They Don’t Make ‘Em Like They Used To

As I’m sure you’ve guessed from my various movie posts, I’m a sucker for the old studio films. I love the sharp costumes, the smoldering glances, the real moral dilemmas, the incisive character profiles. But mostly, the smart dialog! It’s great across the board. Thrillers like The Third Man, where every word means four different things, and screwball comedies like Bringing Up Baby, where the back-and-forth between the romantic leads is the whole point. But I don’t often find the lighthearted patter of a romantic comedy in a film noir, so I was delighted to find that the 1944 film Laura had just that. There are some wonderful twists and femme fatale moments, as there are in all the best film noirs, but it adds some extra touches like this scene between Laura (Gene Tierney) and Shelby (Vincent Price, before his horror movie days).

a little rom com in your film noir

Shelby: I knew there was something on my mind. What is it… Oh yes–will you dine with me tomorrow night?

Laura: Maybe.

Shelby: No, that isn’t what’s worrying me… It’s the next night.

Laura: But Shelby, I can’t–

Shelby: Good. What about three weeks from tonight and all the nights in-between?

Laura: Don’t you think I have any other engagements?

Shelby: What about two months from now and the month after that?

Laura: What about next year?

Shelby: That’s all settled. What about breakfast?

Laura: (laughs) What about dancing? (They get up and dance.)

Shelby: What about lunch? Beautiful lunches. Day after day after day after–

Laura: What about work? Beautiful work. Day after day after day…

Shelby: Why, Miss Hunt, the way you talk, you’d think I was in love with you.

At which point I fell a little bit in love with this movie.

Image.

Where’s the Game?

The other week I was on a shuttle bus headed back from a wedding reception to the hotel, and we passed a large white van pulled over on the side of the road. The cop car lights were flashing and as we zipped by, I saw the logo on the side of the van. It was a Salvation Army van! What was a Salvation Army van doing out and about at midnight, and in trouble with the law?

My bet is Nathan Detroit found a new place for the craps game.

Nicely Nicely in "Guys and Dolls"

Rockin' the boat went mobile

In Praise of Sam Rockwell

I am slowly working my way through the Sam Rockwell catalog. Basically, I want to see anything he’s been in. Doesn’t matter if it was a bit part, because Rockwell’s genius is stealing scenes no matter the role. He’s easily one of the best character actors working today, and also, bonus, he is extremely attractive.

No foolin'

Apparently his mainstream breakthrough was as a vile criminal in The Green Mile, but I remember first seeing him in Charlie’s Angels, in which he plays a shaggy, soft-spoken geek who turns out (11-year spoiler alert) to be the ruthless villain. For a summer popcorn film directed by a man known only by his made-up last name, this actually showed Rockwell’s range nicely. He was easily the shy nerd kissing Drew Barrymore, and just as easily the pompadoured cad shooting her through a window and lighting up a cigarette.

Also, the dancing. He famously loves dancing, and shows off his fancy footwork at every opportunity. I’ve seen him shake it in Charlie’s Angels, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Moon, Iron Man 2, and The Winning Season. No, watch, he’s really good:

I don’t think I’ve seen him in a movie in which he wasn’t unhinged or just a little off. At some point in every film, his eyes go wild with desperation or dark with hopelessness. He often plays someone with a hidden side (Charlie’s Angels, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind), or a dangerous side (Snow Angels, The Green Mile), or both (Moon). He invests his characters with such emotion and commitment that I find myself marveling at the humanity he reveals in even his most despicable characters. I’ve read actor interviews about treating their villainous character as the hero of the story in order to find their motivations, but I didn’t really get what that meant til I saw several Rockwell movies close together. He’s never smarter than his sadsacks or kinder than his killers; instead, he knows his sadsack’s frustrations and his killer’s sick itch. He must be a novelist’s dream actor, since he so easily conveys the paragraphs of internal turmoil and meditation usually lost in translation from page to screen.

I’d love to see him on stage and see how his intensity plays out there. But until I get that chance, I’ll be looking out for him in whatever projects he chooses next. Coming soon, Cowboys & Aliens! I’ll be enjoying him, whether he’s looking like this:

Poor clone man, what is your identity now?

or this:

You still look a little lost. I will definitely help you find your way.

Photo 1 from here.
Photo 2 from here.
Photo 3 from here.

