A collection of my idiosyncratic thoughts & film reviews. I find spending time sitting in the dark watching far too many films back to back a deeply relaxing experience. International, Indy, Hollywood, Vampires - I have very flexible tastes...
Ummm ... it's possible that I may have hit bottom. Yes, I actually went to see Cats and Dogs - The Revenge of Kitty Galore. No, it wasn't as as a dare. And yes, I do feel sort of dirty. Sadly, it's almost exactly what I should have expected - though I'm pretty shocked that I found the felines significantly cuter than the dogs. On the plus side, at least I don't have to introduce myself at parties as the writer of this film. That must be pretty awkward - "oh, you write movies ... anything I've seen? ..."
I feel obligated to explain how this all happened. Not as an excuse, but by way of explanation. On Friday I took a walk that meandered until I ended up at Pacific Place Theaters. I thought it'd be nice to see something but I'd watched absolutely everything else playing. I thought maybe just maybe this film would be clever in some way. There was a small bit of clever mixed in, but things pretty quickly degenerated into a less than thrilling set of scenarios which pretty quickly wore out their welcome with this viewer. The writers pretty much threw the kitchen sink of pet jokes at the "script" meaning lots of hydrant, butt sniffing, playing fetch is dumb/no it's not jokes combined with an attempt to riff on the bond films (for example Kitty Galore's underutilized sidekick had metal teeth like Jaws). If they were going for complete exhaustion of the genre, then mission accomplished.
At the film's start I perked up during the intro scene and opening credits which were relatively sly homages to Bond films Most of the rest of the way though I gave up and caught up on email sitting in the last row. Probably 'nuff said - except I'm a little unclear as to what age group would be super enthralled with this - beyond those thinking "cool, talking dogs!" I may be far off base in terms of children's enjoyment of this sort of material. Just can't help thinking they deserve better. At least save your money on the 3D - I can assure you it's not worth it.
Oh, and there's a pigeon character who seems borderline offensive to me. Maybe that's a story for another day...
On Tues I went down to Central Cinema for the monthly event of STIFF ("Seattle's True Independent Film festival") to see Phillip the Fossil" something that had been on the menu at SXSW but which I hadn't gotten to. It's definitely in the micro-budget indie category of film. With a stripped down story, technically solid film making, though with some ragged edges showing. The most obvious being the camera's focus seeking in and out at times that I find hard to believe was intentional (though I do wonder sometimes when the Duplass brothers did the same in Cyrus).
Phillip (Brian Hasenfus) the character of the title is a fossil only by the standards of the high school kids he tends to hang out with. Working in a half-assed way as a "landscaper" he seems more focused on doing all the drugs and girls and drugs he can while only making noises about starting up his own business. His drug involvement also extends to dealing steroids to the local football players looking to bulk up for college. Perhaps it's that connection that leaves him at least tolerated within the younger circle in which he starts dating the cast off girlfriend of one of the jocks. Add in some other characters in Phillips world such as a friend back from Iraq with a bad case of PTSD (that he mainly hangs around playing Duck Hunt with) and a more age-appropriate ex and you've got the slice of life that is the film.
.
I didn't love the movie- parts of the story seem a little too common for me to really be super enthusiastic. The returning vet for example while undeniably a sad reality just didn't really add that much to the story - beyond providing an opportunity to demonstrate that Phillip actually is a guy with positive qualities and potential. Actually, I didn't realize that was the role he played until I just wrote that. Which brings me to one of the interesting things about the film. While I was mildly engaged mentally while watching it - my appreciation has grown over time. The performance of Hasenfus is very strong - completely believable in the role. The supporting cast does generally approach the stark material without reservation giving a very natural slice of life film. Ultimately as things get darker - probably far darker than the normal chain of events that start with a guy sleeping with a younger woman - I started to feel as though I was getting to see a part of the main character I wouldn't have guessed existed in the beginning. The last scene which was so simple and basic yet left me feeling nearly completely turned around in my feelings about Phillip - triggering the reflections that continued even as I wrote this. As a piece of very low budget filmmaking that focuses on a far less glamorous character than we're used to seeing it did at least meet some of my expectations and surpass others. It's not a "fun" film, and I mention that because a movie whose publicity shots are skewed to a guy with a weed-wacker may make you think it's going to be entertaining in a different sort of way. But it has its interesting bits and for Wed. night fare I can at least mildly recommend it. Brian Hasenfus though is definitely someone to keep an eye on in his next film. Plus Garth Donovan the writer, director, producer and editor apparently is the exception to my new rule that when someone plays all the roles in a film it's likely to be very, very bad. So thanks to Central Cinema and STIFF for the night out.
