It's all about Eartha.
I love me some Eartha Kitt. Like others my age I was first exposed to her voice during the holidays, seductively whining to St. Nick about what she'd like to receive for Christmas in the 1953 recording "Santa Baby." Even without a visual, her voice sounded sublimely seductive and tigerish. Unlike people who have covered it since, who treat the song as if it were just a cute little novelty wish list ("ha ha, yes we would all like a duplex and checks, isn't that funny?"), Eartha sang it from the perspective of a woman already well kept and pampered by the men in her life who fully expects to receive what she's asking for or there will be hell to pay. It's a list of demands delivered with a wink and a hike of her skirt. Powerful stuff.
And then there was the Eartha Kitt who played Catwoman on "Batman." Did flames not erupt from the screen whenever she was on it, purring and vamping, one of the first black women in a role of any import on TV in the '60s? Eartha hit the "Batman" scene in '67, overlapping with Diahann Carroll in "Julia" by '68, but as groundbreaking as Julia was, it wasn't nearly as much fun to watch as "Batman." Plus, Diahann was all covered up in her nurse's whites and tasteful dresses, while Eartha was tricked out in skintight leather, a mask, and talons!
Eartha fascinated me. People told my mother that she resembled the actress, which further fueled my fascination. Also, Eartha's unplaceable, unique style of speaking had many wondering where she came from. She looked and sounded too exotic to have been from South Carolina, which is exactly where she was born.
Anyway, I didn't get an opportunity to see much more of Ms. Kitt apart from guest appearances on the ubiquitous '70s variety shows. I hadn't seen many of her films from the early days. Recently, I saw Anna Lucasta. At first I thought this was a remake of the Greta Garbo film Anna Christie, but I have to watch that flick again to be sure. ** Aha! It is a remake of a 1949 film with Paulette Goddard as Anna.
While times have certainly changed since the 1950s, narrative standards haven't changed much: the story of the bad girl -- the fallen woman who tries to make good -- is as perennial now as it was back then (Cinderella Liberty, Mona Lisa, Pretty Woman, the list goes on). It's also a role that often proves the mettle of an actress. Anna Lucasta was Eartha's turn, and she is quite good in the film, as is Sammy Davis Jr. The drama has some overtly comedic moments, and it also has a natural rhythm of showing the life and values of a real black middle class family of the era. But Rex Ingram, who plays the family patriarch, overdoes his role, chews up all the scenery, and nearly ruins the picture.
The Plot: Anna is a San Diego dockside prostitute, a good time girl whose father threw her out of the house years before, so she had nowhere to go but down. Later we discover that Anna was her father's favorite, but when he found her sitting too close to her high school boyfriend, he labeled her a slut and forced her from their home. It's hard to read between the lines of the dialog and '50s standards whether there is actually more to the incident -- it doesn't appear that Anna and her beau were doing anything that illicit, and one wonders whether Mr. Lucasta, represented as an extremely religious man with a drinking problem, bore an unhealthy fondness for his own daughter that led him to this extreme reaction. But now his son's antiques/junk business is foundering, and an old army friend from Alabama has written to ask that the family find a wife for his son, who is coming for a visit. The son is coming bearing gifts, a lump sum of $5,000, and suddenly the whole extended family is scheming on ways to get the money from what they assume will be a dimwitted country bumpkin. Improbably, they plan to pass off Anna as an acceptable wife, if only Mr. Lucasta will fetch her. It seems a highly immoral plan. The old man is having none of it, but his wife, two sons and two daughters-in-law keep at him until he agrees.
Meanwhile, Anna scrounges drinks and cigarettes in the dockside bar, and brushes off a sailor who shows some interest. When Sammy Davis as Danny, another sailor on leave, blows in, it's obvious that Anna has been waiting for him. They dance, kiss, lush it up, and make plans to paint the town red until, da da DA, Mr. Lucasta appears at the door, begging her to come home. Gratified that the father whose approval she desperately wants has come to call, she agrees.
Back at the Lucasta house, Anna has been apprised of the family's plans and has been cleaned up and coached to ensnare the visitor. But Rudolph, when he arrives, is no country bumpkin. He's an upstanding, handsome agricultural college grad who is smitten the minute he lays eyes on Anna. The two court and coo, and Anna actually falls for Rudolph and realizes she cannot go through with the scheme. She tells Rudolph that she can't marry him and tearfully tells him why. Goodhearted Rudolph says that none of it matters, he loves her anyway. The wedding date is set, Rudolph lines up a great job teaching at a nearby college, and the family is ecstatic.
Except for Dad. Somehow he cannot bear to see his daughter happy. As Anna and Rudy say I do, Mr. Lucasta pays a call to the dean's office of the college where Rudy plans to teach, telling them they shouldn't hire a man whose wife is of low morals. After the wedding, Anna comes home to get ready for the reception and who should show up? Danny, now on leave once more. Though Anna tries to shoo him away, Danny convinces her that she can never live her life "on the square," and she's better off with him, living it up. Anna resists. Danny leaves, but when her father shows up, drunk, and reveals that he has ruined the new couple's reputation, Anna runs after Danny. That age-old adage, "once a 'ho, always a 'ho." Everyone else believes it, so why shouldn't Anna?
Well. improbably, there is a happy ending. Once Anna and Danny have spent all their cash on booze and clubs, they come back to the Lucasta house so Anna can swipe more dough from a hiding place while the family is at church. As fate would have it, her father is in the house, dying in bed, and Anna again tries to appeal to him before he passes. She is too late. The rest of the family comes home and Rudolph sees that Danny has ducked out and rushes to the house to be reunited with Anna.
This is Eartha Kitt at her earth-iest -- pun intended -- and a good look at the fire of young Sammy Davis Jr. as well. Not a perfect film, but a perfect piece of African American film history, alongside 1958's St. Louis Blues, which also featured Eartha as a nightclub singer.
Movie talk from a fan perspective! Veteran entertainment journalist Janine Coveney posts film reviews plus podcast episodes and notes from The Words On Flicks Show.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
"Pitch Perfect" (2012)
Anna Kendrick, Brittany Snow, Rebel Wilson
*written in August 2012*
This past summer I went to this film because I needed a break. Reality was sucking a bit more than usual, and I was mentally going down for the count. Sometimes a film intensifies the gloom for me, but I thought this piece of gossamer fluff could only refresh like a dip in a pool on a summer's day. In that sense, it did not disappoint. There's no mental heavy lifting here.
First disclosure -- I was an immediate fan of TV's "Glee" in its earliest days. (I cannot bear to watch it now because 1, I bore easily and 2, watching the young adults navigate their careers outside of high school bears too much resemblance to my own midlife career struggles). I've been a music and musical theater geek for a long time, singing Anita in church teen production of West Side Story and taking part in chorus and band during my own formative years. I went to Pitch Perfect expecting a bit of Glee Goes To College on the Big Screen. (Or Bring It On with Song.) And that's pretty much what it was. It's pablum, but it's harmless.
Wanna-be DJ/remixer Beca (Anna Kendrick)arrives at college against her wishes, but her Dad wants her to get her degree before launching a music career. She gets suckered into participating in the on-campus a cappella girl group, The Bellas, whose prissy leader is stuck in the past. (They keep singing Ace of Base's "I Saw The Sign," which unfortunately always reminds me of the uncomfortable 8 months I spent working for Arista Records, which was relentlessly promoting that song at the time.) After loads of character development, backstory, a flirtation with a fellow student, and some bad performances, Beca and her fellow Bellas must hunker down for the inevitable Big Competition, where it is Beca's talent for remixing and mashups that finally gets the girls their propers.
Thusly described, this sounds like a massive yawn. But the film struck all the right notes. It didn't take itself too seriously, it had a little romance built in, the lead character wasn't too cutesy-poo nor too goth in disposition. The characters and the music are fun. It had a simple plot, some obvious sit-com humor, and silly sight gags. The film has some twisted obsession with "The Breakfast Club." But I laughed, folks! Yes I did.
As a former urban music journalist, I am torn about the fact that urban music has become widely popular (yay!!); so much so, that young Caucasians have no compunction about co-opting it (ummmm...). I felt a pang of discomfort watching these pale suburbanites who were barely born when the song first hit break out into Blackstreet's 1996 "No Diggity" in a free-for-all facedown. But in the spirit of equal-opportunity archive-raiding, this was OK.
But the real fun of the flick can be embodied in two words: Rebel Wilson. I am in love with her.
Rebel Wilson is so wrong she's right. This Aussie comic actress with the near-albino look is unusual, awkward, lumpen, refreshingly unselfconscious yet deliciously self-aware. Her comic timing is spot on. (The few moments she is onscreen in Bridesmaids are brilliant.) As Fat Amy, she pokes fun at herself, while at the same time showing us how ridiculous and wrong we are for ever thinking that we should poke fun at her. She is unafraid -- and that is the most awesome thing about her. Rock on, Rebel.
(a year later, Rebel's schtick has worn out its welcome, thanks to the dull and tasteless sitcom "Super Fun Night")
Pitch Perfect is a bit of silliness. Anybody expecting it to be a serious examination of college life or a display of spectacular musical artistry are bound to be disappointed. If you need a smile, this could be your prescription.
*written in August 2012*
This past summer I went to this film because I needed a break. Reality was sucking a bit more than usual, and I was mentally going down for the count. Sometimes a film intensifies the gloom for me, but I thought this piece of gossamer fluff could only refresh like a dip in a pool on a summer's day. In that sense, it did not disappoint. There's no mental heavy lifting here.