Film Club: Out of Africa

 

What a surprising movie, dearest fellow travelers! When the film started up, and Meryl Streep started in with yet another perfectly practiced accent telling tales from long-ago days while the camera swept over idyllic African vistas, I rolled my eyes and wondered why I’d let Netflix talk me into this. But it turned out to be an impressive film, a romance that investigates what it means to be a relationship, and a historical drama that doesn’t completely romanticize the rich white people’s experiences and their influence on the native black people.

one of many sweeping vistas

Image from http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film3/blu-ray_reviews51/out_of_africa_blu-ray.htm

Karen von Blixen-Finecke lived a pretty amazing life, marrying twice, growing coffee in the highlands of Kenya, building a school for Kikuyu children, writing a famous memoir, and making sweet, sweet love to Robert Redford. Okay, that last part is just what Meryl Streep gets to do in the film adaptation, but it’s based on real events with Karen’s lover Denys Finch Hatton. The movie’s PG, so we don’t see so much as a boob, but the steaminess of the romance is easily conveyed nonetheless.

My favorite part of the romance was how it was allowed to be a little rough-edged. Sure, there were plenty of scenes in which Karen and Denys share tender moments, or gaze deeply into one another’s eyes, but the conflict between the characters was never resolved to either party’s satisfaction. They were deeply in love, but Karen needed him to be home more often, creating a joint life with her on the farm and not jetting off to do safaris for months at a time, and Denys clung to his independence and his ideal of being able to love someone without possessing them or their time. The movie shows just a couple arguments about their differing needs, but they’re well-written and fair to each character. Karen could easily come across as a needy nag, and Denys could easily be a commitment-phobic cad, but we get to see the validity of both their positions, and the pain it causes them to be unable to compromise on their deeply held beliefs.

How often do you get a romance like that in the movies, one that doesn’t work out (not a big spoiler there; when the movie starts with a voiceover telling us that a man “gave the greatest gift” it’s no big leap to surmise that it ain’t gonna last and probably someone dies), but not because of outside forces like other lovers or an inconvenient death? One that doesn’t work out because love isn’t enough to sustain a relationship if other factors don’t line up like shared ideas about how relationships work and how to balance independence with commitment.

Karen's wedding outfit in "Out of Africa" -- 1913 fashion, yes please!

Image from http://pinoyfilmzealot.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/t500fc-369th-out-of-africa-sydney-pollack-1985/

The other major part of the movie, of course, is that this is a film set in colonial Kenya, a place ruled by a small group of upper-class British men who hardly considered their African “subjects” as anything more than servants and hunting guides. Now I know that Pollack was a sentimentalist, and there is definitely some unfortunate romanticizing and simplifying going on here, but there’s also a surprising amount of complexity and sensitivity. For example, Nairobi in 1913 was far from a homogeneous place but was rather  a multicultural hub, with Somalis, Indians, Kikuyu, and Europeans all interacting, and the movie shows that in tracking shots across the marketplace as well as in the background of many tête-a-têtes between main characters. Also, Karen’s  connection to the Kikuyu in her life is genuine, and her interest in improving their lives (treating wounds and illnesses in an informal hospital, securing land for her tenants when her farm fails) is real, and appreciated by the beneficiaries. The fact that she says she must get land for “her” Kikuyu, well, that’s paternalism for ya. (Ugh.)

Denys, unlike most of his fellow white men, admires the native Masai and Kikuyu people for having their own traditions, stories, and lifestyles. He still feels totally entitled to hire a local man to be his servant as he wanders the country shooting all the wildlife, of course, and that is an entitlement the film does not address. His admiration also too often veers into Noble Savage territory, but he still provides a welcome contrast to the boorish paternalism of the other members of the ruling elite in the film.

Malick Bowens, yes please

Image from http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3819084288/nm0100942

He also provides a great moment of real moral conflict for the audience to participate in, when he argues with Karen over whether the local children should be educated. Her view is that of course the children should learn how to read, as it will undoubtedly improve their lives and it is unfair to deprive them of it. Hard to argue with, except Denys points out that this will just create little Englishmen out of the children, and since they already have their own culture, do they really need the European one imposed on them? It’s hard to separate out the good of educating people from the harm of doing it by a colonial master’s mandate. Not to mention that it’s not like the Kikuyu children weren’t receiving an education already; it just wasn’t a traditionally European one involving books and schools. And all this swirled about in my head after watching a Hollywood romance! Not bad.

