Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

Karina on SpoutBlog

  • HUMPDAY Review. Sundance 2009.

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Humpday  (2009)

    I’ve been accused in the past of having knee-jerk negative reactions to crowd-pleasers, and those accusations have not always been without a kernel of truth: it’s true that I tend to be skeptical of movies which instantly entertain but never ask us to ask what they’re really up to, and of that, I’m not ashamed. But this is not a problem with the tough-to-resist Humpday, Lynn Shelton’s whip-smart, uproariously funny comedy which uses a dumb, drunken, “bros will be bros” dare as the in point to talk about, amongst other things, the inevitable loss of self in long term relationships and the ongoing conquest to reconcile who we really are with who we’d like to think we could be.

    Youngish marrieds Ben (Mark Duplass) and Anna (Alycia Delmore) are comfortably, chastely slumbering in their pleasant Seattle home when they’re awoken in the middle of the night by the unexpected ding-donging of the doorbell. The uninvited guest is Andrew (Joshua Leonard), Ben’s college buddy, who has flown in without announcement from Mexico City and is looking for a place to crash. We don’t know how long it’s been since Andrew and Ben were last on the same side of the equator, but we get the sense it’s been awhile — for one thing, Andrew and Anna have never met. Ben tells his wife it’s “typical Andrew” when their houseguest goes out the next day, meets a bisexual girl at a coffeeshop and ends up back at her dimly-lit playhouse, making fettucine for his new lady friend and her old lady. But when the straightt-laced husband goes to retrieve his friend and ends up staying into the wee hours of the morning smoking, drinking, and eventually goading his free-spirit bro into promising to “perform” with him on camera for an amateur porn film festival –– all the while missing a planned romantic dinner with the anxious-to-conceive Anna –– we’re to understand that this is the furthest thing imaginable from “typical Ben.”

    In the harsh light of sobriety, both men have an easy out, but neither is man enough to take it. Ben “feels compelled” to follow through with the porning, apparently because he needs to prove (somewhat predictably) that his marriage is different, and not the steel cage Andrew makes it out to be; Andrew is anxious to acquire evidence that his lifelong rebellion against squaresville hasn’t been a big joke, especially after an abortive tryst points up his own sexual prudishness. Shelton lets us in from the beginning on the truth — the plan is ridiculous and doomed to fail, and both dudes are self-deluded –– which makes it all the more comedically rewarding to watch Ben and Andrew slowly puzzle it all out.

    The clear-cut theme of many an Apatow comedy is that bros will be bros … until women come along and offer a “better,” more civilized option. Humpday is, refreshingly, not as black and white. Anna is a fully-fleshed out complement to Ben, capable of being just as selfish and single-minded. Neither could pull off the magic act of saving the other from his/her own worse instincts. It may not be a totally fair comparison, but the women in Humpday feel much more real than the love interests often seen in Duplass Brothers films, whether it be the marriage-obsessed shrew of The Puffy Chair or the insecure temptresses of Baghead. Shelton’s film presents grown-up relationships as the complex things they are: sometimes a haven, sometimes a prison, always a thorny nest of compromises and outright lies that are nonetheless basically the best thing we’ve come up with in order to stave off fear of dying alone.

    I saw a Twitter message this morning praising Humpday as “not too mumblecoreish.” To use that ad hoc genre as a perjorative is, in this case, missing the point of Humpday’s construction. Shot with handheld cameras, entirely improvised by the actors based on character work and extensive rehearsal, and edited with rigorous, documentary inspired formalism by Nat Sanders (who also cut Medicine for Melancholy), Humpday takes the ripped-from-real-life spirit of the films Duplass has made with his brother Jay (not to metion the work of Joe Swanberg; Shelton co-starred in his web series Young American Bodies and appeared briefly in Nights and Weekends) and applies it to that very in-vogue subgenre, the comedy of macho male fallibility. The technique wrings unexpected layers from the content, and vice versa. More grown up (and interested in the emotional pitfalls of what it means to grow up) than many recent American DIY films, and far more accessible to a non-film-savvy audience than Duplass’ last Sundance entry Baghead, Humpday may usher in the moment when some notable tropes of what we once called mumblecore can be successfully applied to more mainstream genre fare without the uinitiated turning off.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

