Rocket Science

I enjoyed the characters and the way that the director respected them enough to infuse them with quirk and qualities that ground them in familiarity. The situations were outside my realm of experience, but the feelings of awkward youth are all too familiar and seem to keep rolling into adulthood. And that's why these coming of age tales will keep me coming back for more. Rocket Science has a winning protagonist constantly in over his head. It makes for a good mix of comedy and just the right amount of angst. It works. Writer/director Jeffry Blitz has an ear for fast talking teens on the other end of the teen spectrum from Juno. And more importantly, he has the memory of one who has had circles talked around them.

****

In Bruges

This movie was a very pleasant surprise. The trailers try to pass In Bruges as a madcap, dark, edgy, action picture a la Pulp Fiction or Snatch, but it turns out In Bruges is quite melancholy. It's a character piece, with the two hitmen (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson in excellent performances each) being the chief draw. What makes these men tick? How do they handle conflict? These aren't the questions most hitmen movie even bother asking themselves. Bullets, pizazz, and edgy editing are the norm. In Bruges is anything but.

Sure, all the stuff in the trailer is in the film and it can be quite un-PC and irreverent quite often (sometimes strangely and offensively), but that doesn't distract from an interesting story about two men and the drama that comes in the form of regret, grace, vengeance, honor, and ambiguity.

The film can be a mess at times, but it's a organized mess. Things add up.

There's a doozy of an ending. A surprise without a twist. The kind of ending that leaves you a bit hobbled, stuck considering many things after the credits abruptly begin rolling and the theater lights come up. How many hitman movies can you honestly say leave you really thinking after they're done?

****

The Last Days of Disco

The pleasure of watching a Whit Stillman film is not reliving my past or seeing my future. The youth he portrays in his films is very different from mine. I am not bourgeoisie. I am not in love with disco. I am not from a rich family. I have not read many facinating books. I am not like the characters depicted in these films (Barcelona, Metropolitan, The Last Days of Disco), well, not really. But I recognize these types. I know people, you know? And the realities of the people in Stillman films are not all that different from the realities of people I know, and, well, me too. I admit. I'm like these Disco lovers. There is wonderful pleasure in watching Whit Stillman's work.

Like the group of revolving friends and lovers in The Last Days of Disco, I too have experienced the need to fit in, or in the case of these characters, getting in. They're too self-absorbed to realize that the place they want to get and stay in - the place where they have fun, dance, drink, fall in and out of love, be good friends, and be bad friends - is dying. Disco and this club that they frequent symbolizes the folly and seriousness of youth. And not adolescence. Not being in college. Like few filmmakers, Stillman has a keen sense of the way post-college feels (or what I imagine it feels like). Along with other film's depictions of youth, The Last Days of Disco portrays the urge to fill others expectations of you, or maybe to change how others see you, or maybe even to change the way you see yourself. All of the above. None of the above.

The truth is, these characters only flirt with change. They approach it, but like one character says about the Tramp of Lady and the Tramp, no one really changes. Their context can change, but people never really do. It's a cynical view of society, but the film backs it up.

A Stillman staple is a witty, sophisticated banter/dialogue between characters. What's intriguing is that I've never really heard people in real life talk this way. Even the most mundane, accidental conversation seems planned. But it's never forced. And somehow I believe it. Somehow the reality and truth always shines during even the most artifical scenes.

Sample witty dialogue: Des McGrath: "Yuppie stands for 'young upwardly mobile professional'. Nightclub flunkie is not a professional category. I wish we were yuppies. Young, upwardly mobile, professional. Those are good things, not bad things."

The Last Days of Disco is Whit Stillman's best film. Not only does he guide his best cast to date, but his organization and handling of the distinctive personalities of the film's multiple characters is amazing. Each is complex. Each is real (you know, in that sort of artifical way I semi-explained earlier). And though his other films showed a insight into the life of the privileged, he has never before so accurately displayed an atmosphere. Apparently, Disco was contagious. I never got it before. "Disco?" I asked. "Ugh! Yuck!" I shouted. But it looks like fun. There, I said it. "Disco looks like fun."

****1/2

The Big Kahuna

I'm going to complain. I'm going to give a mediocre rating. I'm also going to specifically state that I really enjoyed The Big Kahuna.

The Big Kahuna is based on a play. It never managed to convince me that it shouldn't have stayed that way. The situation, the dialogue, the directing - it's very stagey. I'm not saying that the characters act contradictory to their personalities or motives, or that I didn't believe the characters meant what they said. I just don't think they'd say the things they said at the that time, all together on that night. Danny Devito's character is said to have been dealing with a lot leading up to that night, but it comes at a bit of a surprise that his crisis-of-sorts is a spiritual one (among other factors) when he is presently surrounded by a young company researcher (Peter Facinelli) and his friend and fellow marketer (Kevin Spacey) engaged in a back-and-forth dialogue about spirituality and the qualities of man. The film is a short, neat little film that is too short to be cinematic, and too confined to be interestingly blocked and filmed. It also showcases the nasty habit/tell-tale-sign that it's a play masquerading as a film. It uses slow motion every so often just to remind the viewer that what they are watching is in fact a film - edited and designed in such a manner. I wasn't fooled. I was bothered.