By the end of the (very long) film, I was totally engrossed in the life of this complicated, strong woman and the many people she comes to know and love during her time in Kenya. Apparently, the title for Blixen’s book came from a Latin saying, “Out of Africa, always something new,” and a few inevitable Hollywood clichés aside, this movie delivers on providing a few new ways of portraying love and colonialism on the silver screen.

Also, the cinematography makes me want to visit Kenya, like, yesterday.

Vote with Your Dollars! Go See “Bridesmaids”

I don’t know about y’all, but we’ve been having a miraculous week of warm weather and sunshine here in Chicago. Luckily, it’s going to be rainy and cold this weekend, lest we get too confused about where we’re living and start advertising the city as a spring break destination or something. This means that it’s a good weekend to see a movie without any feelings of guilt for not enjoying the outdoors! May I recommend you go see Bridesmaids in droves.

Bitchin' but not bitchy? It could happen.

I haven’t even seen the movie yet, but I’ve read all the build-up to it. And people are putting a whole lotta pressure on this movie; it’s supposed to be the one that proves that not only are women funny, but they’re bankable. Putting aside the inherent ridiculousness of even pretending that women aren’t funny and that no one wants to spend money watching them be funny in movies, and also putting aside the fact that it took a big-name male producer (Judd Apatow) and established male director (Paul Feig) to get this female-penned screenplay (Kristen Wiig, Annie Mumolo) made, I say that since the movie has already been built up as a litmus test for what kinds of comedies studios will be greenlighting for the next decade, it is worth it to speak up.

And how do we speak up in this country? If you guessed “vote in elections,” nice try! The correct answer is “with money, baby.” So vote with your dollars for a funny, raunchy movie written by and starring women. If you can make it, go see it this weekend, since studios rely heavily on opening-weekend box office numbers when they make decisions for future projects.

Many reviewers liked the movie, including Manohla Dargis at NYT, Dustin Rowles at Pajiba, Mary Elizabeth Williams at Salon, Dana Stevens at Slate, Scott Tobias at The AV Club, etc. I doubt the movie will show me a Headly Surprise, but it just might pass the Bechdel Test, and at the very least a movie about how exhausting weddings can be for single people is welcome in this, my year of seven and counting wedding invitations. And perhaps most importantly, this movie’s going to be hilarious.

UPDATE: It was hilarious!

Scripts For Your Consideration

Idea #1: Cashing in on the Wedding Movie Trend

Mlle. O’Leary and I were discussing the many weddings we are both attending this year, and we decided we could totally make money off the Hollywood wedding movie trend by borrowing liberally from real life and hokey clichés alike. Girl has ten weddings to attend in one year, and they’re all her close friends and cousins, so she’s a bridesmaid in each. Girl is an Etsy maven, so rather than buy a new dress for each occasion (which she can’t possibly afford, and which she wouldn’t want to anyway because she is Independent and Quirky), she makes over the same dress for each wedding. Of course, she keeps running into the same Boy at all the weddings, and he is always wearing ties that look really familiar but Girl can’t figure out why. There is much malarkey over mistaken identities, wardrobe malfunctions, etc., and in the end Girl’s dress can’t handle any more reworking and it falls apart at the last wedding in a dramatic fashion.

I'm gonna rock that green dress, once it's made into a miniskirt and the sleeves disappear

Image from http://www.ioffer.com/i/McCalls-7847-Wedding-Bridesmaid-Dress-Sewing-Pattern-14898800

In the Hollywood version, Boy helps Girl get to a David’s Bridal, where she realizes she just wants to be like everyone else anyway, and she buys the dress. In the indie version, Boy reveals that he comes from a long line of tailors, and works some magic that makes her dress more beautiful than it ever was before. (Even indie movies have to let the boy save the day, after all.) Boy and Girl realize that the ties he’s been sporting at all these events are from her Etsy shop, so it was Totally Meant to Be.

Hollywood title: Sew in Love. Indie title: Fitting In.

Idea #2: Punking the MBAEs

I saw an ad on the train for an MBAE program — a Master’s of Business Administration for Executives. So instead of just getting a post-graduate degree in how to make more money than everybody else, you can get a post-grad degree in how to make way too much more money than everybody else. Yay?

it ain't good

Image from http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/james-quinn/the-age-of-mammon

Script goes like this: A fresh batch of MBAE students, eager to learn how to make hard deals, screw over their workers, and buy ten yachts in the process, enters the class of Teacher. Teacher is actually a plant from the unions (evil unions!) sent to fix the American Dream from the top down, but passing as a billionaire coming out from retirement to share his pearls of wisdom (it has to be a he, or they won’t listen) with this generation of CEOs. So eager are they to learn Teacher’s secrets, the MBAEs take all sorts of lessons in ethics, collaborative work, and diversity. They’re transformed from evil future CEOs into decent people, and they wield their power for good, bringing the pay disparity back down to a reasonable level and redistributing wealth across the land.

