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

SpoutBlog on spout.com

  • CHILDREN OF INVENTION Review, Sundance 2009

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

    (With Sundance rapidly wrapping up and an intimidating backlog of films to write about, I’ll be publishing a number of brief capsule reviews over the next few days. If a specific title piques your interest and you’d like to see a more substantial review, let me know in the comments.)

    Tze Chun’s micro-budget Sundance Spectrum entry Children of Invention sneaks up on you. Inspired by the filmmaker’s own childhood experiences, the film follows Raymond (Michael Chen) and Tina (Crystal Chiu), two first generation Chinese kids growing up in Boston with Elaine (Cindy Cheung), their overworked, illegal immigrant single mom. After Elaine’s savings vanish in a vitamin sales pyramid scheme, the family loses their home and moves into a model condo unit in an unfinished building. With her estranged husband slacking on child support payments, Elaine gets involved in another pyramid scheme and is eventually arrested. Afraid that Tina and Raymond will be taken away if she tells the police she’s left two young children home alone, Elaine says nothing, and with their mom disappeared with no explanation, the kids are left to fend for themselves.

    Like the somewhat narratively similar Treeless Mountain, Invention presents an adult world through the eyes of a child. But unlike that meditation on the loneliness, isolation and confusion of two very small children, Invention has a sense of adventure. Primary colors abound, not least in the film’s several dips into subtle daydream magical realism, as Tina and Raymond respond to their trials and tribulations with a kind of make-do play. As the hopelessness of the family’s economic situation becomes more and more clear and the dread mounts, it becomes equally apparent how disconnected the kids are from their reality. The result is an edge-of-your-seat family drama, pushed beyond the constraints of its micro-budget by two heartbreaking child actor performances.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Michael Jai White and Scott Sanders Interview, Black Dynamite, Sundance 2009

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

    Black Dynamite

    Michael Jai White is best known to the world of movie-going geeks as the title hero in 1997’s Spawn, and as the gangster overlord Gambol in The Dark Knight. However, after this year’s Sundance Film Festival, it’s going to be hard for him to dodge calls of “Black Dynamite!” in public. This homage to classic 1970s blaxploitation films surpasses movies like I’m Gonna Get You Sucka, and is definitely worth seeing.

    White and director Scott Sanders sat down to discuss the Obama presidency, how James Brown inspired the movie, the future of action films, and what the future plans are for a Spawn sequel.

    All right, so the day that our first black president gets sworn in, I see the inauguration and that night I see Black Dynamite. That is like some weird opposite end of the spectrum stuff going on there.

    Scott: We knew.

    You knew?

    Scott: [laughter] We planned the whole thing. We were really, really organized.

    So how did this movie happen? How did it come to be?

    Michael: Years ago I was doing a movie called Undisputed 2. I had my iPod on and on comes James Brown’s “Super Bad.” I had in the past had a bunch of like I would have like Blaxploitation night at my house. I would invite my friends and we watch these films, some of them good, some of them really bad. People would be encouraged to heckle and we would have a good time with it.

    But I think at the moment when I started listening to the song, I just had this whole vision of this movie where it started and where it ended and some of the really funny inconsistencies that I’ve seen throughout watching these type of films.

    And being that, on so many levels, a film like this can entertain, educate and actually revisit an era that I think that in the ’70s, it was the greatest era of filmmaking and music. And I felt that it worked on a number of levels.

    When I was young it was like the first positive and strong depictions of black people that I have ever seen. And I would argue that I might not have seen that since. It was a real liberating time.

    It was a time of a lot of turmoil but these first images in some of the earlier movies, whether it was Shaft or The Mack, these were great movies. These are real movies before Hollywood started to churn them out and it gave birth to that term: Blaxploitation and that negative connotation that went along with it.

    But for myself and a lot of people, it was really a liberating time in our lives.

    So when you had that workout session where you had the movie came to you, did you call Scott up right after that or how did Scott get involved?

    Michael: Well, actually what I did after that, once I got back home, I rented some costumes. I actually rented the costume and took photos. I took a photo in the very costume that I ended the movie with. Scott had contacted me about a script that he had written that he had intended on shooting in Brazil.

    He asked me what I had been up to. And I told him that I got this idea. At the time it was called Super Bad, from the song I was listening to, the James Brown song. He thought it was interesting. When he saw the photo, the photo did everything …

    Scott: It’s this exact image. Right here on his t-shirt.