Scott Pilgrim vs the World is a mixed up, mashed-up hoot of a ride, a slacker geek fantasy writ large on the big screen. The first half is so much fun that I'm already looking forward to seeing it again (I am such a sucker for cutesy/clever character intros). Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a 22 year old with no visible means of support who plays in a band of dubious merit. When he's not mourning the personally devastating loss of his last girlfriend Envy (Brie Larson) he hangs out with his band, plays video games, and spends time with his less complicated girlfriend Knives Chau.
This (extremely chaste) relationship with Knives (Ellen Wong) a 17 year old Asian schoolgirl is the source of consistent teasing from his pals. Resulting in a fair amount of funny dialog both about her age, and the number of stereotypical fetishes she manages to span - at one point Cera slyly clarifies that yes, it is a Catholic High School that she attends. Knives seems to adore Pilgrim who's her first boyfriend. Their relationship (which is sweet - especially when they're playing a ninja version of Dance Dance Revolution I'm unfamiliar with) sets up some of the film's romantic tension when Pilgrim is drawn to the reddish-purple haired nice bad girl temptress that is Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). He clearly wants Ramona but feels bad dumping Knives. Interestingly enough he seems completely unconcerned with the potentially negative outcomes in dumping an impressionable young woman with the name Knives.
Folks warn Pilgrim to stay away from Flowers - but he goes ahead anyway and after a dorky courtship that probably only works if you're Michael Cera they start dating. The relationship aspects of it while not exactly deep worked well enough for me. Everyone who was supposed to be together or long for each other had enough chemistry to make me care about the outcome. So that's a positive point for the film. Hard to make a mash-up that includes a romantic angle if you can't nail that aspect of things. So far so good.
The film also has the slacker joshing and indy film quirkiness sorted as well. It's oddball in its quieter moments without feeling forced. And I actually laughed out loud, frequently, especially in the first half of the film. That's sadly is becoming a less frequent occurrence for me of late. I suspect it does help if you've got st least a passing familiarity with video game culture (the film had me from it's 8-bit opening credit to Universal Pictures). Though I think it doesn't have to be super deep knowledge of video gaming to get most of the jokes.
So far it could be an updated version of Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist. But as in many movies when there's a too good to be true romance there's a catch. And in this case it's a doosey. In order for Pilgrim to stay with Ramona he must defeat her seven evil exes. Yes, in combat. Or perhaps more accurately in Mortal Kombat. Though that's less of a problem than one might think because in the Scott Pilgrim universe Michael Cera (or his stunt double who seems to have slightly redder hair) has some mad fighting skillz. The remaining course of the film follows Pilgrim sorting out what he really wants, and what he's willing to fight for. Mostly literally.
The film is based on a comic - and the visual style of the film pays homage to that provenance throughout. It's a damn nice looking movie, with a lot of humor, great style (love the graphical treatment of the bands playing - way cooler way to add another dimension than the film than "Real 3D"), and enough relationship stuff to hold things together. Even I expect if you're slightly ambiguous in your position on Mr. Cera. Eventually with seven evil exes to battle it's hard to keep the momentum building continuously. At some point the sweet but funny banter takes a backseat to the mortal kombat shenanigans. I felt the film worked stupendously well when the fights were used as seasoning on top of the geek gaming romance film vs the other way around. But it's not like she only has three evil exes and this sort of film almost always feels weak to me in the final act. It's a pretty minor complaint about a comic book movie that otherwise lives up to repetitive marketing tagline - "An epic of epic epicness." Going to be $10 well spent - most fun I've had in a while at the movies.
In between snapping photos of participants at Comic-Con I also shot a few short clips of video, mainly to give the sense of the overwhelming everpresent roar of the crowd. At least until you walked a few blocks away from the convention center where things quickly quieted down. I'd gone to San Diego thinking I might shoot a fair bit of video and string it together as a guide to the event. But just wandering from place to place was such a riot of the senses I never really got there. So instead here's a brief feel of the surroundings. Most of the footage was actually shot on Sunday which is likely the quietest of all days. Which makes the below all the scarier. Actually it's a fairly mellow vibe (pen stabbing excepted) most of the time so it wasn't like thousands of angry people - but there was a serious mass of bodies to move through much of the time.