Hmm, that is perhaps less a great movie idea than a utopian fantasy, but I’m seeing it as a comedy, with all these middle-aged men doing homework on collective bargaining, first certain that this will help them learn how to crush such bargaining, and then looking bewildered as they realize they don’t want to. “What is happening to me?” they’ll cry, as tears stream down their faces and they don’t even call each other homos for crying like a little girl. They’ll all be too busy hugging and setting up universal health care.

Investors interested in making these ideas a reality, please apply within.

The Headly Surprise: Up in the Air

Welcome back to another round of The Headly Surprise! Today’s honoree is Vera Farmiga as Alex in Up in the Air. This 2009 film follows middle-aged Ryan (George Clooney) as he crisscrosses the country firing people for companies too chicken to do the firing themselves. It’s a bleak premise, and the movie carries that feeling throughout, not least because Ryan is, by nature and by habit, kind of a dick. He gives lectures on how to stay emotionally disconnected from others, and he has a trunkful of reasons why his job is helping people rather than devastating them. Of course, Ryan is played by the puppy-dog eyes and aww-whatever-I-did-I-promise-not-to-do-it-again-baby half-smile of George Clooney, so we can’t totally hate him.

Vera Farmiga Up in the Air

I ain't lookin' for love, but I am looking at you. (photo from http://www.altfg.com/blog/awards/sag-awards-2010-best-supporting-actress-7894/)

Our wayward hero meets Alex in a VIP airline lounge, and they bond over car rental discounts and credit card miles before having a passionate night in Ryan’s hotel room. They sync their calendars to meet up again in various cities around the country, as both their jobs keep them almost perpetually on the move. All goes well until Ryan’s young colleague Natalie lectures him on using Alex instead of committing to her. [**SPOILER ALERT**] Ryan feels inspired to ditch his emotionally stunted viewpoint, and he surprises Alex at her Chicago home in one of those grand romantic gestures that the movies have primed us to receive for decades. But uh oh! Alex is furious that he’s shown up, since she’s married with two kids, and he could ruin her home life with any displays of affection. Ryan returns to Omaha and his previous life a bit sadder and, of course, a bit wiser.

Alex’s Headly Surprise status rests in the way the movie handles this big reveal. There’s no commentary on how her cheating is immoral, or how it makes her a bad mother. In fact, the movie does a neat job of setting Alex up to be a Manic Pixie Dream Girl character, there to help Ryan find himself without having her own personality, needs, or desires; it then inverts those expectations by showing that this part of her life, which is so central to Ryan and the movie, is merely in her periphery. Her real life is with her family, and Ryan, fond as she is of him, is just an escape.

And she made no bones about that. Sure, she never told Ryan she was married, but from their first encounter, she sets up their boundaries so they’re both on the same page; she wants a no-strings-attached, uncomplicated, passionate affair. This is what Ryan wants too, and it’s why they work so well together, at least until he starts to fall in love with her. Then Natalie gives him that push over the edge into acknowledging his feelings and suddenly he doesn’t just want a passionate affair anymore.

About Natalie’s speech: she’s not wrong to tell a grown man to stop leading a woman on and tell her how he really feels and take steps toward building a life with her. She just happens to be wrong in this instance because she doesn’t know what Ryan does, namely, that Alex explicitly said what she did and did not want. Alex even expresses this at the end of the movie, saying how surprised she is at Ryan’s hurt, since she never said she wanted more than what they had and she’d thought they were on the same page with that.

This is a wonderful example of listening to what a woman says instead of listening to what you think she means, or what you want to hear. We are far too ready in these United States to dismiss a woman’s words as game playing or indecisiveness, rather than her actual thoughts and feelings. This has very real and dangerous consequences, of course–see all the men who stalk women who have told them they aren’t interested, or the men who rape women who say no, or the legislators who tell women that they don’t really want an abortion no matter what they say. There are other, less physically harmful, consequences to this line of thinking, too, like assuming a woman must be coyly angling for a commitment when she says she needs no such thing. This robs women of their agency and reinforces the idea that they’re untrustworthy, scheming beings instead of autonomous individuals fully capable of making their own decisions and expressing their own desires. If our needs and wants aren’t heard when we plainly state them, it’s no wonder some women start speaking in the code that’s expected of us, just to eventually get the desired result one way or another.