    Michael: This is the exact image.

    Scott: That was drawn from the photo that he took of himself.

    Michael: That actually sets the tone for the entire movie. I’ve got a gun and nunchucks and look very serious. When you look at the photo really quick, it’s like, “Oh, wow that’s a legitimately cool photo.” But you have to notice that it’s a little bit of an overkill.

    And so that’s the ridiculousness of it. So Scott was really passionate about working on that. We put the Brazil idea on the back burner. We started working together.

    How long ago was that? When did you guys start working on it?

    Scott: That was April of 2006.

    OK. So your work on The Dark Knight came after that?

    Michael: That came far after that. Yeah.

    Did you guys do a lot of research going back and once you decided this is going to be your project? Fid you watch a lot of the stuff or was it fresh enough that you knew the look, the feel that you wanted to go for without having to see a lot of it?

    Michael: Like I said, I used to have the Blaxploitation night at my house. And one thing I had done, I had edited together a lot of these moments. I had the intention on making a documentary of that kind of Blaxploitation thing. And I edited a lot of moments that were like really funny moments and kind of the acting style and some of the mistakes and all that stuff.

    The idea that they didn’t have much money and sometimes the boom is in the shot. It’s just in the shot. But…

    Scott: Yeah, I was also a fan of the movies and I had seen a lot of them. We had been talking about a lot, too, just the entire range and quality. And I think our movie we tried to love the whole thing, the whole gambit from good acting and good stuff to stuff that was fairly horrible.

    A lot of what’s so great about Blaxploitation movies is that they are so strangely idiosyncratic. One of the observations we were talking about is that just weird things like white people always have pools. They always have swimming pools. They are always by swimming pools. We were wondering where did things come from?

    It’s like, do we as black people think that white people are always just sitting by the pool, plotting to, you know, make our lives miserable? [laughs] Those are the things, those concepts are pretty amusing.

    Michael: And still there are certain things that still exist in society like the all powerful “They.” “They” are going do this, “They” are going to do that, which is really comical to give “they” a face and the man is this evil “they”…

    Scott: They’re diabolical, like cooking up something.

    Michael: Right. That’s pretty funny looking at it now.

    You guys did such a good job with the film. It’s definitely over the top. And it doesn’t feel like it gets cheap. If seems like it would have been very easy to go down a lot of super cheesy jokes this and you’ll go… totally lose sight of everything. And I say this knowing that eventually Black Dynamite is fighting Richard and Pat Nixon. [laughter] In regards to that though, you guys did such a loving job. Films like I’m Gonna Get You, Sucka they tried to do something similar with that.

    Scott: We’ve been compared a lot to I’m Gonna Get You, Sucka and Undercover Brother. And the two things about those movies are, in comparison to us, well they are not set in the ’70s. So therefore the whole thing is over.

    I mean, the Blaxploitation era is a very, very specific time. Once you start bumping up against disco, even just musically… once you start bumping against disco, it’s not the same thing. Even though there are some Blaxploitation movies that carry over with disco, like Avenging Disco Godfather or Disco Night in Dallas, it’s like a very specific period of time.

    Undercover Brother and I’m Gonna Get You, Sucka are set in modern times. Or the modern times in themselves. So they’re commentaries on something, I don’t think they are as direct a commentary on the Blaxploitation era as we are.

    Michael: Yeah, Walk Hard is a lot closer to what we did than any other movie that I’ve seen. Really, to be honest with you, what Walk Hard did with that story of the country singer is I think the closest thing.

    That’s an interesting comparison. Well, speaking about the ’70s, how hard was it to get the look of that? That you got the costumes. You got the cars. You got the music, which was fantastic by the way throughout this.

    Scott: Thank you.

    How hard did you guys have to work to make sure like a modern day car doesn’t roll by?

    Michael: Oh, yeah.

    Scott: That’s the weird thing about the movie that we can intentionally have a lot of mistakes in there, but certain mistakes and certain things kind of happen by accident and we just left it in. but then one of the things that we were crazy about was not having… I mean, like you have an SUV roll by.

    Michael: It destroys it.