Some more photos - general impressions to follow in the next day or so with a recap of how I actually spent my time. Each of these are pretty high resolution. So if you'd like to take a closer look just click on it for the full version. Keep an eye out for the big panoramic image at the end of the post.
Waiting to board my flight back to Seattle. Will try to finish off the convention posts in the next day or so.
Maybe I'm a pessimist but this seems like
a relationship doomed to failure
Some members of the JSA I presume talking with the media
Not really a costume as much as a marketing bit for Fandango but folks seemed to dig it.
Suppose the intent here is clear enough - sort of in the category of you don't need to run faster than the bear, just faster than the other guy running from the bear.
These guys were actually outside the hall working on their swordwork
Couple of folks doing an interview - pretty common to see around the halls
Maybe it's just me, but this seems like a bad idea. Whether you interpret that in relation to an Imperial Stormtrooper driving your hotel shuttle or the sparkly headset (geez, those Twilight vamps are really taking over everything aren't they?)
Not really sure who these folks are - but made another interesting couple
Entrance to the Exhibition Hall
Pretty standard scene of the clogged elevators. Highly recommend taking the steps, at least in the downward direction
Very excited to check this film out. At the booth they said their in talks with the Landmark Varsity - so keeping fingers crossed.
Me just playing with my iphone and panoramic imaging outside the convention center. Be sure to click in for the fullest view.
A few months ago, Rich foolishly gave me the keys to his blog and invited me to contribute. I don't have his stamina so I don't think I'll be matching his prolific output. But I share at least some of his love for film, his capacity for pop culture trivia, and sufficiently low expectations that I can sit through almost anything while patiently waiting for the films I will truly love. (Well, almost anything. Let's just say that I won't be competing with Rich to post the first review of the next Twilight film.) So maybe this will work out...
What are we looking for in a summer action movie? They usually have no pretense of Art -- but that doesn't mean they can't be fun and enjoyable. So what do we need to reach at least that threshold level of popcorn satisfaction?
The list isn't very long. A cool, dark place to chill out for a few hours. Some bad guys to drive the plot. And then some choreographed fights, explosions, vehicular mayhem, and gymnastic stunts to keep our attention. Oh, and maybe a bare minimum of a plausible storyline to hold it together and some characters who can wring a drop or two of concern, admiration, or sympathy out of us. It's not much to ask for. I mean, most of the cost is in the stars, locations, stunts, and effects. Surely, buying a competent script won't break the bank and it just might make the film a little better.
Salt with Angelina Jolie is indeed projected in a cool, dark place. And there are plenty of bad guys and action, but other than that, it barely clears my low bar of summer movie expectations.
Jolie plays Evelyn Salt, a badass, deep cover, superspy who just wants to put it behind her so she can pursue her life of newlywed bliss without having to worry about being captured by North Koreans and tortured daily, alone and forgotten, in some dank, nameless hellhole. But no -- just as she's leaving work for a quiet dinner at home with hubby where she can demonstrate her napkin-folding skills, she's pulled back in. In no time at all, she's on the run from her own agency while she tries to save her husband and stop a plot by Russian moles to restore the Soviet glory days by killing the president and setting off a nuclear war.
Wait ... what? Russians? Nuclear war? Seriously?
There's plenty of action. Jolie takes down an entire SWAT team using a MacGyver bazooka made from office furniture and cleaning supplies. She leaps onto moving trucks from freeway overpasses (and then onto other moving trucks) while eluding her former colleagues and maybe trying to stop the Russians. Or maybe she's one of them. Or maybe she just wants them to think she's still on board with the plan. (If there's anyone who's not sure how this particular question plays out, please leave contact info in the comments section so I can alert you to some amazing investment opportunities.)
Some reviewers have compared Evelyn Salt to Jason Bourne. Listen, I hope Matt Damon tracks each of you down and personally delivers the Jason Bourne whup-ass you deserve for this insult. The Bourne trilogy delivers Salt's action, but it is wrapped in a plot that is movieland-plausible because it doesn't rely on a complex undertaking of super bad guys who haven't had contact with their masters since they were children but nevertheless wait patiently in the U.S. for almost 30 years before trying to do massive evil ... just because. Evil which they could have performed at any time because the U.S. President is guarded by nincompoops who can't be bothered to watch the impenetrable bunker door for an extra five seconds as it closes to secure the president in the middle of an assassination attempt.