Anyway, Ryan is clearly upset by what he sees as Alex’s betrayal, but he doesn’t argue with her that she was anything but upfront about their relationship. The film honors her character as a three-dimensional person who makes the possibly ill-advised decision to cheat on her husband without punishing her explicitly. It hurts her to lose Ryan, but we get the sense that her life will carry on without him pretty well, and she’ll maybe think of him wistfully in a hotel here and there. That kind of complex characterization is rarely afforded to women who cheat in film; they’re usually shown as sluts or too simpleminded to make up their minds about which man to love more. Alex knows which man she loves and builds a life with, but she’s not above finding some good times on the side as she travels for one-third of the year. She’s not perfect, but she’s not a devil, and for that, she earns The Headly Surprise.

By the Way

I figured out how to embed non-YouTube videos, so if you read Tuesday’s post, you can now play that video right in the post.

Also a little late, I figured out how to insert animated gifs too! So the awesomeness of the Jump Back! gif can now be seen in the original post.

Just figuring out all this new-fangled media that the kids today are talking about. Someday I’ll ride in a flying machine too!

Have a great weekend.

Heckling the Hecklers

When someone’s an asshole to you, what kind of asshole do you get to be back at them? Can you find enough in the situation to destroy their position without destroying their personhood? Such are the weighty questions I pondered after watching some videos on a comedy site. Like ya do.

The premise of Splitsider’s “Eight Types of Hecklers and the Comedians Who Shut Them Up” by Megh Wright is great–what are the different types of people who interrupt stand-up comedy routines and how do comedians respond? But too many of the comedians Wright chose as examples of great heckler shut-downs were unmitigated assholes. I don’t mean they were mean; most comedians have a scale of “a little to a lot” when it comes to being mean in their acts, and frankly that’s usually why we find them so funny. And especially if some jerk in the audience is going to interrupt your carefully crafted routine and your limited stage time with some inane comment or drunken insult, I say rip ‘em to shreds. And then call security.

But there’s being mean and funny, and there’s being a bigoted asshole. I suppose it shouldn’t surprise me that so many comedians choose the latter, since I don’t watch a lot of stand-up precisely because they include terrible jokes in their acts, but it still got to me. With few exceptions, if the heckler was male, the comedian joked about his supposed homosexuality and also about fucking his mother, and if the heckler was female, the comedian called her a bitch/slut/whore and usually crazy too. Ugh. I went from being on the comedian’s side to wishing the video would end sooner so I wouldn’t have to hear the audience laugh at the awful attacks.

Here’s a sample [TW, definitely]: Joe Rogan called his female heckler a “fucking crazy bitch.” George Carlin said his male heckler was “a cocksucker in disguise” and that he only had his mouth open “because he wants someone to come in it.”  Bill Hicks, whose profanity is a normal part of his routine, went way too far when he screamed at his female heckler, “you fucking cunt, get the fuck out of here right now, you’re everything that America should be flushed down the toilet, get out you fucking drunk bitch.” But definitely the worst was Ari Shaffir, whose response to his female heckler was, “I wish upon you the greatest success in 2008 and hopefully you will get raped many times before you leave here tonight. But I don’t wanna give the rapist any VD that you have… what did they do? all they wanted to do was get laid, they didn’t know.”

Whew. That was a whole lotta ugly.

And there’s no need! Other comedians in the list had great comeback lines without once employing homophobia or misogyny.

Jacqueline Novak rolls right with her male heckler’s comment and explains just how wrong he is, while remaining in the same joke she had been setting up before she was so rudely interrupted. Steve Hofstetter similarly riffs on his male heckler’s stupid interruption without once making reference to the heckler’s sexuality or his mother’s sexual proclivities. Amy Schumer shut her female heckler down quickly, and then told her to be like the losing chess player in “Searching for Bobby Fischer” and “take the draw” if she felt like talking again. My favorite was Patton Oswalt, who went on a lovely long rant about what a douchebag his male heckler was and how his future was filled with douchebaggery.

Being a stand-up is hard work, I know that, but once you have an audience on your side, it’s real easy to get laughs out of them by dealing low blows to a heckler. Why be satisfied with that? Presumably you actually want to be funny, so skip the bigotry and go straight for the withering put-down.