The acting is superb. The characters are essentially locked into a pattern of actions, reactions, and motives. However, that works in the small confinements of the runtime and reality of the film. The writing and actors run the risk of creating one-note performances, but each character is complicated. They're learning things about themselves, about each other, and coming to grips with where they fit into the world and their jobs. Spacey's Larry is invested in his job, cynical about the state of the people he bumps into in his line of work, and certain that spirituality has it's place in the occasional pondering without dwelling on it. Facinelli's Bob (the ring with which Spacey says "Bob" is soaked with cynicism, wit, and tiredness - which I loved each time he said it) is green in the business, but practiced in his faith and the role it plays in his life. Devito's Phil is at a crossroads where he's questioning the life he's made for himself and the role of God in his life.

Facinelli spends much of the film reacting, letting his fish-out-of-waterness show at every turn. I wasn't expecting much from him, mostly because he disappeared after his run on the FOX TV show Fastlane. He fills the role well. It's captivating to see his character truly challenged in his beliefs, to face the way he relates them to others.

Spacey is doing a conglomeration of other Spacey performances (the cynicism of American Beauty, the suit and tie mentality of Glengarry Glen Ross, and the energy/dry sarcasm/wit of The Usual Suspects/Hurlyburly/The Negotiator). When his Phil enters the room at the beginning of the film, it is in like a tornado ripping through what was briefly a tranquil conversation between Bob and Phil. And he remains that way for much of the film, save a few interesting moments where he's relaxed and in conversation with his friend, colleague, and seasoned pal Phil. I recently listened to a review of Superman Returns on Filmspotting.net (right click and choose "Save Target As" to give it a listen) to where one critic said that Kevin Spacey is the most overrated actor of the last 25 years. It's a bold statement and one that I do not agree with. I am, however, becoming more aware of Spacey's habit of falling back into his old bag of tricks (similar to the way Jack Nicholson's performances are often criticized). I love the bag of tricks, but I would like to see a performance from my once-favorite actor that forced him to step outside and try something completely new (and succeed at it).

And Devito. I forgot he can act. He delivers a mannered performance that shows remarkable restraint although it only briefly slides into staginess. He's been in limbo the last few years, although he infamously turned up as a blathering loon on The View. I wish he'd get more chances to really act again. He's got the chops.

The film is confident in its subject matter. It has something meaningful to say about evangelism, cynicism, identity related to your work, and more. But what really struck me is how honestly The Big Kahuna discusses Christianity. The film makes points, but doesn't bang the Christ gavel over the viewer's head. And I guess that's the chief message: being honest about your beliefs and your motives in relating those to other people. Try not to sell your beliefs.

I'd like to see this material performed as a play with these actors. I'd like that.

***

Metropolitan, Barcelona (aka Whit Stillman is neat)

Metropolitan (written and directed by Whit Stillman)

I caught Metropolitan with one of my professors, then watched Barcelona immediately after. First, Metropolitan. Swell movie. It was right up my alley - talky characters with little to do. In truth, the characters rarely did anything other than sit around in nice duds and talk each other's ears off. And they did so with such sharp dialogue. An example: "Playing strip poker with an exhibitionist somehow takes the challenge away."

I liked that Stillman let little events, seemingly minute occurences of tiny revelations during the many conversations, shape the characters and move the plot (although Metropolitan is most certainly not a plot-driven film) toward its conclusion.

Midway through the film, my professor said he actually only liked one of the characters, although he had affection for many of them. This was well said, I think, because most of the characters are self-centered snobs. However, I had a different reaction to them. I loved 'em. I was charmed by their flaws, especially Christopher Eigeman's Nick (discover him, I beg you). It was such a fun mix of stuck up oblivious (though they thought themselves to be very knowledgeable) youngins.

Again, the dialogue is sharp. The acting, not always so much. The film was independently made and many of the performers have not gone on to successful careers. In fact, some have not acted since. So, the acting can be rough at times. But the charm and charisma of the film is always there.



Barcelona (Stillman's handywork again)

This film was made after Metropolitan. Much of Stillman's skill is still present. The film is more polished. The overall level of acting is improved. Eigeman is again present and plays a similar character to Nick from Metropolitan (much to my delight). Taylor Nichols (Charlie in Metropolitan) returns as well. The two play cousins and the film centers on their interactions. The dialogue is still sharp and in abundance. An example: "You are far weirder than someone merely into S&M. At least they have a tradition. We have some idea what S&M is about. There's movies and books about it. But so far as I know, there is nothing to explain the way you are."

Rather than focusing on little occurances like Metropolitan did, Barcelona slowly builds an atmosphere of tension between the natives and Eigeman and Nichols' two Americans abroad. It leads to a major climax - a major event that changed the feeling of the film. It was then that I faltered in my enjoyment of the film. The sharp dialogue was still present. But the not so subtle (not at all) immediate rise in the stakes was too jarring for me. I thought I had figured Stillman out - less if more. But he used a serious event to change the mood of the film and it really caught me off guard. The film did return to its earlier tone, but I found it difficult to return to the high level of enjoyment.

Barcelona: ***
Metropolitan: ****

More Eigeman films: Mr. Jealousy, Kicking and Screaming (identical characters, still great)