In contrast, the Bourne films are driven by amoral beaureacrats who will stop at nothing to further their personal ambition and hide their mistakes -- not such a hard motivation to swallow. They don't want to destroy the world, they just want that next promotion and maybe some cash on the side. We care about Jason Bourne because he's an awesome guy who's been used and done things he's ashamed of. He wants to find out who he is, he's horrified by what he discovers, and he wants to remake himself and make amends. We're happy when he gets the girl, we want things to work out for them, and we're bummed and pissed when she gets knocked off. And none of this gets in the way of the best car chases ever filmed.
Action, story, character. It's not a bad formula. If you're willing to settle for one-out-of-three, go ahead and see Salt. It'll give you a chance to cool off while you reflect upon how you miss the Cold War.
I've been curious about Comic-Con the huge comic book and way way more convention that takes place in San Diego for a while. This year I decided to go down, even though I could only really attend for a small portion of the days. I'll likely be writing more after the show ends. But for tonight I wanted to post some of my photos. It's a pretty huge event and the convention center and surrounding area were positively packed by fans. Many in elaborate and impressive costumes. Wait times to get into events seemed to be very long - but once into a venue it was possible to ride out much of the day there. I really only attended one full panel for The Vampire Diaries but spent significant time getting the lay of the land, trolling the exhibition floor and watching part of the Fringe panel (which contained more bong related humor than I would have expected). So for now - behold this tiny fraction of the geek awesomeness that is Comic-Con.
Today Fantastic Fest published the first batch of films that will be screened this year in Austin. I was pretty interested in this festival from what I'd heard in the past, then more interested after attending SXSW and seeing where the events were held. But with the release just a portion of the films I'm now officially pretty darn excited about it. Not everything on the list seems like it'll be my cup of tea - but it certainly does live up to their promise of being "a film festival with the boring parts cut out" (not to mention 'The Geek Telluride'). I encourage you to take a look at the stuff they've got planned. This year they're also turning the Highball in an arcade with their Fantastic Arcade section this year - along with some gaming film themed events. Overall, seems like an awesome way to spend a week.
Here's a link direct to the list of films. Below are some of the highlights - at least in my mind (yes - they had me with the description "it's Cocoon with kung fu!") - cribbed from the official info. Don't know anything about any of the films beyond what I've read on their site.
Life and Death of Porno Gang (2009) Director: Mladen Djordjevic, Serbia, 90 minutes
Adult movie director Marko steals money from his mobster producer Cane to create his masterpiece: an experimental black and white erotic horror film. When the film bombs and he can’t repay his boss, he slips away with the cast and crew to produce live porno-theater in the Serbian countryside. Then it gets weird.
Gallants (2010) Directors: Derek Kwok & Clement Cheng, Hong Kong, 98 minutes
The funniest, most ass-kicking, hard-rocking, pedal-to-the-metal movie of the year. It’s COCOON with kung fu! (New York Asian Film Festival)
Golden Slumber (2010) Director: Yoshihiro Nakamura, South Korea, 139 minutes
Last year, Yoshihiro Nakamura’s FISH STORY saved the world from certain annihilation and became the word-of-mouth hit of the festival. This year, Nakamura’s back with another ode to the human connection, GOLDEN SLUMBER, a brain-melting thriller send-up that’s two parts THE BIG CHILL, three parts BOURNE IDENTITY and a million parts awesome. (New York Asian Film Festival)
Outrage (2010) Director: Takeshi Kitano, Japan, 109 minutes
Takeshi Kitano is back in classic form, directing and starring in the genre God intended for him: a ruthless, bloody and very violent yakuza crime thriller.
Rubber (2010) Director: Quentin Dupieux, France/USA, 85 minutes
Quentin Dupieux (the real name of legendary DJ Mr. Ozio) has directed my hands-down favorite film of Cannes 2010. Robert, a very disgruntled psychokinetic automobile tire explodes the heads of birds, beasts and humans alike on a high-desert killing spree like no other.
Sound of Noise (2010) Directors: Ola Simonsson and Johannes Stärne Nilsson, Sweden, 102 minutes
Musical terrorists have launched a full-scale musical attack using the city – its buildings, its machinery and its ceaseless noise – as their instrument. The group’s leaders are the “Bonnie and Clyde of underground rock,” hell-bent to dismantle the harmony of the world with their anarchic performances.