First disclosure -- I was an immediate fan of TV's "Glee" in its earliest days. (I cannot bear to watch it now because 1, I bore easily and 2, watching the young adults navigate their careers outside of high school bears too much resemblance to my own midlife career struggles). I've been a music and musical theater geek for a long time, singing Anita in church teen production of West Side Story and taking part in chorus and band during my own formative years. I went to Pitch Perfect expecting a bit of Glee Goes To College on the Big Screen. (Or Bring It On with Song.) And that's pretty much what it was. It's pablum, but it's harmless.
Wanna-be DJ/remixer Beca (Anna Kendrick)arrives at college against her wishes, but her Dad wants her to get her degree before launching a music career. She gets suckered into participating in the on-campus a cappella girl group, The Bellas, whose prissy leader is stuck in the past. (They keep singing Ace of Base's "I Saw The Sign," which unfortunately always reminds me of the uncomfortable 8 months I spent working for Arista Records, which was relentlessly promoting that song at the time.) After loads of character development, backstory, a flirtation with a fellow student, and some bad performances, Beca and her fellow Bellas must hunker down for the inevitable Big Competition, where it is Beca's talent for remixing and mashups that finally gets the girls their propers.
Thusly described, this sounds like a massive yawn. But the film struck all the right notes. It didn't take itself too seriously, it had a little romance built in, the lead character wasn't too cutesy-poo nor too goth in disposition. The characters and the music are fun. It had a simple plot, some obvious sit-com humor, and silly sight gags. The film has some twisted obsession with "The Breakfast Club." But I laughed, folks! Yes I did.
As a former urban music journalist, I am torn about the fact that urban music has become widely popular (yay!!); so much so, that young Caucasians have no compunction about co-opting it (ummmm...). I felt a pang of discomfort watching these pale suburbanites who were barely born when the song first hit break out into Blackstreet's 1996 "No Diggity" in a free-for-all facedown. But in the spirit of equal-opportunity archive-raiding, this was OK.
But the real fun of the flick can be embodied in two words: Rebel Wilson. I am in love with her.
Rebel Wilson is so wrong she's right. This Aussie comic actress with the near-albino look is unusual, awkward, lumpen, refreshingly unselfconscious yet deliciously self-aware. Her comic timing is spot on. (The few moments she is onscreen in Bridesmaids are brilliant.) As Fat Amy, she pokes fun at herself, while at the same time showing us how ridiculous and wrong we are for ever thinking that we should poke fun at her. She is unafraid -- and that is the most awesome thing about her. Rock on, Rebel.
(a year later, Rebel's schtick has worn out its welcome, thanks to the dull and tasteless sitcom "Super Fun Night")
Pitch Perfect is a bit of silliness. Anybody expecting it to be a serious examination of college life or a display of spectacular musical artistry are bound to be disappointed. If you need a smile, this could be your prescription.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
Oscar Time Again...
The Oscar nominations were revealed this week. I can't really comment much on the choices, other than to note that award nominations are truly the result of politicking, networking, and how culturally aware the academy of nominating members actually are. I think awards involve an interesting process, but it's not always completely balanced or inclusive. I don't see how one body can possibly pay tribute to all of the worthy films that get released in the course of a year.
Glad to see noms for 12 Years A Slave, including the key actors, director, writing and editing. Also recognition for first-timer Barkhad Abdi, who appears in Captain Phillips. And of course the documentary 20 Feet From Stardom, featuring some ladies whose voices have helped make pop music what it is (I've been fortunate to meet Lisa Fischer, Tata Vega, and Janice Pendarvis during the course of my music biz career.)
Certainly I am disappointed that The Butler did not receive any recognition for its actors, writer, and director. I thought the film was a fascinating pageant of American history, with beautiful performances from the principals (though some of the cameo players portraying the occupants of the White House were a bit strange). It served as a visual reminder of how far the country has come in its treatment of African Americans, over such a long period of time. We may not be where we should be in terms of racial politics, but thank God we're not where we were. And the character of the Butler, whose mission it is to serve in the most perfect way he can, is an example of someone trying to bloom where they are planted, to invest with dignity and integrity a position that some might have seen as undignified and servile.
I would have been gratified to see those involved with Fruitvale Station get recognized. This wonderful small film showed us a day in the life of a good brother with a good heart, whose path was abruptly ended for no good reason. This was a little gem, with naturalistic performances from all, so it's sad that at Oscar time it was eclipsed and overlooked.
2013 was an up and down year for me, so I didn't get to the theater as often as a movie fanatic like me really should. I haven't seen all of the nominated pictures. And therefore I am reserving judgment. When the March 2nd Academy Awards telecast rolls around I will arm myself with popcorn and martinis, dish on what the nominees wear on the red carpet, and prepare to see how things shake out.
Here's the main nominees list: http://oscar.go.com/mypicks
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
"Looper" (2011)
*** SPOILERS ***
Caught this one on cable recently. I’d been wanting to see it and found it alternately fascinating and impenetrable. Good premise, bad execution, too much going on to be linear. Get ready, sci-fi fans.
Fave Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe, a member of an elite crew of live-for-today 2044 hooligans called Loopers. This assassin ring kills crime world targets from 2074, delivered back over the years via an outlawed time machine. He is given an appointed time and place of delivery, and as soon as the victim appears, bagged and tagged with his pay in silver bars attached via straitjacket, he executes them and disposes of the body. Oddly they use a giant weapon of old, the messy hand cannon of the 1700s known as a blunderbuss. Unfortunately being a “looper” comes with the “proviso” that they only get 30 years to serve until they too get looped back for execution. In the meantime it’s all rock’n’roll, fast cars, a jump in the number of people with telekinesis, and some sort of eye-drop-delivered drug amid a dystopian city backdrop of beggars, burnouts, and thugs. Hell breaks loose when Joe is faced with closing his own loop, aka executing his 30-years-gone self, played by Bruce Willis. Old Joe is a fighter, and after a brawl Young Joe lets the quarry escape.
See, in 2074 Willis is nabbed in China and watches as the ganglanders kill his wife; he overtakes his captors then leaps into the time machine back to 2044 determined to nip in the bud the scary overlord known as Rainmaker who is mowing down all the loopers at one time and making life hell in the future. In other words, Willis wants to kill the monster as a child, and save the life of his bride. He’s gleaned some identifying info to track the tyke, but has to keep his younger self and the rest of the executioner squad off his back. At the same time, he has to safeguard Young Joe or there won’t be any Old Joe. The future can change in an instant.
The trail leads to Emily Blunt, wielding a convincing Okie accent and a mean axe stroke, who is raising up a boy on an isolated farm. As it happens, this youngster has gargantuan telekinetic powers that can spark fires, twirl the furnishings, churn up hurricanes and uh, kill people if he gets riled. At 6 he’s formidable, so we can only imagine the horrors he will be capable of 30 years down the line as the Rainmaker. Just as Young Joe tracked down Blunt, Old Joe arrives soon after, and Young Joe finds himself conflicted: Should he protect an innocent boy and his mother figure, who loves the kid unconditionally and just may keep him from being a monster, or let his older self, Willis, squash the kid like a bug in order to protect one possible salvaged future in China? As Willis shoots at the kindergartner, Young Joe, an orphan who has yet to experience the redemptive love of a Chinese wife, ultimately puts the blunderbuss into his own mouth, saving the kid and wiping out Willis’ existence.
OK, maybe I like the flick a little better in retrospect. Still-- Piper Perabo shows her boobs for no reason, Jeffrey Daniel grows facial hair and tries to be hardcore as a mob boss (please Jeff), and the intense Paul Dano (There Will Be Blood) and his crooked nose are wasted.
The watching was at times uncomfortable. I didn’t get excited until this chilling kid showed up with his impressive tot acting and the scripted ability to turn the world upside down with his singular abilities.
Caught this one on cable recently. I’d been wanting to see it and found it alternately fascinating and impenetrable. Good premise, bad execution, too much going on to be linear. Get ready, sci-fi fans.
Fave Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe, a member of an elite crew of live-for-today 2044 hooligans called Loopers. This assassin ring kills crime world targets from 2074, delivered back over the years via an outlawed time machine. He is given an appointed time and place of delivery, and as soon as the victim appears, bagged and tagged with his pay in silver bars attached via straitjacket, he executes them and disposes of the body. Oddly they use a giant weapon of old, the messy hand cannon of the 1700s known as a blunderbuss. Unfortunately being a “looper” comes with the “proviso” that they only get 30 years to serve until they too get looped back for execution. In the meantime it’s all rock’n’roll, fast cars, a jump in the number of people with telekinesis, and some sort of eye-drop-delivered drug amid a dystopian city backdrop of beggars, burnouts, and thugs. Hell breaks loose when Joe is faced with closing his own loop, aka executing his 30-years-gone self, played by Bruce Willis. Old Joe is a fighter, and after a brawl Young Joe lets the quarry escape.
See, in 2074 Willis is nabbed in China and watches as the ganglanders kill his wife; he overtakes his captors then leaps into the time machine back to 2044 determined to nip in the bud the scary overlord known as Rainmaker who is mowing down all the loopers at one time and making life hell in the future. In other words, Willis wants to kill the monster as a child, and save the life of his bride. He’s gleaned some identifying info to track the tyke, but has to keep his younger self and the rest of the executioner squad off his back. At the same time, he has to safeguard Young Joe or there won’t be any Old Joe. The future can change in an instant.