    Scott: It just destroys the whole illusion. That part was hard. It was just hard like… it’s a weird thing making a movie when you can’t go outside and shoot. You just can’t take the camera and everything has to be time controlled.

    Michael: I work individually with a lot of the actors and I was saying that I give birth to this term: time cell phone casting. The majority of the actors are friends and I was really insistent on getting their tone right. It’s just an easy thing to get wrong. Somebody could just go loose and have these 2009 sensibilities and it just will destroy the whole tone.

    And sometimes when you try to push the comedy, it really interrupts that balance. And so, I was a little insane on making sure that, yeah, hey guys, this is a comedy but they weren’t doing these black-ploitation movies to be funny. They were deal serious.

    And it means something to me.

    How did you guys get Arsenio Hall? I don’t think he’s been in anything in a while, has he? Has he kind of retired for a while or not acting, just kind of doing his own thing?

    Michael: I sent Arsenio the scripts. He told me when he read that there’s a Captain Kangaroo pimp in this thing, he said, “I’m in.” [laughs] He said, “Captain Kangaroo pimp, that’s all I had to read. You know what I’m saying?”

    Yeah, we sent him his scene, basically the scene that he would be in. Yeah.

    So what was the casting process like? Did you already know a lot of the people you wanted to work with going in?

    Michael: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Being an actor and having friends of that kind know the scope of their work and their sensibilities. So it’s a hell of a head start. And we trust each other really well. A good friend of his that we worked with in the trailer… I know Scott really is like definite about something, I don’t have to think anything about it.

    So we trust each other completely. We make the decisions together, but I’ll tell him why I think this or that. We just work together really well.

    How did you two first meet?

    Scott: Oh, we met on our first film, Thick as Thieves, which was here at Sundance ten years ago.

    Wow, it’s your ten year anniversary.

    Scott: Yeah, it’s our ten year anniversary.

    Congratulations, by the way, on selling the movie.

    Scott: Thank you very much. We’re excited about that.

    So do you think this will spawn a franchise of Black Dynamite films if this does well? Would you revisit this character again?

    Michael: Certainly. Certainly.

    Scott: We both want to. That’s the goal. I mean, it’s just a fun world to be in. and we’re having a good time in the world of Black Dynamite. It’s something that’s funny about the ’70s world that’s just interesting and those kinds of things. The world has changed so much that even… all those things are just entertaining to us. Like the difference.

    Michael: Yeah. Look at the sexual ethos alone. Just revisiting that it’s just, the sexual revolution and we’ve been repressing that and we’re animals. We’re human animals. It’s great to revisit the time where we didn’t have to be so politically correct.

    Did you guys collaborate on the scripts together for a while? How long was your writing process?

    Michael: About three weeks. Yeah, two and a half, three weeks. Basically even from the idea when I listened to the song, all these moments and stuff when I was talking about it with Scott and got him hyped up, I was telling him about these ideas of where this tone would be.

    And so it kind of was pre-written for a while, but our collaboration was about setting the pace, kind of like all these ideas to just put it in a shape. And within that we knew we were start here and end here. This was going to be in the middle, whatever, and the connective tissue all around it. So when wanted to go write it, it was practically done.

    There is probably going to be a whole generation of kids coming to see this movie that have not seen any of the films that this is riffing on or referring to or inspired by. Do you think they’ll still be able to appreciate it or do you think they’ll want to go back and see some of these older movies?

    Scott: That’s our goal. You know how The Simpsons works on two levels. Like you go watch The Simpsons and it would be like somebody will just be happy to hear Bart say “Cowabunga.” Or they’ll make references to Gore Vidal. And you can enjoy it on both levels.

    That was always kind of goal for us. It’s a movie that can be enjoyed on its face and it can be enjoyed skin deep. That was sort of the.

    Michael: Yeah, just like Bugs Bunny. We didn’t know when we were kids these reference points that they…

    Scott: Who the hell is Jack Benny? Like, it was always like Jack Benny and this and this is all stuff that that was way before. You eventually learn the times of Bugs Bunny, oh that’s Humphrey Bogart or what the reference is, but…

    Michael: And I’ve got a house full of kids. And when my son who doesn’t want to consider anything I do as cool. When he and his friends think this movie is tremendous, and it’s the last thing he wants to do is admit that he likes something that I have done.