What to say that hasn't already been said about this film - and by much better writers? Probably not much. It was a fabulously fun ride - though I might differ with some of those same writers on whether it was really any more deep a meditation on the meaning of reality vs. dreams and their relation to our collective humanity than a strangely similar episode of Ally McBeal.
First, let me just say if you haven't seen Inception you should probably just stop what you're doing, head over to your favorite theater and see the film. Even with the quibbles that one could have with the film (and there aren't really many) if you're the sort of person who wastes what precious time you have reading this blog you want to see this film (or, you're my parents - hi Mom/Dad! - and even then you should probably go). If for no other reason that it's a lot of fun while you're watching it and you can see Hollywood's money well spent on the screen.
Much like director Christopher Nolan's Memento this is the sort of film you're way better off seeing cold. At a high level the movie follows Leonardo DiCaprio as an "extractor" someone who uses technology that allows people to share dreams to break into their trove of hidden secrets and steal them for others. Together with an all star team he's given an offer he can't refuse, break into the mind of an industrialist and plant an idea - a very specific idea. In exchange another powerful businessman will clear up some barriers in the US keeping DiCaprio from returning to see his children. The insertion of an idea, the "inception" of the title is a more complex undertaking than stealing something and much of the team feels it cannot be done - but they follow DiCaprio on this one last big score even though some on the team are starting to realize he has hidden motivations and unresolved issues that make the mission even more dangerous than it seems. We follow them in reality and in dreams and as expected the line between these begin to blur.
I thought Inception was a significantly better piece of film than I've seen from Hollywood in a while. I'm not 100% sure I buy all the biggest mind fuck of all time hype surrounding it (Four Boxes messed with my head considerably more - not to mention the end of the Newhart show) but it was a lot of mentally engaged fun. While I'm not 100% sure of the intent of the film's ambiguous ending - if my interpretation is correct (and who's to say otherwise) it turned out to be the outcome I largely suspected it would be about 1/3 in. But that didn't stop my from enjoying the experience in the least. The movie's melange of weird sci-fi concepts combined with the "one last big job" genre feel, plenty of shootouts, and other heist film tropes totally worked for me. I won't try to explain anything else about the film - other that it's way worth the $10 it costs to see it. And I'd like to personally thank everyone involved in resisting the urge to convert it to 3D at the last minute.
Look, I know Harry Potter is all the rage. And not everyone can come up with a new idea for emotionally tortured abstinence now vampires. But just because you can make a movie doesn't necessarily mean you should make a movie. I mean, come on - there must have been a third script lying around somewhere for the National Treasure series. Did you really need to make the third film in that cycle involve witchcraft? And I'm a sucker for this sort of silliness. Don't believe me read my review of Percy Jackson for starters. But except for a few cute moments this is pretty derivative stuff and not particularly even trying that hard to hold your attention. I realize it's targeted towards a young audience - but there's no reason to succumb to the soft bigotry of low expectations when it comes to cinematic entertainment for the youth of today.
Nicolas Cage plays Balthazar (a name whose upwards ascendancy of cool for me peaked when it was used on Charmed - can we please now come up with a new magic-y sounding name?). He's an apprentice of Merlin who's been looking for the great wizard's successor so he can defeat Morgana who's trapped inside his girlfriend who's trapped in some sort of Russian doll like device along with many of her followers. Yep, seriously - that's the plot. Except for the part about Jay Baruchel who meets Cage as a ten year old on a school trip, turns out to be the kid Cage has been looking for, only to lock Cage in a vase for ten years until he's a physics major at NYU has suffered enough emotional trauma to be interesting without being threatening.
There are some bad guys of course, and an ending allowing for a sequel if enough money is made by this one. In the middle there's a cute homage to Fantasia (which I didn't know was based on a much older poem until I started writing this) that is likely to be lost on many folks who didn't have nightmares about Mickey (*) and the mops after seeing it at Radio City Music Hall. It's relatively well put together visually - just don't expect to be shocked by the originality of anything in the film. I could write more. But I'm not sure it's worth the trouble. Can't muster up hate, love or much in the way of caring one way or the other. I've certainly seen worse - and that includes Mr. Cage's hairstyle. Though it certainly would make a top ten list on that one.
