far from an easy watch at times, but it is also humane, funny - honestly - and deeply moving.
When first we meet Alice, a linguistics professor at a university in New York, she is celebrating her 50th birthday in the company of her three children and husband, played by Alec Baldwin. You don't look 40, much less 50, he tells her, and it is true. Well-educated, fit, a keen observer of her own well-being, Alice is a picture of middle aged good health.
The first obvious sign that this is not the case happens while she is giving a lecture and her mind goes blank. Then, while out running a familiar route, she becomes lost. From here, she and her fellow academic husband do a textbook investigation into what might ail her. But no matter how much Alice attempts to stay ahead of the condition, putting her mind through one mental workout after another, she glides towards the inevitable like ship to iceberg.
Westmoreland and Glatzer do well to realise that the drama here is in the small details, in the gradual loss of self and independence. No histrionics are required. There is certainly plenty of drama as we watch Alice and her family attempt to deal with the situation, but aside from the odd moment of high emotion, they muddle through quietly, as people do. Baldwin, one of the most under-rated of actors, is on a low peep here and excellent as the bewildered husband, while Kristen Stewart, playing the daughter railing against her mother's advice to plan her life, adds further depth to the tale.
Moore, wisely, does not play Alice as a noble victim, some latterday saint, but as a woman who knows that her life as she knows it is ending, but that she will nevertheless have to carry on. While the screenplay is not above the odd Hallmark moment, it is left to Moore to set the tone and he does so superbly. She weeps, she rages, she tries to wring the most out of life while she can. While giving her free rein to do so, the directors also deal with the practicalities of her predicament. What happens to her job? Where will she live? What should the family do for the best? And can they stop talking about her as if she is not there?
Moore plays the part flawlessly. As her character puts it, "I am not suffering, I am struggling". It has become a cliche of acting that playing conditions wins prizes, but Moore never loses sight of the fact that she is portraying a person, warts, hopes, flaws and all.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article