The trail leads to Emily Blunt, wielding a convincing Okie accent and a mean axe stroke, who is raising up a boy on an isolated farm. As it happens, this youngster has gargantuan telekinetic powers that can spark fires, twirl the furnishings, churn up hurricanes and uh, kill people if he gets riled. At 6 he’s formidable, so we can only imagine the horrors he will be capable of 30 years down the line as the Rainmaker. Just as Young Joe tracked down Blunt, Old Joe arrives soon after, and Young Joe finds himself conflicted: Should he protect an innocent boy and his mother figure, who loves the kid unconditionally and just may keep him from being a monster, or let his older self, Willis, squash the kid like a bug in order to protect one possible salvaged future in China? As Willis shoots at the kindergartner, Young Joe, an orphan who has yet to experience the redemptive love of a Chinese wife, ultimately puts the blunderbuss into his own mouth, saving the kid and wiping out Willis’ existence.
OK, maybe I like the flick a little better in retrospect. Still-- Piper Perabo shows her boobs for no reason, Jeffrey Daniel grows facial hair and tries to be hardcore as a mob boss (please Jeff), and the intense Paul Dano (There Will Be Blood) and his crooked nose are wasted.
The watching was at times uncomfortable. I didn’t get excited until this chilling kid showed up with his impressive tot acting and the scripted ability to turn the world upside down with his singular abilities.
Monday, January 13, 2014
12 Years A Slave (2013)
Chiwetel Ejiofor, Lupita Nyong'o, Michael Fassbender, Benedict Cumberbatch, Paul Dano, Brad Pitt
I did not see 12 Years a Slave when first released because life just got in the way. I usually jump on flicks during opening weekend, but I just couldn't get to the theater. It was not a case of not wanting to see it -- I knew I HAD to see it. Because I didn't view it right away, my writing about it also got lost in the holiday shuffle. But I was actually shocked to hear people in my acquaintance declaring that they would never see it, because they did not want to become angry. (Ditto on The Butler, which I also recommend.) At some point the refusal to view the film and the potential threat -- "don't make me angry!" -- among folks approached competitive proportions, with refuseniks seeking some kind of badge of honor for who can harbor the most racial outrage.
On one level, I understand that seeing a visual interpretation of the horrors and injustice our ancestors endured (or perpetrated) during slavery is difficult to deal with. There is no question that the institution of slavery and subsequent years of racial bigotry and discrimination are all things to be furious about. But on another level, I think the choice not to see 12 Years A Slave is shortsighted, a bit immature, and ultimately self-defeating.
This movie is powerful, spellbinding, heartbreaking, and horrifying, but it is also beautifully shot and beautifully told. It is about one man's victory. Yes. Solomon Northup is born free, and after enduring 12 brutal years in slavery, is returned to freedom. He survives to tell the tale, to bear public witness to the raw day-to-day realities and practices of a system that many whites -- and blacks -- would like to see swept under the rug and forgotten. At a time when it was illegal for slaves to read or write, Solomon -- like Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Olaudah Equiano and others -- created a slave narrative (published in 1853) that was a powerful tool in the swelling American abolitionist movement leading up to the Civil War. Yes, he left behind hundreds of thousands of fellow slaves when he was rescued by a white attorney of his acquaintance, but he could have returned to his old life and never sought to share what he saw through his best-selling book.
12 Years A Slave the movie is affecting, because the "peculiar institution" of slavery is made all the more chilling and dehumanizing seen through the eyes of Solomon, a freeborn, educated man of color who had a family, a home, and career. While the southern states brutalized Africans in servitude, Solomon's insulated life in upstate New York is not touched by the experience of slavery until he himself is cruelly kidnapped by unscrupulous slave traders and shipped off to Louisiana. The film is also powerful in the way it contrasts the debauchery and inhumanity of slavery with the sheer beauty of a young country. It's that irony that further shakes us: this happened in the "O beautiful for spacious skies" America, the America of liberty, of rolling green hills and rich foliage, gorgeous sunsets, mighty rivers, idyllic glens, soaring flocks of birds and the sweet night music of frogs and insects -- continually sullied by human atrocities. Amid so much sylvan beauty, there is blood on the leaves.
As such, 12 Years A Slave does not shrink away from the material. (Armond White of CityPages called it "torture porn.") There are insults, lies, taunts, vicious whippings, bloody beatings, violent rapes, betrayals, the stripping away of family units, clothing, and all semblance of dignity or humanity. There is near-starvation, sleep deprivation, back breaking labor, amd the loss of hope. These towering injustices have been depicted on screen many times before, but perhaps not in such agonizing detail; Ejiofor's expressive eyes and dignified presence drive home his disgust, dismay, and despair. Lupita Nyong'o's portrayal of a young woman who bears the brunt of Missy's ire and Massa's desire will tear your heart out. At the same time, it's not a perfect film, nor can it begin to approach what slavery must really have been like.
Yes, all of this is tough going. But you must see it. It is a measure of truth. One version of what indeed happened to our country. If we refuse to look because it disquiets us, we contribute to the kind of cultural amnesia that creates a climate for these atrocities to happen again. We contribute to a national sleep of collective ignorance from which some factions hope we never wake.
As to anger: Get angry. Fine. Art is supposed to evoke emotion. But we are no longer children who cannot control our emotional responses, we are thinking adults. We can talk about our history. We can channel our righteous anger into good works, into fighting for the continued rights of oppressed peoples, and into crusades to free people who are enslaved everywhere.
Further, we must support artists of color like director Steve McQueen, whose commitment to bringing this film to the screen is an act of courage as well as creativity. The actors -- both black and white -- must be applauded for their daring and fortitude. If we don't support films like 12 Years A Slave, which keep our stories alive, they won't get made.
Finally, I don't understand how 12 Years A Slave -- a finely crafted film of historical significance in all senses of the phrase -- makes people angry, while a whole series of films where a black man dons a wig and a dress, waves a gun, and drops ghetto malapropisms that keep harmful stereotypes alive and well doesn't make anybody remotely pissed. (Not mad at brother Perry, who has provided creative jobs for a whole bunch of people.) Let's keep things in proper perspective.
As others have noted: Some of our ancestors survived way more than 12 years in slavery; you can surely survive 120 minutes of a film depiction.
If you missed your chance to see 12 Years in theaters, it will be available soon enough on DVD. Please open your eyes to it.
I did not see 12 Years a Slave when first released because life just got in the way. I usually jump on flicks during opening weekend, but I just couldn't get to the theater. It was not a case of not wanting to see it -- I knew I HAD to see it. Because I didn't view it right away, my writing about it also got lost in the holiday shuffle. But I was actually shocked to hear people in my acquaintance declaring that they would never see it, because they did not want to become angry. (Ditto on The Butler, which I also recommend.) At some point the refusal to view the film and the potential threat -- "don't make me angry!" -- among folks approached competitive proportions, with refuseniks seeking some kind of badge of honor for who can harbor the most racial outrage.
On one level, I understand that seeing a visual interpretation of the horrors and injustice our ancestors endured (or perpetrated) during slavery is difficult to deal with. There is no question that the institution of slavery and subsequent years of racial bigotry and discrimination are all things to be furious about. But on another level, I think the choice not to see 12 Years A Slave is shortsighted, a bit immature, and ultimately self-defeating.
This movie is powerful, spellbinding, heartbreaking, and horrifying, but it is also beautifully shot and beautifully told. It is about one man's victory. Yes. Solomon Northup is born free, and after enduring 12 brutal years in slavery, is returned to freedom. He survives to tell the tale, to bear public witness to the raw day-to-day realities and practices of a system that many whites -- and blacks -- would like to see swept under the rug and forgotten. At a time when it was illegal for slaves to read or write, Solomon -- like Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Olaudah Equiano and others -- created a slave narrative (published in 1853) that was a powerful tool in the swelling American abolitionist movement leading up to the Civil War. Yes, he left behind hundreds of thousands of fellow slaves when he was rescued by a white attorney of his acquaintance, but he could have returned to his old life and never sought to share what he saw through his best-selling book.
12 Years A Slave the movie is affecting, because the "peculiar institution" of slavery is made all the more chilling and dehumanizing seen through the eyes of Solomon, a freeborn, educated man of color who had a family, a home, and career. While the southern states brutalized Africans in servitude, Solomon's insulated life in upstate New York is not touched by the experience of slavery until he himself is cruelly kidnapped by unscrupulous slave traders and shipped off to Louisiana. The film is also powerful in the way it contrasts the debauchery and inhumanity of slavery with the sheer beauty of a young country. It's that irony that further shakes us: this happened in the "O beautiful for spacious skies" America, the America of liberty, of rolling green hills and rich foliage, gorgeous sunsets, mighty rivers, idyllic glens, soaring flocks of birds and the sweet night music of frogs and insects -- continually sullied by human atrocities. Amid so much sylvan beauty, there is blood on the leaves.
As such, 12 Years A Slave does not shrink away from the material. (Armond White of CityPages called it "torture porn.") There are insults, lies, taunts, vicious whippings, bloody beatings, violent rapes, betrayals, the stripping away of family units, clothing, and all semblance of dignity or humanity. There is near-starvation, sleep deprivation, back breaking labor, amd the loss of hope. These towering injustices have been depicted on screen many times before, but perhaps not in such agonizing detail; Ejiofor's expressive eyes and dignified presence drive home his disgust, dismay, and despair. Lupita Nyong'o's portrayal of a young woman who bears the brunt of Missy's ire and Massa's desire will tear your heart out. At the same time, it's not a perfect film, nor can it begin to approach what slavery must really have been like.