    He’s 17. And I’ve got a 17 year old, a 16 year old in the house, 13 and all that. And they eat it up. He wants to invite his friends to just even see clips. I knew I had something with the young audience.

    What happens when dad is like such a character like that? Do they bring friends over and be like: Dad can you do a little Black Dynamite? Will you slip into that character for them? Or is it only something that you do when you are performing in the movie?

    Michael: There’s a visceral thing with that character. Like if Mike Meyers were to do Austin Powers and he is dressed and he looks like he does every day, it’s not going to really work as well.

    Scott: Mike doesn’t look like Black Dynamite.

    No, he doesn’t.

    Scott: we were talking about this. It’s kind of funny. Black Dynamite looks closer to my father who died like years ago and so [laughs] it was sort of like I’m looking at my dad and like I haven’t seen Mike for awhile… of course except in the movie, he’s always in costume. He would come to set, I’m preparing or whatever and I forgot what he looked like. You know what I mean?

    Michael: [laughs] Yeah.

    Scott: I was talking to Black Dynamite and all of a sudden he’s Mike and I’m like, “Who’s this guy?”

    Michael: I can see it in people’s eyes. They watch a screening and they’re talking to me and they’re like, “Are you the same guy?” Which I like. That’s actually a really good thing for me because maybe I don’t get, people don’t see Black Dynamite when they see me.

    That’s what actors want.

    Michael: Yeah. That’s a luxury. That’s a luxury because say I’m doing a dramatic film or I don’t want people to see Black Dynamite. [laughs]

    Scott: The mustache is so bushy. You know, it’s just like that big, bushy mustache. I think that’s a big part of it.

    Michael: Yeah, and that Afro.

    Scott: And that Afro.

    You looked like you were in great shape. Were you working out all the time or are you just in shape all the time?

    Michael: Well, I pretty much stay the same. I may fluctuate five or at most ten pounds but pretty much look the same right now. But yeah, working out and martial arts… that’s a way of life for me.

    Those fight scenes looked pretty realistic. Even though he is fighting multiple opponents every time, they still looked like they were pretty well choreographed and shot.

    Michael: Yeah. Yeah. Those are odes to Dolomite. One of those exploitation heroes was Dolomite and he had those… he clearly didn’t really know kung fu but [laughs] but he had his own kind of brand of it. But it was also an homage to people like Jim Kelly who was a martial arts champion. And there were at that time, the Bruce Lee era, so it’s an homage to all of that.

    So what is the deal with Sony? Will we see this theatrically?

    Scott: That’s what it seems to be. I mean, our deal also has been reported. It has like, you know, a P&A budget and everything. So, all these things, it’s so funny they evolve all over the place but we’re feeling really happy about what’s happened.

    So, what else are you guys working on, kind of separately? Are you doing any other projects right now? Like been taking up a collect on Dolomite?

    Scott: That’s a questions we get a lot. We’re still in Black Dynamite world and working on it. We’re working on some projects together. We’re actually been talking about the project that originally went to him that I was interested in working on.

    Michael: Yeah, and I’ve started my own production company, Goliath Entertainment. Another film that I produced is already been purchased by Sony as well. And so this is the second movie that I have produced…

    What’s the other one called?

    Michael: It’s called Blood and Bone. And I’ve got with Goliath Entertainment I plan on using the Tyler Perry model that he’s used for these urban films. I plan on doing that with worldwide, overseas and domestic market, the specific niche of action type films. And kind of corralling a lot of my cohorts and creating a new level in action films that are kind of an homage to the raw gritty, real action films. Not the whole… I mean, audiences are sophisticated nowadays. And there is no real American action really, martial arts hero any more.

    Scott: There’s none.

    Michael: Yeah. So I plan on really doing something about that whole genre, because I think the American action genre, there’s a big chasm there.

    Scott: Yeah.

    We went through a bad period of time where there were just so many bad movies like that. I assume that they are always to introduce somebody new like that guy in The Marine. I forgot that guy’s name. That movie was just forgettable.

    Michael: Oh, yeah, it’s just been… I’m sorry to say, it’s just lazy filmmaking. There’s no reason under the sun that any action movie has to be stupid. Or any martial arts movie has to be cheesy.

    It doesn’t have to be from the terrible martial arts movie teat. Where they suck one off the same bad teat for a long time. And it’s like you can put good storylines in and have quality actors. It doesn’t have to take a lot of money. And so that’s when I’m intending on doing.