  • YOU WON’T MISS ME Review, Sundance 2009

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Ry Russo-Young’s You Won’t Miss Me is identifiable as a film about a young woman made by young women, which is unusual enough at Sundance that the film’s very existence is almost a revelation. By immersing us in the world of 23 year-old aspiring actress/recent mental patient Shelly Brown, and burying the point of view so deep within the character that Shelly’s social imbalance sometimes feels contagious, writer/director Russo-Young and co-writer/star Stella Schnabel remind us how rare it is to see a film about the inner life of a beautiful, troubled young lady without the objectifying filter of the male gaze, without the beauty and the trouble fusing into a fantasy cipher of a postmodern damsel in distress.
    Shot on five different formats, from 16mm film to low-grade consumer video, Miss Me splays out in episodic fragments of Shelly’s life in crisis, strung together with shards of a conversation between the young lady and her shrink on the last day of her hospital stay. Russo-Young’s camera(s) follow Shelly from all-night parties, where deapan flirting gives way to either cotton-mouthed seduction or resentment-stoking rejection, to a number of auditions for “artists” whose visions of the world seem just as dangerously subjective as that of our barely-holding-it-together heroine, who punctuates many sentences with a sharp sniff.

    “I have nothing but time,” Shelly tells a theater director, and in a way she’s doing what a lot of early-twentysomethings do, dabbling in life experience to fill the hours of the day with the assumption that at some point, something will come into focus. But Shelly’s also drawn to acting as an escape from the real, one that’ll legitimize her uncanny knack for theatricalizing every real-life situation, and infinitely delay her deadline for assimilation in a zipped-up world.

    If the the intention of each discrete shooting format isn’t always crystal clear, Russo-Young pulls off the blending of the formats beautifully. The look of the film continually recalls the photographs of Nan Goldin, particularly “Nan and Brian in Bed” and other iconic images of from The Ballad of Sexual Dependency. The allusion comes to mind not just because Shelly is a woman who feels distant from her lovers even whilst still in bed, and not just because Russo-Young occasionally bathes Schnabel in a similar golden glow; Shelly also seems to move within a Goldin-like milieu.

    Russo-Young says in her director’s statement that her intention was to “make a film that could only be made at this particular moment in time, that would speak to our entire visual existence today” — and, in terms of the way she clashes technologies to talk about the way personalities mutate under different eyes, she succeeds. But the film also seems infused with the spirit of the laregly-disappeared downtown New York of the late 70s/early 80s, an aspect of the city’s personality that lives on in certain bars, blocks, brownstone walk-ups, but which has been scrubbed clean from the media image of the city entirely. It’s the natural environment for a story in which self-conscious creative spirit often gives way to destructive self-indulgence. Like Goldin’s slide shows, Miss Me feels less like a narrative than a private image journal-turned-enveloping time capsule. Both are so intimate that the viewer becomes not just privy to the protagonist’s self-destruction, but virtually implicated in it.

    This is tricky business, asking a viewer to take on the point of view of a girl who spends virtually the entire length of a film fighting against drowning; what’s actually on screen could potentially be overwhelmed by the alternating novelty and discomfort of seeing it. But when You Won’t Miss Me succeeds — which it does more often than it doesn’t — it’s because it taps into a universal sense of youthful rootlessness, recklessness, and confusion, while challenging us to look at these familiar states of being with neither nostalgia or romantic revision, nor condescension. If the narrative and its execution seems sometimes at loose ends, the volatility of the emotions at the film’s center demand it.

    Russo-Young’s first feature, Orphans, premiered at SXSW in 2007, where the director also appeared in a supporting role alongside Greta Gerwig in Joe Swanberg’s mumblecore super-group feature Hannah Takes the Stairs. There’s a scene in Miss Me featuring Gerwig and Swanberg, as well as Mary Bronstein, Michael Tully and, most prominently, Aaron Katz. The Quiet City director plays an independent filmmaker named “Joe” who puts auditioning actresses (including Schnabel and Gerwig) through a serious of exercises designed to rake the depths, which instead skate the absurd and resolve in hostility. Is this scene a reference — mockingly, lovingly, maybe both? — to Russo-Young’s Hannah experience?

    In talking about an artist like Russo-Young, who so clearly pulls from the personal, I don’t think you could count out real-life influence completely, but the more I interrogate that scene as a statement on the filmmakers who cameo in it, the more that read falls apart. Hannah Takes the Stairs is a film in which unlikeable behavior is put under a microscope so that we can critique it. As the rest of Miss Me shows, Russo-Young is a filmmaker who looks for the beauty in a character’s flaws, sympathizes with their missteps, and ultimately withholds judgement. The motives behind You Won’t Miss Me seem too generous in spirit for a single-scene gear-shift into acid in-joke.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

  • MOON Review. Sundance 2009.