Yes, all of this is tough going. But you must see it. It is a measure of truth. One version of what indeed happened to our country. If we refuse to look because it disquiets us, we contribute to the kind of cultural amnesia that creates a climate for these atrocities to happen again. We contribute to a national sleep of collective ignorance from which some factions hope we never wake.
As to anger: Get angry. Fine. Art is supposed to evoke emotion. But we are no longer children who cannot control our emotional responses, we are thinking adults. We can talk about our history. We can channel our righteous anger into good works, into fighting for the continued rights of oppressed peoples, and into crusades to free people who are enslaved everywhere.
Further, we must support artists of color like director Steve McQueen, whose commitment to bringing this film to the screen is an act of courage as well as creativity. The actors -- both black and white -- must be applauded for their daring and fortitude. If we don't support films like 12 Years A Slave, which keep our stories alive, they won't get made.
Finally, I don't understand how 12 Years A Slave -- a finely crafted film of historical significance in all senses of the phrase -- makes people angry, while a whole series of films where a black man dons a wig and a dress, waves a gun, and drops ghetto malapropisms that keep harmful stereotypes alive and well doesn't make anybody remotely pissed. (Not mad at brother Perry, who has provided creative jobs for a whole bunch of people.) Let's keep things in proper perspective.
As others have noted: Some of our ancestors survived way more than 12 years in slavery; you can surely survive 120 minutes of a film depiction.
If you missed your chance to see 12 Years in theaters, it will be available soon enough on DVD. Please open your eyes to it.
Her (2013)
Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams, the voice of Scarlett Johanssen
"That was weird," pronounced my movie mate after viewing Her on Sunday.
"Yes, but also strangely compelling," I said.
Whether you think Her is weird or compelling or both depends on your attitude toward technology, relationships, and/or long close-ups of Joaquin Phoenix's mustachioed mug. Writer/Director Spike Jonze, who specializes in The Weird And Compelling (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich, Where The Wild Things Are), has created a brilliant meditation on what constitutes "relationship" as well as the inevitable collision of humanity and technology. But unlike such tech-gone-rogue cautionary tales as I-Robot, Artificial Intelligence, The Terminator, or (fill in the name of your favorite Sci-Fi "it's learned to think!" flick), the damage is less violent but no less impactful.
I was curious to see this thought-provoking film, set in a pleasant, near-future Los Angeles where technology has advanced significantly enough to where humans can fall in love with their highly-evolved, talking computers. (It's also a future where apparently the waistlines of pants have been raised to new heights and a sort of washed-out, kindergarten yellow-orange-blue color palette has taken over fashion and design). For me, the film is a commentary on the increasing separation and isolation people feel in an increasingly digitized world, and how human connection becomes that much harder to accomplish. At the same time, Her is deeply romantic, where technology is simply the latest tool by which we express all-too-human longings and needs that require another human to satisfy. Still, whether relationships involve humans or machines, the outcome seems predictable.
By now, you know the setup: Mild-mannered writer Theodore Twombley mopes through his solitary routine, unhinged by the fact that his childhood friend-turned-wife (Rooney Mara) is now divorcing him. On a whim, he downloads a brand-new artificially intelligent OS1 operating system that promises to attune itself to his every need and thought. "Samantha," voiced with throaty enthusiasm by Scarlett Johanssen, not only manages the details of Twombley's external life, but her refreshing candor and curiosity also gain her entry into his internal life as well. When she inquires about the cause of his marriage's demise, Twombley says, "I hid myself away in the relationship." It's a line that any insecure, commitment-phobic, life-distracted person can relate to. It becomes easier, therefore, for Twombley to open up to a consciousness and personality that is always accepting, always supportive, and always there -- until, of course, she's not.
So much of filmmaking wisdom is of the "show, don't tell" variety, but Jonze's script allows the conversations and discoveries between Theodore and Samantha to roll out in organic fashion. These are the kind of getting-to-know-you moments of information, teasing, inside jokes, confession, and dream sharing that can be the foundations of love. Too many movies have characters exchange names and then fall into bed, so this kind of back and forth feels refreshing for a while. Until it goes on too long and starts to feel way too precious and we grow tired of staring at Joaquin's lip fur as he listens to Samantha purr.
There are some truly funny moments in Her, first having to do with the nature of his writing job, then with the 3-D video game he diverts himself with in the evenings (director Jonze voices the impertinent "Alien Child") as well as the "Perfect Mom" video game Theodore's pal Amy (Amy Adams) is programming. The shot of Theodore walking outside, deep in conversation with his OS device, which widens to show that everyone on the street is similarly engaged, is thoroughly ironic. There are also some awkward moments, mostly having to do with sex. "You're a creepy man," accuses a drunken blind date (Olivia Wilde), who only moments before had been engaging Theodore in French kisses and pleas for commitment. And Samantha's plan to utilize a human surrogate in her relationship with Theodore is painful to watch.
Ultimately, though, Her made me want to cry. You will no doubt be thinking, "Why, for heaven's sake?" Some see this film as being hopeful about love. I -- the repressed romantic -- see it as hopeless. With technology becoming more and more complicated and advanced, and more of the world being sucked into its embrace, Her seems less like a cautionary tale and more like a Coming Attractions reel for the future.
FYI: Jonze picked up a Best Screenplay honor for Her at the Golden Globe on Jan. 12.
"That was weird," pronounced my movie mate after viewing Her on Sunday.
"Yes, but also strangely compelling," I said.
Whether you think Her is weird or compelling or both depends on your attitude toward technology, relationships, and/or long close-ups of Joaquin Phoenix's mustachioed mug. Writer/Director Spike Jonze, who specializes in The Weird And Compelling (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich, Where The Wild Things Are), has created a brilliant meditation on what constitutes "relationship" as well as the inevitable collision of humanity and technology. But unlike such tech-gone-rogue cautionary tales as I-Robot, Artificial Intelligence, The Terminator, or (fill in the name of your favorite Sci-Fi "it's learned to think!" flick), the damage is less violent but no less impactful.
I was curious to see this thought-provoking film, set in a pleasant, near-future Los Angeles where technology has advanced significantly enough to where humans can fall in love with their highly-evolved, talking computers. (It's also a future where apparently the waistlines of pants have been raised to new heights and a sort of washed-out, kindergarten yellow-orange-blue color palette has taken over fashion and design). For me, the film is a commentary on the increasing separation and isolation people feel in an increasingly digitized world, and how human connection becomes that much harder to accomplish. At the same time, Her is deeply romantic, where technology is simply the latest tool by which we express all-too-human longings and needs that require another human to satisfy. Still, whether relationships involve humans or machines, the outcome seems predictable.
By now, you know the setup: Mild-mannered writer Theodore Twombley mopes through his solitary routine, unhinged by the fact that his childhood friend-turned-wife (Rooney Mara) is now divorcing him. On a whim, he downloads a brand-new artificially intelligent OS1 operating system that promises to attune itself to his every need and thought. "Samantha," voiced with throaty enthusiasm by Scarlett Johanssen, not only manages the details of Twombley's external life, but her refreshing candor and curiosity also gain her entry into his internal life as well. When she inquires about the cause of his marriage's demise, Twombley says, "I hid myself away in the relationship." It's a line that any insecure, commitment-phobic, life-distracted person can relate to. It becomes easier, therefore, for Twombley to open up to a consciousness and personality that is always accepting, always supportive, and always there -- until, of course, she's not.
So much of filmmaking wisdom is of the "show, don't tell" variety, but Jonze's script allows the conversations and discoveries between Theodore and Samantha to roll out in organic fashion. These are the kind of getting-to-know-you moments of information, teasing, inside jokes, confession, and dream sharing that can be the foundations of love. Too many movies have characters exchange names and then fall into bed, so this kind of back and forth feels refreshing for a while. Until it goes on too long and starts to feel way too precious and we grow tired of staring at Joaquin's lip fur as he listens to Samantha purr.
There are some truly funny moments in Her, first having to do with the nature of his writing job, then with the 3-D video game he diverts himself with in the evenings (director Jonze voices the impertinent "Alien Child") as well as the "Perfect Mom" video game Theodore's pal Amy (Amy Adams) is programming. The shot of Theodore walking outside, deep in conversation with his OS device, which widens to show that everyone on the street is similarly engaged, is thoroughly ironic. There are also some awkward moments, mostly having to do with sex. "You're a creepy man," accuses a drunken blind date (Olivia Wilde), who only moments before had been engaging Theodore in French kisses and pleas for commitment. And Samantha's plan to utilize a human surrogate in her relationship with Theodore is painful to watch.
Ultimately, though, Her made me want to cry. You will no doubt be thinking, "Why, for heaven's sake?" Some see this film as being hopeful about love. I -- the repressed romantic -- see it as hopeless. With technology becoming more and more complicated and advanced, and more of the world being sucked into its embrace, Her seems less like a cautionary tale and more like a Coming Attractions reel for the future.