    Let me ask you real quick about your role as Gambol in the The Dark Knight. When his death scene comes, is that a cut moment? That’s kind of like you just see him crumple to the ground. He’s got the knife in the mouth and then… was there a shot that they cut?

    Michael: Well, there’s a lot that they cut out. Gambol was not intended on dying. It wasn’t a death, actually. And my mouth gets cut. But it was an effort to shorten the movie. They had to cut down a whole lot. And a lot of my stuff that I shot was really compressed and cut down. And they had to just kind of get rid of the character in a way.

    But that’s not what was intended when we shot.

    With regards to comic books… Do you think if Spawn had come out ten years later, it would have been bigger than it was? We’re in the height of comic book movies right now, riding this big wave. Spawn was way before all of that happened. Do you think it would have made a difference?

    Michael: Well, I mean, Spawn is a monster. Actually it did well. It did well and the repeat viewings of it, people watched that movie over and over and over. And it was one of the first that had the special effects comic book type of hero.

    I think there’s a lot of political issues that has happened from the selling of it. It is a tremendous sequel waiting to happen should the powers that be put aside their differences and make this.

    Because they learned that doing a movie like Spawn now and adhering to a R rating, I think it would kill. It’s a movie that would be, especially at this time, it would be very welcome to do an adult action hero, a dark action hero. That’s as dark as you can go.

    It’s already got a following. I think it would be…

    Would you be up for playing him again?

    Michael: Oh, Yeah. Oh, yeah. I wouldn’t do that to people. I so remember as a young movie goer there’s… I have a memory of a… I’m not going to name the actor. There was an actor that I was a big fan of. And I remember I saw a movie that I knew he was phoned in the performance.

    And I just felt so betrayed. I would never do that. I work 110 percent on anything I do. And all the people who loved Spawn I would never desert those people. They made me who I am and where I am. That means a lot to me. I would never turn my back on that role.

    Where does it kind of lay right now? Is Todd McFarlane not wanting to make another film right now?

    Michael: Well, yeah, I’ve heard some stuff. But I’m not…

    You talked about a sequel, if I’m not mistaken, back after the first one, right?

    Michael: Yeah, we talked a number of times about a sequel. I think we should talk again. Because things are a bit different now. And I think there was a kind of impasse that really needs to be resolved.

    And I’m not at liberty to talk about the internal, like family issues basically, but I think differences need to be set aside. In the same way I think there’s a responsibility to the audience that we should like, in light of that, that responsibility to the audience we should set aside differences and make it work.

    Let me ask you a last question. Going back to the inauguration that happened yesterday, as black filmmakers is this an exciting time? Do you think it’s not going to really make much of a difference with the new president or would you think it would open up new avenues?

    Scott: I think it’s a culmination of the world changing. It is 2009 and we have a black president named Barack Hussein Obama. That, in and of itself, is just an evolution in our country’s history that’s fascinating thing to watch and a fascinating thing to be around and … like I have a grandfather who didn’t get to see the moment who was involved in politics. Me and my mother talk about, oh my God, what would he…

    I mean, this is somebody who was born in 1911 and the degree of segregation that went on at that period of time. And for him to have seen that would have been really great. But yeah, I think it was a good thing to see yesterday. I think a lot of people felt … It just seemed to feel good. Everybody, not just black people.

    Our country has a lot of dire problems and more than not he seems extremely competent. And there’s an emphasis on competence. And that’s the people we need in the country to solve our very difficult problems.

    Michael: Personally, this is a little bit more inflammatory, but I think the movie industry is lagging behind the world as far as talk about African-American influence in this process. There are people who run studios that feel that: Okay, black films don’t’ sell. We can’t do anything with a positive black hero, which I beg to differ.

    I think the quality of a character is what is paramount, whether that person can be black or white. I would hope that they would look at this whole, the Barack Obama phenomenon as a sign that, hey, this is your audience. Your audience is beyond putting people in little boxes. And I would hope they would start to think that way as well.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • WE LIVE IN PUBLIC Review, Sundance 2009

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

    “I was the smartest kid in town, and the reporters knew it,” brags Josh Harris in We Live in Public, Ondi Timoner’s documentary on the rise and fall of the Internet’s first (and still its most charismatic) video mogul. It’s a telling statement, in that it points to both Harris’ 1990s raison d’etre, and also his achilles heel: it’s not what you do that matters, it’s that people are watching you do it. Timoner’s portrait of the prescient (and quite possibly crazy) web pioneer will be a must see for anyone interested in internet fame and the phenomenon of casual over-sharing, even if her storytelling tactics are surprisingly stale.