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Moon  (2009)

    A small, personal story wrapped in the trappings of classic sci-fi epic, Moon manages to be both derivative (most notably, of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001, but with only a touch of that film’s monumental pessimism) and deliberately rebellious in its treatment of sci-fi tropes. Moving through familiar territory and yet sparked with a spirit all its own, like any great work of genre cinema Moon’s future-world scenario and super-slick techno-artistry are put to the service of a story that ultimately downplays the traumas wrought by technological possibility in order to dig deep into the traumas of people being people.
    The film, directed by Duncan Jones (once known as Zowie Bowie, son of David), begins with a pitch-perfect advert for the company that contracts an astronaut named Sam (Sam Rockwell) to live and work on a space station for a three year stretch, accompanied only by a HAL-meets robot named Gerty (voiced by Kevin Spacey), and able to communicate with his wife and child on Earth only via taped video message. Wedding exposition (this is how we learn that the massive machines to which Sam tends on auto-pilot are “harvesting solar energy frpm the dark side of the moon”), to a sense of ease that’s too, almost unsettlingly easy, the opening sequence perfectly sets the tone for the coming inquiry into a fractured personality and the relationship between surface and depth.

    Moon relies on a major twist to set this inquiry into motion, one which I’d feel criminal in giving away. Suffice it to say that Sam is at once not as alone as he thought he thought he was, and as fundamentally, incontrovertibly lonely as anyone could ever be. This dramatization of Sam’s sudden, tragic self-awareness gives Rockwell a platform for a terrifically exciting dual performance which, thanks to seamless, non-showy effects and a magic of chemistry, allows Moon to feels more casual and accessible than any cinematic exploration of the Lacanian mirror stage has a right to be.

    What marks Moon as a potential sci-fi game changer is the complexity of its philosophy on The Future, one which allows for both limitless faith in human feeling and a skepticism over the human cost of innovation, particularly in regards to Saving The Planet. 2001 predicts that the more human-like machines become, the more they’ll take on the worst of humanity and, as an added bonus, that humans will lose the passion and compassion that makes them human in direct proportion to the degree to which they engineer machines to become more human-like. Moon approaches a similar scenario from a very different tack, imagining that the artificial intelligence that humans create will embody the best of what humanity can be, but will probably be used to the ends of, if not evil, than at least the individual-indifferent banality that keeps a capitalist society ticking along.

    The timing is a bit uncanny. Is this a projection into a post- (or maybe post-post-post-) Obama world, in which “no drama” promises of a better tomorrow simply placate us into ignoring that even the most utopian visions of “change” must be fed into the capitalist machine in order to become a reality, and will likely be contracted out to the higest bidder even at the expense of human lives? Corporate culture bears the burden of Moon’s cynicism, but that critique is part and parcel of a film about self-knowledge, and the tragedy of stumbling upon it only when it’s nearly too late.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

  • THE ONLY GOOD INDIAN. Sundance 2009 Preview w/Director Kevin Willmott

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

    Kevin Willmott, director of controversial Sundance title CSA: Confederate States of America, returns to Park City this year with The Only Good Indian, a Spectrum selection period piece focusing the story of a Native American boy kidnapped from his family and sent to an orphanage specializing in forced assimilation. The SUndance catalogue calls Indian an “outstanding revisionist western” and a “a worthy fictional account of an essential American story.” Answering the 4 Questions We Ask Everyone, Willmott talks Lena Wertmuller, the importance of casting, and the magic of Payroll Loans.

    Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out.

    Tom Carmody brought this project to us.  Tom has a deep interest in Native American issues and history and wanted to make a film about the tragic story of Native American boarding schools.  Our challenge was to make an entertaining movie that still told the truth.  We knew Wes Studi was key to making the film work.  So, Studi plus real history gave us what we have:  The Anti-Searchers.

    If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker.

    My day job is being a college professor.  But, when you’re making films that always require more money than you have, you have to take care of your family and get the film finished.  That’s where Payday Loans comes in.

    Have you been to Sundance before? If so, tell us your best moment (or worst, which ever is funnier). If you haven’t, what are you most (or least) looking forward to based on your impressions of the festival?

    This is my second film at Sundance.  The first was CSA: Confederate States of America, in 2004.  On opening night, it’s safe to say, the movie left the audience stunned.  People didn’t quite know what to say, and there were a few haters – one who later admitted to me that he was a Southerner.  The feeling in the room started to turn against me.  That was when Melvin Van Peebles stood up.  He said, “I know people are probably wondering what I think about this film….”  My heart stopped for a moment.  And then, he said, “These are exactly the kind of films I wanted to see produced after I made Sweetback.”  After that, the room was ours.

    Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature?

    Lina Wertmuller’s Seven Beauties, Sergio Leone’s The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, scrambled eggs and a Heineken.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

 


Advertisement