FYI: Jonze picked up a Best Screenplay honor for Her at the Golden Globe on Jan. 12.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
"Now You See Me" (2013)
I enjoyed this thoroughly as a piece of pure movie entertainment. As the perennial Grumpy Critic, I wanted to resist its numerous charms and focus on its flaws, of which there are a few. But the flick won me over with the cleverness of its premise, the input of its dynamic cast, the gritty veracity of its locations (Vegas, New York, New Orleans, Paris), and its utter commitment (to quote Family Guy: “It insists upon itself”). With so much sheer momentum it’s tough not to get swept along, and the film dares you not to like it. As a breezy meditation on what constitutes magic and the faith required to pull off an illusion, director Louis Leterrier (the Transporter franchise, The Hulk, Clash of the Titans) does his own bit of cinema prestidigitation, pulling the wool over our eyes with panache and making us feel grateful for the experience.
There is some crackling acting done by Jesse Eisenberg, fave Mark Ruffalo, and now-veteran character actor Woody Harrelson. Isla Fisher’s flowing red hair and Dave Franco (baby bro to James) and his familial killer grin are just along for the ride, but Morgan Freeman—whose best screen work is now safely behind him – looks a little worse for wear as he tries valiantly to inject some enthusiasm into his role as agent provocateur. Also happy to be collecting yet another check is Michael Caine, who has precious few choice lines as a multi-millionaire investor with a giant ego and a mean streak. French actress Melanie Laurent (Inglorious Basterds) bats her baby blues, models her considerable proboscis, and mangles the English language as a mysterious Interpol agent who helps FBI agent Ruffalo track the magicians known as the Four Horsemen as they commit bank heists for mass entertainment as some sort of Initiation Rite. Why rapper and actor Common is even in this flick is as much a mystery as how the magic tricks are done, since he is wasted as a member of the FBI investigational team, when his coolness factor could have added exponentially to the fun of the proceedings.
AS the film opens we are shown how this diverse collection of individual magic practitioners manages to swindle their audiences with acts of illusion ranging from the petty (card tricks and sleights of hand on the street by Eisenberg and a bait-and-switch underwater escape by Fisher) to the criminal (a spoon bending robbery by semi-newcomer Franco and a cheap hypnosis hustle by Harrelson). They are brought together for a common cause by a mysterious stranger who challenges them in the name of joining the Illuminati, er, the Ultimate Magic Fraternity aka The Eye. Semi-strangers at first, within a year they have put together a stage act that is drawing patrons like gangbusters to watch some of the most unique illusions ever committed in public, essentially robbing the rich and paying the poor. But the quartet is not a band of noble Robin Hoods – their magic acts are part of a vengeful scheme ordered by an unknown mastermind for reasons not revealed until the final moments of the film.
Some of the best bits in the film have to do with Eisenberg’s arrogant rat-a-tat line recitations, besting the feds who would see the magicians thrown in the pokey for seeming high crimes that can’t be explained. I laughed out loud at the plot payoffs, mostly having to do with the after-effects of mentalist Harrelson’s hypnotic suggestions on innocent audience members reacting to trigger words at just the right times. A car chase staged in lower Manhattan and then over the Brooklyn Bridge is utterly thrilling, and the huge magic show setpieces are captured by cameras that glide and swoop around and over the stage and its inhabitants.
What is interesting about Now You See Me is the idea of how much we the audience are essential to the success of any illusionist’s craft. Singers can sing whether there is an audience or not; dancers leap around in their basement or a rehearsal studio and their abilities are intact. But somehow the world of magic, perfected through hours and hours of diligent practice, is only successful when performed before an observer whose power of belief makes things so. Illusionists use our humanity – our five senses and our willingness, nay our sheer need to believe – against us. To what degree we feel sheer amazement and delight – or resentment at having been duped – depends entirely on our expectations.
There is some crackling acting done by Jesse Eisenberg, fave Mark Ruffalo, and now-veteran character actor Woody Harrelson. Isla Fisher’s flowing red hair and Dave Franco (baby bro to James) and his familial killer grin are just along for the ride, but Morgan Freeman—whose best screen work is now safely behind him – looks a little worse for wear as he tries valiantly to inject some enthusiasm into his role as agent provocateur. Also happy to be collecting yet another check is Michael Caine, who has precious few choice lines as a multi-millionaire investor with a giant ego and a mean streak. French actress Melanie Laurent (Inglorious Basterds) bats her baby blues, models her considerable proboscis, and mangles the English language as a mysterious Interpol agent who helps FBI agent Ruffalo track the magicians known as the Four Horsemen as they commit bank heists for mass entertainment as some sort of Initiation Rite. Why rapper and actor Common is even in this flick is as much a mystery as how the magic tricks are done, since he is wasted as a member of the FBI investigational team, when his coolness factor could have added exponentially to the fun of the proceedings.
AS the film opens we are shown how this diverse collection of individual magic practitioners manages to swindle their audiences with acts of illusion ranging from the petty (card tricks and sleights of hand on the street by Eisenberg and a bait-and-switch underwater escape by Fisher) to the criminal (a spoon bending robbery by semi-newcomer Franco and a cheap hypnosis hustle by Harrelson). They are brought together for a common cause by a mysterious stranger who challenges them in the name of joining the Illuminati, er, the Ultimate Magic Fraternity aka The Eye. Semi-strangers at first, within a year they have put together a stage act that is drawing patrons like gangbusters to watch some of the most unique illusions ever committed in public, essentially robbing the rich and paying the poor. But the quartet is not a band of noble Robin Hoods – their magic acts are part of a vengeful scheme ordered by an unknown mastermind for reasons not revealed until the final moments of the film.
Some of the best bits in the film have to do with Eisenberg’s arrogant rat-a-tat line recitations, besting the feds who would see the magicians thrown in the pokey for seeming high crimes that can’t be explained. I laughed out loud at the plot payoffs, mostly having to do with the after-effects of mentalist Harrelson’s hypnotic suggestions on innocent audience members reacting to trigger words at just the right times. A car chase staged in lower Manhattan and then over the Brooklyn Bridge is utterly thrilling, and the huge magic show setpieces are captured by cameras that glide and swoop around and over the stage and its inhabitants.
What is interesting about Now You See Me is the idea of how much we the audience are essential to the success of any illusionist’s craft. Singers can sing whether there is an audience or not; dancers leap around in their basement or a rehearsal studio and their abilities are intact. But somehow the world of magic, perfected through hours and hours of diligent practice, is only successful when performed before an observer whose power of belief makes things so. Illusionists use our humanity – our five senses and our willingness, nay our sheer need to believe – against us. To what degree we feel sheer amazement and delight – or resentment at having been duped – depends entirely on our expectations.
"Spring Breakers" (2013)
starring James Franco, Vanessa Hudgens, Selena Gomez, Ashley Benson, Rachel Korine, Gucci Mane
Last month I watched another weird, disturbing movie (you know how much I love watching things that are off the beaten path). It was called Spring Breakers, and it came out earlier this year. I thought it was just this lightweight, modern day beach party movie. Um, no.
In one way, it’s about how modern girls relate to one another and how empowered they feel to do whatever they want; in other words, feminist. But in another way, it’s about our society’s fetishizing of youth and particularly of young women, as the camera zooms in on more naked tits and ass than you’d expect in a teen movie starring former Disney stars.
In yet another way, it’s about the aimlessness of today’s generation of youth and their need to constantly push the boundaries of what is physically and emotionally possible and what is socially acceptable, about girls who adopt the trappings of outlaw culture and minority culture in particular as a way to construct identity. Director Harmony Korine uses a muted, soft-focus cinematography in Nebraska, and then a bright, lurid, saturated palette in the Florida scenes; he also uses quick cuts, looped and repetitive dialogue, and weird zooms to emphasize the shallowness of these girls’ dreams and values.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
The Plot: A group of Midwestern college girls haven’t been able to scrape up enough money to get them to Florida for Spring Break. They are pissed about it, particularly since the dorm has already emptied out. Three girls get zooted on marijuana and cocaine, soup one another up, steal a professor’s car and rob a local chicken shack using ski masks, water pistols, and a lot of male-style aggression. Scooping up a fourth, baby-faced born-again Christian pal (Selena Gomez), who lies to her grandmother about where she is, they board the bus for St. Petersburg. Once there, it’s boys, bikinis, dancing, cussing, screaming, boys, boob flashing, grinding, bong hits, boys, pool parties, coke sniffing, scooter riding, liquor shots, boys, motel room trashing, and all other kinds of inappropriate, over-the-top youth behavior. The girls are loving it, until the police bust in and arrest them all for drug possession. Still in bikinis and sneakers, they are trotted out before a judge who says they can only be released if they produce $10,000 in bail – which of course, they don’t have.
In the morning they are released when a local white drug dealer/rapper named Alien (Franco) posts their bond and tries to impress them with his world of cash, drugs, guns, rap, and sex on the fringes of the black hood. The viewer is left wondering whether this seamy dude (played by James Franco in corn rows and gold fronts, bringing to mind Gary Oldman’s dreadlocked pimp in True Romance) is priming them to turn tricks for him. The Christian girl freaks, cries and begs to go home – as I would have as well. She wants to misbehave, but this criminal – with his Little Ladies Of The Night/wannabe Iceberg Slim rap -- scares the pee out of her. He lets her go, and she tearfully says goodbye and hops the bus. I, for one, am relieved because I’m not sure what debauchery Alien has in store. We understand that whatever happens next, the remaining girls have eagerly co-signed, and that’s where things get really crazy.