*Update: On further reflection, which definitely was not triggered by a nasty letter from Disney, the nightmares may have been triggered by Radio City's signature gigantic goose stepping dancers and not as previously inferred Mickey Mouse. Though at this point so many years later I'm not 100% sure
Some things are just better left to the French. Dinner for Schmucks is a remake of the significantly less Yiddish-y titled film The Dinner Game. While I haven't seen it I have a hunch that's a reasonably funny movie - even though they clearly stole the plot device from Happy Days. Sadly, I cannot say the same for the American version I saw earlier this week. I wanted to like it - but sometimes need to remind myself I'm always skeptical about Paul Rudd films for a reason.
Paul Rudd is an analyst of some sort working in an investment bank for an all star cast of douchebags. He's got a girlfriend who won't say yes to his proposals of marriage leading to some degree of professional insecurity. When he sticks his neck out with a new idea it looks as though he'll move up in the firm. But to cement his promotion he needs to bond with the guys. Which means participating in their monthly "Dinner for Winners" party - wherein they compete to bring the biggest idiot with them to the meal. Yeah - I know - haven't these dudes ever heard of a strip club for frat boy male bonding? Obviously, it's not a very nice thing and Rudd puts up token resistance but decides if he's going to move ahead he'll have to find such an "idiot" (interestingly enough the term "schmucks" is never used in the film). Then he hits Steve Carell with his car. Carell's character is a lonely fellow who works for the IRS and makes intricate dioramas using taxidermy mice. His wife has left him for a co-worker, he has some deficiencies in understanding social norms, no filter between his brain and mouth and quickly hitches himself to Rudd when an invitation is extended to dinner the next night. In other words he's probably a shoo-in to win the contest.
Along the way Carrel manages to help Rudd almost lost his girlfriend, his career, and his mind only of course to (maybe) have it all "happen for a reason." The film has some funny moments but for me not enough of the humor stuck. One can tell that the folks making the film probably had a great time - but I'd expect it'd be more fun to watch these guys hanging out and eating dinner than to watch the film they later put together. Part of the problem for me may have been that everyone seemed to take Carrel as a freak because of the taxidermy. While I'm not super enthused about art made from dead animals the creations were actually pretty clever and after seeing Marwencol I'm not inclined to be dismissive of someone imagining their own world artistically for the sake of personal therapy. So I was uncomfortable laughing at these creations from early on. After watching the film a friend reminded me of the taxidermy dioramas of dead frogs in Cane Toads. These are sort of like that but given the budget even more involved.
Dinner for Schmucks isn't a horrible movie, it's just not a very memorable one. The night I saw it Seattle was boiling hot and the screening was a great respite for that. Which at some point was the main reason I saw the film through to the end - which is likely not a great endorsement to suggest you should run out and spend $10+ to see it when it hits theaters as the end of the month.
Saturday night I went to see I am Love with Tilda Swinton. I'd heard mixed things about it during SIFF but didn't really have anything else specific to do/see so gave it a shot. I think I might have hated it during SIFF - but as the only movie in a day I sort of liked it. Well, actually parts of it were terrible - but I sort of laughed at the most extreme examples. Such as the near wordless fight between Tilda and her son when he realized she's sleeping with his best friend (which he intuits when he's served a very special soup as part of a dinner prepared by said friend - no, not making that up) and the resulting extreme results. When the Italians do melodrama they certainly really bring it. Absolutely nothing held back / left on the table here. Someone walking out from the screening before me said loudly that it reminded him of Anna Karenina - which is only partly a comparison one might draw due to Swinton's character's Russian heritage. You could have alternately titled the film "I am repressed and rather horny" - that also would have worked. For all my snarking it really is beautifully photographed though with long complex tracking shots and an interesting washed out look with plenty of great architecture forming the backdrops. But the story is so over the top I almost feel as though I'm expected to view it as parody. Much like "Bring it On."
At the start of the film an extended aristocratic family gathers to celebrate the patriarch's birthday. During the meal he announces his retirement passing on the business to Swinton's husband and one of their two sons. He's built up the family fortune in the textile business and it's now up to the next generation to ensure the continuity of the business. That's ostensibly part of the story but the stronger focus is on various relationships, the coming out of Swinton's daughter, and beautifully photographed backgrounds (architectural, natural, and edible). I liked the first half better than the second where I started to realize things might just kept building until they all plummeted off a cliff. Which is pretty much what happened. Overall a nice piece of film making as a visual form. Not in my category of absolute must but I can see why others might like it more .... or less.
Last night I went to see The Room - which is probably easiest to describe quickly as this decade's Rocky Horror Picture Show but without the catchy music and less cross dressing. Truly are not the words in my head to describe the badness of this work. Yet is was truly a hoot. They're doing two midnight screenings of it in August at the Egyptian with the star/director/writer/producer Tommy Wiseau in attendance. Not 100% sure it'd be as much fun the 2nd time - but I think I'm willing to risk it.
They apparently spent something like $6 million making this - which is staggering in itself. You could watch it on DVD but I don't think it would be nearly the same. Sort of like watching Rocky Horror on late night cable not knowing anything else about it. You might think it was awesomely ridiculous - but it wouldn't be comparable to the midnight experience.
The story itself is almost nothing. Johnny (Tommy Wiseau) has some undetermined job at a bank and lives with his girlfriend Lisa. At some point for no discernible reason Lisa decides she's bored with Johnny. And her feelings aren't helped when he doesn't get his big promotion. So she takes up with his BEST FRIEND (that all caps designation is a running joke too - at least in the subtitles) Mark. Eventually Johnny finds out about the affair and kills himself with the gun that Mark and he took off of a drug dealer (who we never see again) who was menacing Denny (who's every appearance causes the crowd to scream 'Hello Denny') for a drug problem we never hear about again.
Thankfully Central Cinema shows it subtitled - otherwise it would be very hard to follow as the audience is screaming over big parts of it. By the end you will be too.
It's hard for me to put my finger on what makes the work both so god-awful yet watchable. First there's Wiseau who's quite a character. A quote on the film's wikipedia page attributes the memorable (and accurate) description of his speaking voice in the film as "Borat trying to do an impression of Christopher Walken playing a mental patient" to a writeup on IFC.com. Then there's the fact that the film is filled with plot points and characters that never appear again - at one stage a character we're clearly supposed to know catches Mark and Lisa kissing only to have the subtitles ask the question that was on my mind 'Who the fuck is this guy?!?' Another classic example is Lisa's mom announces she has breast cancer to have it never reappear again even though the mom appears throughout as the constant nag telling her daughter to stay with Johnny as he's her meal ticket. Not to mention Lisa's complete lack of concern about her mother's cancer brushing it off a second later. With is the standard way of dealing with everything for most of the characters. Extremely revelation followed by a 'no big deal' sort of comment that makes it seems that almost everyone has a brain injury that destroyed their short term memory. And of course as you'd expect the acting leaves a lot to be desired - though it's unclear if even the top actors of the last century could have made this thing work.
The writing is very off in terms of dialog - as if they'd written the script in English, translated it to Spanish via Google Translate and then back to English (with a possible bump to Chinese in between). A good example is Johnny's constant refrain "But she's my future wife" - at every mention the audience loudly corrects him with "your fiance." The film is peppered with other pieces of choice dialog such as "Oh man, I just can't figure women out. Sometimes they're just too smart. Sometimes they're flat-out stupid. Other times they're just evil", "Thank you honey, this is a beautiful party! You invited all my friends. Good thinking!" Many but not all of the memorable quotes appear on this list at IMDB.
If that wasn't enough there's also quite a few creepy sex scenes that seem intent on focusing way to much on Johnny's ass muscle articulation mid act. Something no one really needs to see.
But the true Room experience seems to come from the spoons, my lord the spoons... For no particular reason I can fathom Johnny's apartment has a bit of a spoon theme. Anytime a spoon picture appears onscreen someone in the audience yells SPOON!!! triggering a cavalcade of plastic spoons thrown by audience members at the screen. And yes, one does occasionally catch an errant stray in the back of the head. Adds flavor to the experience.
Central Cinema jazzes up the experience further by occasionally activating a disco ball mid love scene and running a smoke machine at "appropriate" moments. Oh - and when Johnny offs himself they shot off some sort of streamer device from the ceiling as he blew his brains out. Plus the night started out with a pre-film trivia contest. A lot of value for your $5.
I'm only capturing part of the silliness. I'm not sure it'll hold up to too many repeat viewings. Though by the end of it I was totally yelling "Hello Denny" with the rest of the audience. :-) Basically I'm not sure that if you recut the film using a random number generator to order the scenes that The Room wouldn't make roughly the same amount of sense. As it is it was a lot of fun - I'd recommend giving it a try at least once with a live audience. And yep - I'm increasingly becoming a fan of Central Cinema. True even before I learning they're going to be screening Gymkata which totally sealed the deal there.
