[Review] Tulip Fever: Where's the Fever?

Tulip Fever boasts an interesting premise, an excellent cast, and even a rather appealing title, but unfortunately, the film as a whole simply isn't that interesting, excellent, or appealing.

First, my thanks to Golden Scene for inviting me to last week's advance screening. Initially, I wasn't particularly interested in this film. However, my interest was piqued upon seeing that it starred Christoph Waltz, a two-time Oscar winner for Best Supporting Actor for Quentin Tarantino films, and the rising star Alicia Vikander, both actors I greatly admire. In fact, the film's subject matter is quite intriguing itself. The story is set in 17th-century Holland, a time when people were obsessed with tulips, willing to pay exorbitant prices to acquire and endlessly speculate on them. Watching their fervent tulip auctions, and even seeing someone lose their life over tulips, all seems utterly absurd. Yet, isn't our real world just as absurd? If we replace the tulips in the movie with real-life stocks, or even everyday commodities and mobile phones, we realize our world is equally nonsensical. Many people forgo sleep and meals daily, abandoning their original professions and hobbies, sacrificing their leisure time, disregarding loved ones, and even their own lives, choosing instead to become engrossed in these speculative activities. As the film shows, such speculation certainly brings them money and a better life, but when these activities are banned or the bubble bursts, what is left of these people's lives?

On the other hand, the "Fever" (or "Desire" as translated from the Chinese title "慾望鬱金香") in the film's title also refers to the passion between Sophia (Alicia Vikander) and Jan (Dane DeHaan). In the 17th century, the status of women was still very low; they basically had no opportunity to earn stable, substantial income through legitimate work. Therefore, the only way for them to secure a stable life was to align themselves with a wealthy man, bearing him children. In the film, after Sophia marries Cornelis (Christoph Waltz), she gains a stable life but feels reduced to a baby-making machine, constantly failing to conceive. One day, Cornelis commissions a painter, Jan, to paint their portrait, and Sophia and Jan fall in love at first sight, embarking on a passionate affair. In this illicit romance, Sophia must constantly hide from Cornelis, and later even fakes a pregnancy, all to escape with the man she loves and no longer be a breeding machine. Cornelis, though seemingly friendly, is Sophia's husband, and thus becomes an antagonistic figure in the film, hindering Sophia from finding true love. Yet, in the end, we discover that Cornelis would rather forgo children than risk Sophia's life, showing that he, too, deeply loved Sophia, though it was all too late. While Sophia's actions to find true love and seek autonomy seem justified, she ultimately abandoned her husband for an illicit affair, which also leaves her deeply remorseful and caught in a dilemma.

The story described above seems quite interesting and appealing, but the film's screenplay and editing utterly fail to convey that passion and desire. The film company itself, in promoting this R-rated movie, heavily emphasized its passionate scenes, which surely raised many people's expectations for the intimate moments between Alicia Vikander and Dane DeHaan, not to mention Cara Delevingne... However, the film's passionate scenes are not that "passionate," and the intimacy is not particularly explicit. Furthermore, I feel the film's exploration of characters is not deep enough, especially in portraying Sophia and Jan's love at first sight; the line, "I've fallen in love with her," feels more like a theatrical delivery than a cinematic one. Moreover, the film's editing is disjointed; many times, just as a crucial plot point arrives, the film cuts to another scene, significantly disrupting the film's rhythm. Therefore, regardless of any passionate scenes, how deeply the characters are in love, or how fervently they speculate on tulips, this film still fails to evoke a sense of passion, desire, or madness. The word "Fever" remains solely in the title, unable to be felt by the audience. Moreover, in the segments detailing Sophia's deception of her husband by faking pregnancy, and the scenes involving Jan and his drunken friend Gerrit (Zach Galifianakis), there are quite a few genuinely funny moments. The comedic effect is actually stronger than the film's attempt to convey "desire" in other scenes.

However, it is worth commending the film's truly beautiful and opulent costumes. Sophia, in a blue gown holding yellow tulips, is breathtakingly stunning; no wonder Jan immediately fell for her. Additionally, the performances of the main cast are quite good. Alicia Vikander and Christoph Waltz, both Oscar winners for Best Supporting Actress and Actor, deliver excellent performances throughout the film. The former vividly portrays Sophia's struggles and passionate feelings, while the latter's emotional changes after discovering the truth are very clear and moving. As for Zach Galifianakis, he continues to deliver a humorous performance with good results, and Judi Dench is as steady and reliable as ever. It's just a pity that the film's script and editing could not adequately showcase these actors' excellent performances, preventing this film from becoming a truly good work.