Franco is a good actor, but director Korine lets him run rampant with the improv as his character shows himself to be a dim, hop-headed, violent, shallow, semi-serious romantic who jumps on his bed like a grade-schooler while showing the girls the ill-gotten gains of his crimes – almost like Jay Gatsby showing off his shirts to Daisy. He’s a vapid idiot with a gun – but the girls pledge their allegiance as part of their new Charlie’s Angels schtick. Tricked out in a spanking new bikini every day (once they hit Florida, they are never seen in actual clothing), they are down for whatever, from group sex to toting guns and committing more armed robberies. In one twisted sex romp, Alien lets the girls ram a loaded gun in his mouth while he eagerly fellates the barrel.
But Alien has a problem: he’s on a collision course over territory with his childhood friend and competitor Big Arch (rapper Gucci Mane). An armed showdown between them nets one of the Angels a bullet in the arm. Alien is outraged, swearing revenge before he puts that girl and her broken wing on a bus for home as well.
Left with the two hardest core blondes, Alien launches a nighttime attack against Big Arch. While Alien is gunned down within minutes, the yellow-bikinied blondes machine-gun everyone in sight – including Big Arch in the hot tub with two naked chicks -- before placing goodbye kisses on Alien’s cold mug and then motoring away in his souped-up Camaro. It’s no kind of victory. There are so many questions one could ask about the girls’ motivations, and how Alien ever got as far as he did, and why things went so so wrong. But there’s nothing but the lurid lights of the Florida night and a throbbing electronic dance groove.
We're only left with the girls' rallying cry: “Spring break forever, bitches!”
*All pictures are screenshots.
Last month I watched another weird, disturbing movie (you know how much I love watching things that are off the beaten path). It was called Spring Breakers, and it came out earlier this year. I thought it was just this lightweight, modern day beach party movie. Um, no.
In one way, it’s about how modern girls relate to one another and how empowered they feel to do whatever they want; in other words, feminist. But in another way, it’s about our society’s fetishizing of youth and particularly of young women, as the camera zooms in on more naked tits and ass than you’d expect in a teen movie starring former Disney stars.
In yet another way, it’s about the aimlessness of today’s generation of youth and their need to constantly push the boundaries of what is physically and emotionally possible and what is socially acceptable, about girls who adopt the trappings of outlaw culture and minority culture in particular as a way to construct identity. Director Harmony Korine uses a muted, soft-focus cinematography in Nebraska, and then a bright, lurid, saturated palette in the Florida scenes; he also uses quick cuts, looped and repetitive dialogue, and weird zooms to emphasize the shallowness of these girls’ dreams and values.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
The Plot: A group of Midwestern college girls haven’t been able to scrape up enough money to get them to Florida for Spring Break. They are pissed about it, particularly since the dorm has already emptied out. Three girls get zooted on marijuana and cocaine, soup one another up, steal a professor’s car and rob a local chicken shack using ski masks, water pistols, and a lot of male-style aggression. Scooping up a fourth, baby-faced born-again Christian pal (Selena Gomez), who lies to her grandmother about where she is, they board the bus for St. Petersburg. Once there, it’s boys, bikinis, dancing, cussing, screaming, boys, boob flashing, grinding, bong hits, boys, pool parties, coke sniffing, scooter riding, liquor shots, boys, motel room trashing, and all other kinds of inappropriate, over-the-top youth behavior. The girls are loving it, until the police bust in and arrest them all for drug possession. Still in bikinis and sneakers, they are trotted out before a judge who says they can only be released if they produce $10,000 in bail – which of course, they don’t have.
In the morning they are released when a local white drug dealer/rapper named Alien (Franco) posts their bond and tries to impress them with his world of cash, drugs, guns, rap, and sex on the fringes of the black hood. The viewer is left wondering whether this seamy dude (played by James Franco in corn rows and gold fronts, bringing to mind Gary Oldman’s dreadlocked pimp in True Romance) is priming them to turn tricks for him. The Christian girl freaks, cries and begs to go home – as I would have as well. She wants to misbehave, but this criminal – with his Little Ladies Of The Night/wannabe Iceberg Slim rap -- scares the pee out of her. He lets her go, and she tearfully says goodbye and hops the bus. I, for one, am relieved because I’m not sure what debauchery Alien has in store. We understand that whatever happens next, the remaining girls have eagerly co-signed, and that’s where things get really crazy.
Franco is a good actor, but director Korine lets him run rampant with the improv as his character shows himself to be a dim, hop-headed, violent, shallow, semi-serious romantic who jumps on his bed like a grade-schooler while showing the girls the ill-gotten gains of his crimes – almost like Jay Gatsby showing off his shirts to Daisy. He’s a vapid idiot with a gun – but the girls pledge their allegiance as part of their new Charlie’s Angels schtick. Tricked out in a spanking new bikini every day (once they hit Florida, they are never seen in actual clothing), they are down for whatever, from group sex to toting guns and committing more armed robberies. In one twisted sex romp, Alien lets the girls ram a loaded gun in his mouth while he eagerly fellates the barrel.
But Alien has a problem: he’s on a collision course over territory with his childhood friend and competitor Big Arch (rapper Gucci Mane). An armed showdown between them nets one of the Angels a bullet in the arm. Alien is outraged, swearing revenge before he puts that girl and her broken wing on a bus for home as well.
Left with the two hardest core blondes, Alien launches a nighttime attack against Big Arch. While Alien is gunned down within minutes, the yellow-bikinied blondes machine-gun everyone in sight – including Big Arch in the hot tub with two naked chicks -- before placing goodbye kisses on Alien’s cold mug and then motoring away in his souped-up Camaro. It’s no kind of victory. There are so many questions one could ask about the girls’ motivations, and how Alien ever got as far as he did, and why things went so so wrong. But there’s nothing but the lurid lights of the Florida night and a throbbing electronic dance groove.
We're only left with the girls' rallying cry: “Spring break forever, bitches!”
*All pictures are screenshots.
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
"American Hustle" (2013)
Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence
Directed by David O. Russell
“We have to get over on all these people.”
Focus on that. It’s the concept that Sydney Prosser/Edith Greensley (Amy Adams) holds out to boyfriend /business partner Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) to get him to brainstorm the Swindle that will save their swindling asses. She utters the line three-quarters of the way through American Hustle, and after all the tumult and complications the plot has put these characters through, we can’t wait to see what they’ll come up with. We know it’s gonna be juicy.
Why do we love a good hustle? Are we born with larceny in our hearts? Are we so greedy as a culture that we get the hots entertaining the notion of grifting other folks? Give us The Sting, The Grifters, The Great Train Robbery, The Great Escape (hell, give us The Wolf Of Wall Street), and we’re thrilled. It’s not called “American” for nothing, and this Hustle straight has us. Watching this whiz-bang ride of a movie, we’re as hungry for the takedown as the conning characters. Why? Because maybe at heart we all feel like poor schnooks ourselves, and sticking it to someone else makes us feel just grand.
American Hustle is loosely based on the ABSCAM scandal of the late ‘70s, in which the FBI was able to nail politicians for taking bribes. Certainly, congressmen and others in high office who take home attaché cases of cash in exchange for legislative favors is a concept we’re against. But this film is also about the price to be paid for daring to upset the undercurrents and utilizing a kind of To Catch A Thief justice.
Over-eager FBI agent Richie Di Maso (Cooper), looking to make his bones at the Bureau, practically shoves the booty down the pols’ throats while drooling in anticipation of the bust, which almost routs the operation. He isn’t smooth enough to swing the sting himself. He needs the duo of Rosenfeld & Prosser, whom he’s busted for small-time loansharking. He’s strong-armed the lovers into working his takedown scheme in return for reduced sentences. The trio proceeds to hook Carmine Polito, the mayor of nearby Camden, New Jersey, by claiming ties to a wealthy sheikh who can bankroll the redevelopment of the then-in-decline Atlantic City in light of newly approved gambling legislation. As Irving gets closer to good-guy Polito, the two develop a real rapport and he begins to have misgivings about the entrapment scheme. More complications ensue as Irving and Sydney clash over how to handle Di Maso, who keeps trying to raise the stakes. Sydney seemingly transfers her affections to the hyper Di Maso, while Irving’s neglected, pathetically narcissistic wife (Jennifer Lawrence), ignorant of her husband’s predicament, further mucks up the works.
What this movie has for it is incredible style and dynamic performances from the cast. The pacing and montages owe a nod to Scorsese, while the start-in-the-middle technique owes a nod to Billy Wilder and Tarantino. But director Russell – whose serio-comic oeuvre includes Spanking The Monkey, Flirting With Disaster, The Fighter, and Silver Linings Playbook -- is no slouch. The music placement – Elton John’s “Goodbye Yellow Brick Road,” ELO’s “Long Black Road,” Tom Jones “Delilah” (telegraphing or underscoring the action) -- is brilliant. The sets, costumes, and dynamite soundtrack scream the ‘70s, though at times the styling approaches kitsch as Sydney’s every braless outfit plunges to her navel and curlers emerge as the must-have accessory of the era.
