BIG EYES

US, 2014, 106 minutes, Colour.
Amy Adams, Christophe Waltz, Krysten Ritter, Jason Schwartzman, Danny Huston, Terence Stamp, Jon Polito, Delaney Raye, Madeleine Arthur.
Directed by Tim Burton.

There are quite a number of big eyes in this film. They are the focus of most of the paintings by Margaret Keane, who began her work in in the late 1950s and is still painting. She has done a series of pictures of waifs and given them all very big eyes, different colours but a pervading sense of black and darkness around them. They have been very popular over the decades while some of the art critics have dismissed them as kitsch.

It is a surprise to find that this is a Tim Burton film. For more than a quarter of a century, Burton has delivered a wide range of films treating the world of fantasy and vivid, often dark, imagination. While the big eyes do fit into this Burton interest, and there are some moments when Margaret Keane looks into a mirror and sees herself with big eyes, this is a fairly straightforward narrative, often very serious, but with some moments of hilarity and even zany bravado.

We might ask how this could be especially when the film opens with Margaret leaving home with a young daughter, driving away from the outer suburbs of Northern California into San Francisco and establishing herself there, interviewing for a job at a furniture factory, painting children’s illustrations on some of that furniture. But she does go outside, offering to paint portraits of passers-by. It is there that she attracts the attention of Walter Keane who is flirting with passers-by, trying to sell his paintings of Montmartre and other Paris settings. They connect, date, marry and go on a colourful honeymoon to Hawaii. Who could ask for anything more?

Margaret’s difficulty is that she does not know Walter very well – nor do we. At first he seems too good to be true but when he starts exhibiting his own and Margaret’s paintings in the corridor of a club which leads to the toilet and eventually does get some interest, it is in her paintings and not his. Uproar with the club owner brings headlines and photos.Walter makes friends with a San Francisco columnist and users story finds him. Margaret is dismayed when he claims that he did the paintings himself but, in those days, even with a confession sequence, although she is not a Catholic, where she is reminded that the husband is the head of the family, she continues to lie about the paintings to her daughter who is growing up and lets Walter take the credit for the fast-selling paintings. He even set up his own gallery, prints off posters which eager patrons want with an autograph, and then postcards of the posters.

This means that Margaret’s time and energy is devoted to work in her studio, churning out big eyes paintings. Walter even gets a commission for a painting for the 1964 World Fair in New York.

When Walter takes to fisticuffs against a critic at a society do, it is the beginning of the end.

The intriguing latter part of the film is the court case when Margaret sues Walter and a newspaper company and she and he, each has to prove that they are the artists who have made the big eyes pictures.

This would be an entertainment if it were not true. However, it is a true story.

Bringing it to life is the performance, intense but restrained, of Amy Adams as Margaret. But it is Walter who holds the limelight on screen, even as he did in real life. This is a cheerfully bombastic, sometimes over-the-top, performance from Christophe Waltz, which reaches its climax in his attempts to speak for himself in court and in his comically absurd self-defence.

In the final credits there is a photo of the real Margaret Keane along with Amy Adams.

1. A true story? The final image of Margaret and Amy Adams? The information at the final credits?

2. California, the late 1950s, into the 1960s? Homes, suburbs, apartments, mansions? Art galleries, studios, exhibitions? The World Fair of 1964? New York? Hawaii locations, honeymoon, the courts? The musical score?

3. Tim Burton, his work, his interest in fantasy, this film more realistic?

4. Margaret and taking her daughter, fleeing her husband, San Francisco, the meeting with Dee Ann and, support, settling, the interview at the furniture factory, with a group of people painting on the cribs and other furniture?

5. Painting outside, small cash for her portraits, next to Walter, his painting, flirting with the girls? Looking at her paintings, intrigued? Praise, misreading Margaret’s daughter, the effect? Sharing with Walter, going out, meals, the proposal, her hopes? The joy of the Hawaiian honeymoon?

6. The title, the pictures, waifs, the enlarged eyes, the pathos? Margaret and her talking of expressing emotion? The range of portraits? Using her daughter? Over the years, in her studio, secretly? The plan for the World Fair, her large mural with so many children? The impact on viewers, some liking, some disliking? The art critic considering it kitsch?

7. Walter, his character, living in a world of fantasy, stories about studying in Paris, his real estate work, his dreams of being a painter? The range of paintings of Paris and his selling them? Margaret scraping off his signature and finding the true signature, his not being a painter?

8. Walter at the club, free drinks, paintings, the decision to hire the corridor, the reaction of the owner, the various clients on the way to the toilet, not selling many pictures, his attack on the owner, their fight, photographed, in the paper, the owner and his being pleased with having a full clientele? His claiming to be the artist? Margaret hearing him, puzzling about his lying, the effect on Margaret, her actually agreeing to the paintings and letting him sign? His demands on her? The secrecy? Hiding everything from Jane, not allowing her into the studio?

9. Margaret’s will confession, not being Catholic, the priest welcoming her, talking about lying, talking about Walter, the priest’s probing questions, but then urging her to be subservient to Walter for the sake of peace and the family?

10. Walter, selling the paintings, bringing home the cash? The decision to open the gallery? His rival with Ruben, Ruben and his gallery across the street, dismissing Walter’s paintings? The exhibition, the interests, the range of people present, the focus on Margaret’s paintings? The effect on her?

11. Money making, people unable to afford the pictures, buying the posters, the autographs, then making postcards?

12. The passing of years, the pressure on Margaret, her daughter growing up?

13. The prospect of the World Fair, Walter’s proposal, the acceptance, Margaret doing the painting, weary, her daughter finding her exhausted?

14. The art critic, supercilious, his critique, dismissing the paintings as kitsch? Walter’s reaction outburst, the fight at the party? The articles condemning him? The World Fair withdrawing the painting?

15. The San Francisco journalist, his narrative, his writing his column, human interest stories, listening to Walter, becoming a friend, believing him, helping him? The discovery of the truth and his reaction?

16. Walter, his enjoying society, his reputation, signing the paintings, everything going to his head, increasing the fantasy, saying that women could never sell their paintings? The clashes with Margaret?

17. Margaret, the final confrontation, taking Jane, going to Hawaii?

18. The year passing, the decision about anonymity? Suing Walter? Suing the papers? The courting Hawaii, Walter’s reaction? His bravura behaviour?

19. The judge, the jury, his sympathetic response, criticising Walter and his self-defence? The idea that each of them should take an hour to paint? Or to saying he wanted inspiration, his shoulder hurting, not painting? Margaret painting, with her daughter, winning, the press conferences? Her reputation?

20. The aftermath, Walter and his denials, dying in 2003, never doing any more painting? Margaret, her continuing to paint every day?

21. An interesting film about after talent, fantasy? Hoaxes and frauds in the art world?