    A quick-cut pileup of stock footage, video captured by Timoner over a decade on Harris’ trail, and footage recorded during his surveillance projects, Public outlines Harris’ troubled childhood and tricky relationship with his alcoholic mom before clicking into its comfort zone with Harris’ founding of Pseudo.com. Pseudo, launched in 1993, morphed from a Prodigy chat service into an internet TV network, complete with themed channels and on-air personalities. The company –– and Harris –– became best known for throwing wild parties, which by the late 90s had formed the core of the Silicon Alley social scene. For a brief, heady moment in time, celebrities mingled with nerds, and nerds became celebrities — just because, as Silicon Alley Reporter & Weblogs Inc founder Jason Calacanis puts it, “you knew how to set up a modem.”

    Riding high on hype (and an $80 million “on paper” net worth), in 1999 Harris launched a massive art project called “Quiet,” where he invited dozens of artists to live with him in a bunker complete with firing range and communal showers, with each bed outfitted with a camera and a TV screen. Life was filmed constantly, residents were subject to the interrogation of a CIA operative, and no one was allowed to leave. When the FBI broke into the bunker and made everyone evacuate (they thought it was a cult, and as one member says on screen, “We were quacking and walking like a duck”), Harris and his girlfriend Tanya moved into a loft outfitted with motion control cameras in every room, broadcasting their relationship 24 hours a day to an audience of eager chatters. This project, called “We Live in Public,” fell apart when the relationship cracked under the pressure of surveillance. By this point, Harris’ sanity was slipping away as fast as his fortune, and in late 2001, the entrepreuer disappeared to an apple farm upstate.

    Harris is a great anti-hero, and the film more than convinces that we haven’t even begun to grapple with the ramifications of our “always on” internet personas. But for all of its fascinations, the frantic pace is frustrating. Timoner’s montages move so quickly that you can’t begin to connect to or contemplate the bulk of her images. This technique is effective in conveying what it felt like to be in the middle of the whirlwind, but it blocks any beyond-superficial understanding of what that whirlwind meant. (The exception to this rule is the section of the film using footage from “We Live in Public” to talk about Josh and Tanya’s break-up; Timoner gives this material time and space to breathe, which only draws attention to the airlessness of the rest of the piece.) Timoner also relies a little too heavily on pop music for commentary. It’s one thing to set a montage of “Quiet” footage to Le Tigre, to remind us what 1999 felt like; it’s another to ask LCD Soundsystem’s  “New York I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down” to bring the poignancy to a 9/11 montage. The song might have been a fresher choice had it not been used not long ago (and to greater ironic effect) on an episode of Gossip Girl, but it still would have been a lazy, literal way to inject feeling.

    But Public ultimately overcomes its grating stylistic flourishes. Most striking is the footage of “Quiet,” which looks like a mash-up of The Real World and Abu Ghraib. In the late 90s, Harris anticipated not just our country’s use of quasi-fascist interrogation, but the fascination with documenting it and sharing that document on social platforms. Every Harris project seen in the film includes a chat room. He figured out the core truth behind social media years before the rest of us: the news, the art, the event itself is nothing unless you enable people to talk about it.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • I Love You Phillip Morris Review, Sundance 2009

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

    Milk  (2008)

    Move over Milk. I Love You Phillip Morris does the gay rights movement one better, using in-your-face comedy and mainstream casting to defuse whatever anxiety the Heartland might have with guy-guy relationships — the irony being that this outrageous conman comedy from Bad Santa scribes Glenn Ficarra and John Requa was originally supposed to be directed by none other than Gus Van Sant. When Van Sant dropped out, the writers stepped in to shoot their own screenplay, resulting in a first-time film that feels more polished and professional than 90% of the studio comedies in theaters these days.

