Gondry: I want to make classic films that everyone knows and loves using only technology that a pair of idiots can get their hands on.
Studio Head: What?
Gondry: Like if two guys simply made every classic film.
Studio Head: What?
Gondry: Like if two guys tried to make King Kong with a super 8 machine, one guy standing real close to the camera and the other guy stands far away to simulate depth. You know. The close guy is King Kong the far guy is an onlooker – depth.
Studio Head: What?
And though Gondry successfully pulls this feat off with a spectacular flourish it is lacking something very important. This was my problem with his previous work, Science of Sleep (2006), though the visually stunning pieces in both movies were eye-popping, how-did-he-do-that masterpieces, the story took a back seat. This is also why Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) succeeded where these two movies fail. With Eternal Sunshine Charlie Kaufman’s story was accented with Gondry’s visual flair, but Gondry sans Kaufman is like the Jagger-Bowie collabortaion, “Daning in the Street”: all flash, no substance.
The movie opens with a confusing biopic about a jazz piano player named Fats Waller. This biopic is played in pieces through the film and threads together the story like a loose fitting sweater draped over the idea of recreating previous films. This also plays as a theme for Gondry’s filmmaking itself, jazzy and improvisational, skirting convention with sour notes and syncopation, but it does not let him off the hook for his lazy story telling. Jerry, played by Jack Black who once again overplays the annoying sidekick he once hit perfectly in High Fidelity, and Mike, played with a little too much sap by Mos Def, are forced to recreate a slew of VHS tapes that were destroyed. They dub this sweding a film (it had something to do with Sweden and Jack Black rambling, so I lost what this meant) and then become minor celebrities as their sweded films are more popular than the original. But this story line takes far too long to get to and the film recreations, the meat and potatoes, are few and far between. Gondry hits a few sweet notes with his display of filmmaking as a community affair bringing people together to create art, which is a nice little band-aid for this post-writer’s strike Hollywood, but the overall plot seems shoehorned into the desire to recreate classic films.
6.5 out of 10: Visually melodic when it wants to be, but, like pop music, missing any real substance.
This is a mind blowing piece Gondry did a few years back.
Steriograms - Walkie Talkie Man
Director: Michel Gondry
9 comments:
curious to hear what you thought about this. Also, is the movieblog going to grace us with an oscar wrap up otherwise known as "the montage of movies ash hasn't seen because none of them were released in his state"
ha ha ha, sadly no Oscar wrap up, but I'll give my thoughts here. As for the big prize and Best Director, I think No Country for Old Men deserved them. I loved the movie, thought it was the best film of last year. The soundtrack (lack of) was a thing of beauty. Set a perfect tone. I have to disagree with the Cohen brothers win for their screenplay, though I know very little about this art I feel There Will Be Blood deserved it. Paul Thomas Anderson was robbed. I agree with the best male actor... though I haven't seen all the movie in this category, DDL is transformative as an actor no one can hold a candle to his performance (though, I wish Dano, his co-star, would have gotten some credit.) Best Original Screenplay was a joke. Really – Juno? I don’t think so. But as I’ve only seen three of the five nominations as of now, I won’t hazard a guess as to who should have really won. I have no opinion about the lead actress, haven’t seen 4 out of the five movies so... The show was alright. I thought all the montages were fun, but rather stale, like some Halloween candy you find in the cabinet at Easter.
I totally disagree with the La Vie en Rose’s steal for best makeup... come on... Norbit man, freakin' Norbit!
P.S. it may take me a couple days to get the two reviews up, I have a ton of stuff to do before spring break, so here’s to hopein’.
astute observations, New. I think PTA was robbed of something, if not director than Best Picture. There's something about TWBB that kind of trumps NCFOM in my mind but I can understand that it was the populist vote for the Academy (or moreso than TWBB).
I also agree that Dano should have been nominated although it really would have been a non-issue considering Bardiem had that award since the release of NCFOM.
I have not seen "La Vie en Rose" but would bet the farm that it was not as emotionally wrenching of a performance as JC from "Away from Her." That movie, particularly her performance, haunted me for days. I will eventially watch La Vie solely for comparison purposes but this struck me as a bold yet unsatisfying surprise.
Best Actor was also a lock-not much to report there. I must say my mouth was also agape learning that Tilda Swinton swooped in to take supporting actress. Again, not having seen "Michael Clayton" I can't be 100% on this but I can say with certainty that Blanchet's Dylan was one of, if not my favorite performance of any actress this year. I just watched "gone baby gone" yesterday (excellent ps) and I would have been happy if Amy Ryan walked away with the award. Thank god neither Ruby Dee or Hal Holbrook got the awards however; old people getting nominations for 5 minute (non)parts in movies is pretty demeaning for everyone invovled.
As for the original screenplay- a joke. a fucking joke. I cannot wait until Diablo Cody is hanging out with Jesse Camp down in the cut out bin on the boulevard of broken dreams. Oh my blog, I went there!
your loyal reader,
-ms
I agree with most of your statements, Dano's nod would have been a waste anyways. He'll be back, I'm sure. And old people getting a nod for the five minutes, I agree completely. I know it is a respect thing. And maybe these actors haven't been noticed before this year when they should have been, but if you nominate them now you aren't truly getting the best performances to compete...and, well, it is a cycle (I could explain this, but it would take a while). I could talk about it for hours - well, maybe not hours, but at least thirty minutes. I hate the “make-up” nomination/win for years past. (The most glaring of these would be Russell Crowe’s win for Gladiator, which he shouldn’t have won, but his performance in the previous year’s Insider and subsequent lose that year needed retribution I guess.)
On an added note, I think Enchanted was robbed of its best original song Oscar. An acoustic song with a piano is great, and hard to write well, but an orchestrated, harmony rich, playful melody is nigh impossible to create (think Disney movies after their recent golden age, they have been trying and failing for over ten years to recreate that magic).
the make-up nod is a bitch. I think that happens with everything- I've used it to explain the popularity of the latest National album-something I've eventually come around on a BIT but still. It wouldnt be nearly as popular if people had recognized their last record when it was released. Instead everyone is enjoying this album as if it contained the same quality they missed out on for "Alligator" during its initial release.
The classic recent example of this for the Oscars is Giamatti's nod for "Cinderella Man" after being snubbed for far better perfomances in "Sideways" and "American Splendor." Sad for him especially considering what a downward turn his career has taken lately.
I have never heard the "Enchanted" songs and although I must admit I have a soft spot in my heart for the scruffy underdog lead singer of the Frames, the music in "Once" was absolute drivel. Like Coldplay meets Bright Eyes with the dramatics turned up to 12. Unbearable!
Guys, guys...movies are gay! Nice Jesse Camp reference though, Matt.
I saw BKR last night and it was an expected letdown. Even the visual stuff was nothing special, with the exception of the one-shot-ten-movie montage in the middle. Gondry should go back to legos. I would've been much more impressed if he would've done the whole movie with legos. I should've seen Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins.
Dan told me last week that he thought Mos Def's character was intended to be perceived as slightly developmentally disabled. I do not believe this. thoughts?
Oh man, I highly disagree. I think you can certainly see where he gets that. His mannerisms and speech, along with his inability to figure out that the message was turned around, I mean come on… but I think his character was just lacking in the common sense for plot device. You can’t have him figure out the message immediately or there will be no hilarious montage of him figuring it out (This, by the way was one of the things I think Gondry could have cut and the movie would have retained everything). But I do not believe the character had any learning disabilities, it was mos def trying to act.
Oh and sorry for the long pause... Been in Flo-rida with the mrs. and on a T.V. kick, maybe tonight?
Post a Comment