The acting is astonishing. You can’t even believe that British, once-buff Batman Bale is buried inside this pot-bellied, comb-overed Lawn Guyland shyster; he so disappears into the character that the movie is easily hijacked by the histrionics of Cooper, in a perm as tightly wound as Richie’s emotions, and by floozy Jennifer Lawrence. Cooper’s take on an Italian mama’s boy with off-the-chain ambitions is startling. Amy Adams is consistently good, this time taking on not only Sydney, but Sydney’s impersonation of a cool British banking heiress who mercilessly teases and fleeces Richie. And JLaw, who seems at first too young for the role of Irving’s clueless wife, creates a unique characterization of both dunderheadedness and vulnerability. There is so much great acting and design on display here that you won’t know which way to look.
Sure, like any piece of art if you examine it too closely you’ll see the flaws. But who cares. The fix is in, kids. Let American Hustle get over on you. Your senses will be delighted and your thirst for cinema larceny will be quenched. You may be hustled, but fair exchange is no robbery.
Directed by David O. Russell
“We have to get over on all these people.”
Focus on that. It’s the concept that Sydney Prosser/Edith Greensley (Amy Adams) holds out to boyfriend /business partner Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) to get him to brainstorm the Swindle that will save their swindling asses. She utters the line three-quarters of the way through American Hustle, and after all the tumult and complications the plot has put these characters through, we can’t wait to see what they’ll come up with. We know it’s gonna be juicy.
Why do we love a good hustle? Are we born with larceny in our hearts? Are we so greedy as a culture that we get the hots entertaining the notion of grifting other folks? Give us The Sting, The Grifters, The Great Train Robbery, The Great Escape (hell, give us The Wolf Of Wall Street), and we’re thrilled. It’s not called “American” for nothing, and this Hustle straight has us. Watching this whiz-bang ride of a movie, we’re as hungry for the takedown as the conning characters. Why? Because maybe at heart we all feel like poor schnooks ourselves, and sticking it to someone else makes us feel just grand.
American Hustle is loosely based on the ABSCAM scandal of the late ‘70s, in which the FBI was able to nail politicians for taking bribes. Certainly, congressmen and others in high office who take home attaché cases of cash in exchange for legislative favors is a concept we’re against. But this film is also about the price to be paid for daring to upset the undercurrents and utilizing a kind of To Catch A Thief justice.
Over-eager FBI agent Richie Di Maso (Cooper), looking to make his bones at the Bureau, practically shoves the booty down the pols’ throats while drooling in anticipation of the bust, which almost routs the operation. He isn’t smooth enough to swing the sting himself. He needs the duo of Rosenfeld & Prosser, whom he’s busted for small-time loansharking. He’s strong-armed the lovers into working his takedown scheme in return for reduced sentences. The trio proceeds to hook Carmine Polito, the mayor of nearby Camden, New Jersey, by claiming ties to a wealthy sheikh who can bankroll the redevelopment of the then-in-decline Atlantic City in light of newly approved gambling legislation. As Irving gets closer to good-guy Polito, the two develop a real rapport and he begins to have misgivings about the entrapment scheme. More complications ensue as Irving and Sydney clash over how to handle Di Maso, who keeps trying to raise the stakes. Sydney seemingly transfers her affections to the hyper Di Maso, while Irving’s neglected, pathetically narcissistic wife (Jennifer Lawrence), ignorant of her husband’s predicament, further mucks up the works.
What this movie has for it is incredible style and dynamic performances from the cast. The pacing and montages owe a nod to Scorsese, while the start-in-the-middle technique owes a nod to Billy Wilder and Tarantino. But director Russell – whose serio-comic oeuvre includes Spanking The Monkey, Flirting With Disaster, The Fighter, and Silver Linings Playbook -- is no slouch. The music placement – Elton John’s “Goodbye Yellow Brick Road,” ELO’s “Long Black Road,” Tom Jones “Delilah” (telegraphing or underscoring the action) -- is brilliant. The sets, costumes, and dynamite soundtrack scream the ‘70s, though at times the styling approaches kitsch as Sydney’s every braless outfit plunges to her navel and curlers emerge as the must-have accessory of the era.
The acting is astonishing. You can’t even believe that British, once-buff Batman Bale is buried inside this pot-bellied, comb-overed Lawn Guyland shyster; he so disappears into the character that the movie is easily hijacked by the histrionics of Cooper, in a perm as tightly wound as Richie’s emotions, and by floozy Jennifer Lawrence. Cooper’s take on an Italian mama’s boy with off-the-chain ambitions is startling. Amy Adams is consistently good, this time taking on not only Sydney, but Sydney’s impersonation of a cool British banking heiress who mercilessly teases and fleeces Richie. And JLaw, who seems at first too young for the role of Irving’s clueless wife, creates a unique characterization of both dunderheadedness and vulnerability. There is so much great acting and design on display here that you won’t know which way to look.
Sure, like any piece of art if you examine it too closely you’ll see the flaws. But who cares. The fix is in, kids. Let American Hustle get over on you. Your senses will be delighted and your thirst for cinema larceny will be quenched. You may be hustled, but fair exchange is no robbery.
"Two For The Seesaw" (1962)
Robert Mitchum & Shirley MacLaine
Directed by Robert Wise
OK, more of my current early Shirley MacLaine obsession.
The story of two misfits managing a bumpy doomed romance in early 1960s New York, photographed in moody black and white. The film is a tad dated but does offer a kernel of truth about the complications of two very flawed people trying to connect.
Adapted from a stage play, the film version suffers from overlong dialogue and the bad casting of Mitchum, who is too taciturn and disaffected to be remotely engaging. He usually plays tough guys, and while he has his appeal, he just doesn’t work here as a romantic lead. In the mouth of someone like Richard Burton or Jack Lemmon, Jerry Ryan’s lines might sound clever or charming, but Mitchum sounds like a grim, depressive, controlling abuser (and he does manipulate and smack Gittel a few times – and in those politically incorrect times, she just takes it). MacLaine, who is excellent as usual, affects some New Yawk Jewish girl quirks as Gittel Mosca, a free-spirited but struggling former dancer who calls ‘em like she sees ‘em but still gives, gives, gives.
It’s hard to understand how she and displaced Nebraska lawyer Jerry get together in the first place, considering that WASPYy Jerry—in Big Apple self-exile while his wife divorces him-- only reaches out because he has no other options. Gittel is merely curious. For her, Jerry is just the latest in a string of bad relationships that she kills by being way too accommodating (something I can relate to). And Jerry is slumming, trying to make up through easy-breezy Gittel for everything he failed to do in his marriage. There is no way this is going to last. Not only are they culturally miles apart, Jerry is in his 40s and Gittel is just 29; further, Jerry has a law degree while Gittel – though no dummy – only finished high school. Once they throw in together, they try to make it work by shoring each other up through thick and thin, but it’s no use. Gittel knows she can’t hold him, and sabotages the relationship by sleeping with someone else. They both know he’s still in love with his wife. They end it, and manage to stay friends.
I think that’s what I like about the film, finally, though I’m not sure I would sit through it again: Some relationships are only meant to last for a season, and once we understand that, there’s no need for recriminations. Breaking up is never easy, fun, or happy. But Jerry and Gittel are very clear that though it didn’t last, they are both far better people for the experience.
Shirley MacLaine, Italian Style: "Woman Times Seven" (1967)
One of the tentpoles of my New Sanity is the watching of old movies on my Kindle. Saints be praised! When my mother gave me the device I put it aside, mostly because I couldn’t figure out how to get it hooked to the WiFi. Now I am addicted. With Amazon Prime, I can watch dozens of free movies and so I watch something nearly every night. For the last couple of nights I got into two old Shirley MacLaine movies that I had never heard of. So let me digress now.
I like early Shirley MacLaine; as an actress she was unique and daring and physical. She could dance. She had the face of an Irish angel. She was quirky and hip in the 60s and 70s. So many of her early films were about “bad” girls with hearts of gold, and she wasn’t too prudish to play them to the hilt. She was usually a cheerful whore. In Irma La Douce she was a Parisian prostitute; in the original Sweet Charity her character was also a prostitute, though in the film she is cleaned up as a taxi dancer; in The Apartment, she is a secretary driven to suicide by an affair with her married boss; in Some Came Running she is a ditz from the wrong side of the tracks; in Two For The Seesaw, which I plan on seeing soon, she is a Greenwich Village kook who jumps from one affair to the next. These characters came at a time when America was struggling with the conservative values of the ‘50s and being confronted by the free love/woman’s liberation movements of the late ‘60s and early ‘70s. And Shirley didn’t look like the personification of a fallen woman, she was light and bright and cute as a button and that’s why American accepted her. I know Shirley’s mid-period films like The Turning Point and Madame Sousatzka and of course Terms of Endearment, but what happened to all her earlier stuff? Why isn’t it on cable more often?
Anyway, I just watched two films of hers from the 1960s. The first: Vittorio De Sica’s Woman Times Seven, shot mostly in Paris with an international cast. The film has not fared well with critics and seems to be misunderstood. I had never heard of it; it was marketed as a film about seven adulterous women, but that is an overstatement. In its way, the film is about the longings and secret desires of women still trapped in a repressive, male-dominated culture. Shirley MacLaine is astonishing in this film, which finds her playing seven completely different characters in a series of vignettes. Some complain that the stories don’t go far enough and have very little payoff, but I think as a viewer you have to reach a bit further to understand the nuances of what De Sica is presenting here. It’s all about Shirley’s characterizations, in little snapshots -- it’s not about long complicated, well-developed plots. What I also loved about the film is that it’s Shirley in her prime. She looks amazing, the clothes are all classically prim Pierre Cardin, the jewels are fantastic Van Cleef & Arpels, her makeup is exquisite, and Paris is shot in wide angles so you really get a sense of the city from a past era.
In the first segment, Shirley is Paulette, a grieving widow, rich and seemingly inconsolable as she walks in her husband’s funeral cortege with a huge crowd of mourners. She is being escorted by her husband’s associate, Peter Sellers, who can’t resist trying to seduce her in this most inopportune moment. The kicker is that this black-veiled widow ain’t too distraught to consider a weekend with a man who owns a couple of farms and a sports car. It’s just a delicious peek into the weakness of a serial gold digger who needs to set up her next Situation as soon as possible.
In the next segment, Shirley is a perky wife who returns early from a trip to Italy and catches her husband, Rossano Brazzi, in bed with her best friend. After a glorious freakout in which she smashes every plate and vase in the joint over his cowering head – in one ongoing take -- she runs into the night vowing to bed the first man she comes across. (Shirley’s characters do quite a bit of high-heeled running in this film!) After regretting her decision as she dodges freaks and vagrants, “Maria Teresa” hoofs it into a park where a troupe of understanding prostitutes is on the stroll. These ladies counsel the tearful wife on how to put the horns on hubby and even offer up their johns so she can do the deed. It’s an incredibly funny scene and so uniquely European; the stuff these streetwalkers say about men is hilarious. Faced with a naked freak in a car, Maria Teresa loses her nerve and gets a courtesy lift home from a pumped-up pimp. Her husband, suspecting the driver of being the lover, insults him and gets a smash in the nose that puts him on his ass. And in that moment, Shirley becomes the solicitous wife yet again, as all is forgiven and she runs to his aid. This is where it ends – we don’t know how they will resolve his infidelity, and that’s why people don’t like the flick. But I just see it as evidence of the complicated nature of love and the complicated nature of women. How many of us love people who do us wrong? How many of us forgive over and over, because love can’t be turned off like a faucet? There’s no logic in love!
In another segment, Shirley is an icy, all-business translator at some international conference. In her severe blue uniform, “Linda” speaks Japanese and Hindi and Italian like a machine. Men are drooling at her feet and propositioning her, but she turns them away. Two men in particular, an Italian and a Scot, won’t be dissuaded, even as she explains that she is an intellectual who enjoys art and poetry and, uh, artistic nudity. Eventually the competing suitors come to her flat for a drink, where she tries to engage them in a scholarly reading of TS Eliot’s “Lovesong for Alfred J. Prufrock” while buck naked. It seems she wants to keep things on an intellectual level, but when the two swains scuffle over which one will stay and get the prize, we see that this is exactly what turns her on. Their competition and flattery actually causes her to climax right as she’s standing in front of them (the camera focuses on her gasping face). As the segment closes out, we see the high standards, mind games, and icy veneer crumble as Linda willingly prepares to swan dive into the threesome pool. This segment is about a woman owning her sexuality, and also about the seductive power of intellectualism. This character is going to get what she needs from her ménage a trois and turn them out of bed in the morning without a second thought, because she’s All That. Go Shirley.
There’s another vignette about a mousy woman married to a handsome romance writer. Her husband is so caught up in the wild adventures of his heroine, Simone, that he completely overlooks the needs of his wife. He doesn’t notice “Edith” at all, and forgets their anniversary. Desperate for attention, Edith begins to dress wildly, sing, roller skate, stage elaborate dinners, and dance for hubby, who thinks she’s gone mad. He summons a shrink to dinner, having him masquerade as a lawyer, but when wifey figures out that she’s being summed up for a mental evaluation, she climbs out the window and across rooftops with hubby and doctor in pursuit. When they catch her, her plaintive crying rends the heart. “I’m not crazy,” she sobs, “I’m in LOVE.” Shirley is such a good actress you just want to shed buckets of tears for this poor soul who is willing to do anything to out-Simone the fictional Simone her husband is so enamored by. On a deeper level this is about the power of male fantasies and how often they have nothing to do with flesh and blood women; even today’s porn has many men addicted to impossible and inappropriate standards of beauty and sexual behavior. The uncomfortable truth of this vignette is that there is nothing this wife can ever do to regain her husband’s sexual attention, and her attempts are just pathetic and sad. She’s not noble. She’s a fool, and she knows it.
One of the less successful stories pairs Shirley with Alan Arkin. She’s Marie, a shrill, dark-haired harpie trapped in a loveless marriage and he’s a mousy nothing who married a rich older woman he can no longer stand. They are lovers who have come to a seedy Paris hotel to publically declare their love and execute a double suicide pact. It’s their politicized “goodbye cruel world” act, but they bicker over how to do it and what they should say in their audio-taped suicide statement. As they seem to come to terms about how to end it all, each secretly tries to back out and succeeds, with Shirley breaking the bathroom window and hoofing it down the spiral fire escape. Not sure about the meaning behind this one, but I will say this: It’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind.
As “Eve,” Shirley is the pampered, shallow, abusive and demanding wife of a business magnate. With long blonde curls and dripping with diamonds and fur, Eve has a catastrophic meltdown when she finds out that another Parisian socialite will be wearing the exact same gown she plans to wear to the opera that night. She tries to tear the designer a new asshole for promising her that it was an exclusive design; she calls the woman and asks that she wear another gown, but the woman refuses; she then forces her high-powered husband to call and threaten the other woman’s husband with financial and social ruin – to which the other husband laughs. Eve is not giving up, and with the help of one of her husband’s underlings concocts a diabolical scheme: to have a small bomb planted in her rival’s limousine. A bomb? Yes. Not murder, just inconvenience is her goal. Eve gets herself glammed up: hair piled high with double tiaras, diamonds at her ears, one-shoulder gown of gorgeous white silk with silver paillettes and ostrich feather and chiffon overlay, silver body glitter and silver eye shadow. She ignores her screaming toddler and overwhelmed nanny, and heads off with her husband to witness the car bomb explosion before gloatingly heading to the opera. She floats into the opera house as all eyes follow her grand entrance. She is smugly satisfied until she looks across the balconies and spots …. A matron wearing The Same Gown!!!! This is too much for her, and she bolts from her box just as the conductor is ramping up the intro to Carmen. Eve is undone, and in tears of rage and frustration she goes tearing back down the opera house steps as her husband pursues her. She pauses for breath behind a guard, as if he is but a marble pillar, and spies her rival and her husband belatedly arriving. They are both covered in soot. His tuxedo is torn. Her gorgeous gown is besmirched and bedraggled. The husband has to right the mile-high beehive hairdo from sliding off the wife’s head. The sight sends Eve – whose face is smeared with the mascara of the tears she just shed – into gales of helpless laughter as the segment ends. Despite all her efforts, she still has no control. But she still got to see her rival bested, even if both of them end up trumped by the Matron in the Same Gown.
The final vignette is bittersweet. Two girlfriends walk the street after lunch hand in hand, in the European way, dressed to the nines. Tall, dark Claudie (Anita Ekberg) is in leopard and mink, and Marie (Shirley, in a soft blonde ‘do) is in rose beige cashmere and tan leather. They have just had a day of shopping and notice that they are being followed by a tall fellow who looks a bit out of place. It’s Michael Caine, who never utters a word in this cameo. The ladies stop and start and cross the street to make sure he is following them, which he is. Claudie thinks he is a potential lover for one of them, though both ladies are married. Claudie suggests that when they walk out of the café, they both go in different directions to see which one of them he follows. They do, and when Marie goes right, Caine goes right after her. It suddenly begins to snow, and when she can’t find a taxi, Marie finds herself lingering in front of a shop window looking at the reflection to see if Caine is there. The shop owner mistakes her attention for interest in his wares. He sells her a drill, and with the package in hand, Marie skips through the snow and onto a bus. When Caine leaps onto the bus, the two find themselves face to face, exchanging nervous but flirty glances. Marie hops off the bus and runs into her building, with a male neighbor complimenting her on the pep in her step. She glances over her shoulder to see Caine lingering across the street. Upstairs, she gazes into the snow and watches Caine as he tries to sit on a snow covered park bench. The look on her face is longing, interest. She is soon interrupted and interrogated by her French husband as to why she is so late. She explains that she had lunch and went shopping with her friend, and stopped to buy him a present. The husband asks what he is supposed to do with a drill, and she says she doesn’t know, she just wanted to get him something. HE inquires about what she’s looking at, and she says, Something about the snow just excites me. Just then the phone rings and Marie answers; she thinks it’s going to be Claudie checking to see what happened, but it’s for her husband. He takes the phone and listens covertly. “It’s just as she said,” monsieur says, sotto voce. “Shopping with a girlfriend, coffee, the drill. Yes. Thank you.” We see a shot of Caine in a phone booth and realize that he is a detective that the husband has hired. The husband is visibly relieved and moves behind Marie as she gazes out of the window at a departing Caine. Monsieur then gives a lovely speech about how much he loves her, how much she means to him, and if she thought enough to buy him a drill he will gladly put holes in every wall in their house. It’s a beautiful speech, and he delivers it with intermittent kisses to her neck, but as her attention never shifts from the window we know that the idea of a strange man following her with sex on his mind just set her little world on fire. And she has no idea that her fantasy is an emissary of her husband’s mistrust.
Whew – can’t believe I spent so much time writing about Woman Times Seven. But I loved it. It’s certainly quirky and unusual, and it’s the most Shirley MacLaine you can get in one film. It really made me think – and it made me laugh, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)