    It helps that Ficarra and Requa went in with a proper script, an ingredient too frequently missing in Judd Apatow and Adam McKay’s improv-happy method, where a cocktail napkin sketch of a plot seems to be all the team needs. No doubt Ficarra and Requa allowed their leads, Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor, a certain flexibility in interpreting their parts, but it’s refreshing to find a comedy that cuts together, where one scene sets up the next and ideas planted early in the film pay off for bigger laughs later on. The final gag, which shows an unmistakably phallic-shaped cloud, completes a joke set up in first-act flashbacks to Steven Jay Russell’s childhood.

    Who is this Russell fella? He’s a Virginia/Florida/Texas con-man who, over the course of the movie, works as a cop for a few years, has a daughter by a good Christian woman, gets mixed up with the law, goes to jail and meets the love of his life, a man named Phillip Morris (yes, like the cigarettes). When Russell’s sentence ends, he poses as a lawyer and springs Morris from prison before his penchant for criminal deception lands them both in the slammer all over again. Only the most twisted comedy writers could dream up such a plot, but Ficarra and Requa didn’t have to. It all happened. Well, probably not quite like this, but something tells me the facts were probably even more outrageous.

    Now, take a minute and try to imagine what Gus Van Sant would have done with the material. For the life of me, I can’t picture it. It’s all about tone, and I Love You Phillip Morris depends on the trickiest of balancing acts. Even getting a performance like this from Jim Carrey, who manages to play it along the lines of his Man on the Moon Andy Kaufman persona (cocky, charming, a little crazy, but free from the bug-eyed bellowing and sad-clown shtick that sometimes creeps into the actor’s bipolar acting history). It sets up a world in which a well-adjusted family man can be seen tucking his daughter into bed or patiently praying with his wife one minute, then going doggy-style on some dude in a hotel room the next, with nothing more than a voice-overed “Did I forget to mention I’m gay?” to help audiences cope with the record-screech revelation.

    Everything hinges on that moment. Ficarra and Requa could’ve introduced the idea in a million ways — with Russell cruising someone in the produce department or tapping his feet in an airport bathroom — but they go all the way, with a burly trucker type screaming “Do it, come in my ass!”, and Carrey obliging. Progressive and/or desensitized viewers will surely hate the scene, wishing for a little subtlety, but in this day and age, the only way to sell a gay sex scene is through comedy, and the I Love You Phillip Morris team isn’t content to settle for some respectable rutting (a la Brokeback Mountain) or tasteful displays of public affection (the way Milk does it, downplaying the “sexuality” in “homosexuality”). Russell probably didn’t have the kind of sex this scene implies –– nor do most gay men –– but by cutting straight to the extreme, Ficarra and Requa inoculate the squeamish.

    After all, being offensive is easy (catch any episode of Family Guy, and you’ll witness “how far can we go?” humor in practice), but it takes a special gift to be as strategic about button-pushing as I Love You Phillip Morris is. Take an off-hand scene in which Russell begins his first day on a new job (he’s conned his way in to a CFO position with a major financial company) and he asks his black assistant for coffee: “I’ll do that today,” the poised young lady replies, “but I don’t do that really.” With that fleeting exchange, the screenwriters widen the net, playing once again on the characters’ and audiences’ stereotypes. The next time we see Russell at work, he has a new assistant, this time a flaming gay man, because the world is backwards, and progress doesn’t happen overnight.

    For most of the movie, Russell’s homosexuality is just one more trait in the character’s quiver, which is the kind of ideal depiction GLAAD is always going on about, but I Love You Phillip Morris is actually stronger when the movie is making a big deal of the relationship. Who can possibly resist the stretch in which Russell falls for McGregor’s wide-eyed Southern boy in prison? But as soon as they’re both on the outside, the focus shifts to a more straightforward con-man movie — still twice as entertaining as Catch Me If You Can (not to mention such superficially similar Carrey comedies as Liar Liar), and yet a little light on the relationship plot that planted the audience’s butts in the seats in the first place.

    “Is the gay thing and stealing something that goes hand in hand?” Leslie Mann (playing Russell’s religious wife) asks early on, perfectly summing up the perception the movie hopes to correct. It’s not easy to get audiences to root for a gay relationship involving a character they otherwise disapprove of, but I Love You Phillip Morris pulls it off, not by offending everyone in sight (the prevailing tactic in un-P.C. comedies), but by showing it’s OK to laugh at such things.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog