Spoilers follow
Across the Universe is a film that threatens to get it right at numerous points in its two and a quarter hour running time, but never really is sure what it wants to be about.
Set in the 1960s, it begins as a quest for a father, then becomes about making a new friend, then about meeting a girl, then about the friend being drafted, then about American drugs culture... I could go on.
The result is a bit of a mess that simply feels like an attempt to force as many Beatles songs into a plotline as is humanly possible. A simple glance at the characters' names will tell you which songs are going to come up. Asian girl named Prudence? I suspect we'll be getting "Dear Prudence". Lead character called Jude? "Hey Jude"!
What frustrates me is that there are decent stories here but in combination none feels like they are given the time they need to develop (despite its engorged running time). The one I would have liked to have seen more of was Max being called up and the absence of a friend for Jude and a brother for Lucy. Its hinted at but becomes lost in the obligatory and unconvincing romance shoehorned into the middle of this story.
Whilst I liked Sadie, Jo-Jo and Prudence - their appearances could all easily be lopped out of this story without being felt. The film may even have been better for a tighter, sharper focus on Max, Lucy and Jude. As it is Julie Taymor throws every 1960s element and stereotype at the main characters to put them through scenario after scenario.
Jim Sturgess is so-so as central character Jude, bumbling from each of these scenarios to the next with little sense of purpose. Yet I had trouble really liking his character; whilst Jude is angry at himself for his lack of a cause, I was feeling more annoyed that we never get a sense of what he wants. I remain unconvinced that he is really wanting Lucy - they have remarkably little chemistry together and he spends precious little time in the film having fun with her.
Evan Rachel Wood as Lucy is cute enough and she does a good job of conveying Lucy's naiviety about her revolutionary friends and the methods they will use to get what they want. Her fear that she will lose her brother as she lost her boyfriend is one of the few solid emotional hooks to latch onto here and was one of the most interesting areas of the film.
Joe Anderson as Max was my favourite of the three. His character is irresponsible and foolish, suffering a little bit from his sister's naiviety yet is so full of energy and so much fun that I missed him during the middle third of the film. His absence is felt and immediately I found myself disengaging.
There are some vivid, exciting visuals here, yet at points they feel like a distraction from the weak points of the narrative rather than an attempt to move the story forward. For instance, "I Want You" is a visually exciting sequence reminiscent of the medical in the excellent Hair (1979). Yet these sequences remain inherently predictable and never really surprised me despite their technical brilliance. Indeed, at points the imagery seems far too heavy-handed (such as in the "She's So Heavy" coda to that same song).
With less songs and a simpler story structure this could well have been more successful. The film needed a clearer sense of purpose to truly succeed. Despite energetic performances from its cast, this piece falls flat and misses its chance to redeem itself with an unhappy ending, instead opting for the oft-trodden path of romantic reconciliation.
This film succeeds in saying nothing fresh about one of the most interesting periods in modern history, relationships or ideas and so disappointed enormously.