Showing posts with label things that don't suck. Show all posts
Showing posts with label things that don't suck. Show all posts

3.28.2011

minnesota nice

raimi fest is in full swing over at things that don't suck! in honor of this, i would like to talk a little bit about my favorite sam raimi film, a simple plan (1998).

bill paxton plays hank mitchell, passing his days working at a feed mill, waiting anxiously on the arrival of his first child. it's an existence that he will come to realize, through bitter hindsight, is pretty much exactly what his old man described to him as happiness. bridget fonda is his wife, sarah, a librarian who spends her evenings figuring out ways to make ends meet and preparing for the baby. billy bob thornton is hank's somewhat obtuse brother, jacob. hank and jacob, along with jacob's friend lou, who is an oaf, a drunken lout, are making their way home from a visit to deliver flowers to the family plot when they crash jacob's truck after swerving to miss a fox in the road. they chase jacob's dog, who is chasing the fox, into the snowy woods. the fox escapes but they discover a downed plane covered in snow, the contents of which are one decaying pilot that is being eaten by scavenging birds and one gym bag that contains 4.4 million dollars. hank immediately wants to turn it in. the other two are keen to keep it, arguing that it isn't stealing, as it is most likely drug money. it doesn't take much cajoling when your cut is just shy of 1.5 million and hank devises the titular plan - they sit on the money and wait until the spring thaw when the plane will be found. if the money is not mentioned in the report, which it won't be if the money is as dirty as they assume, they each take their split and leave town. if there is the slightest hint of trouble, hank will burn the money. it's the only way he'll go along with it. he insists on control, immediately establishing a dangerous dynamic, with him as the axis amidst moronic allies. it also reinforces the fact that the arrogance - the "you think you're better than us" vibe - that he is being accused of at exactly the moment they discover the plane is not necessarily just a figment of lou's imagination. their pact in place, they head to their respective homes where it takes scant minutes before they are already breaking their vows of secrecy and the events are set in motion that will end up with six bodies floating in a wake of greed and guilt. if only people could keep their mouths shut.

this is a particular strain of cinema that i love - the midwestern noir/crime film. as the flipside to their urban antecedents in the forties and fifties, the open spaces these films occupy provide an isolation that is every bit as unnerving to the guilty soul as the claustrophobic, neon-littered cityscape. from in cold blood (1967) to fargo (1996) to the exemplary winter's bone (2010), back roads muddy from melting snow and the eerie quiet of the plains have provided the backdrop for some of the most chilling and effective crime thrillers in the modern era of cinema, certainly some of my favorites. even lesser efforts like the ice harvest (2005) - not a bad film, just not on par with the others i have mentioned here - i tend to give a headstart just based upon their wintery, rural geography. it's put to immediate use here, as some of the first images we are greeted by are those of a literal fox in the henhouse, a bit of symbolism that would be impossibly incongruous in los angeles. the snow deadens all sound to the point that when gunshots ring out it's the only thing you can hear for miles. the most devastating part of the setting, though, is the implication that cruel fate came all this way to find you. it ferreted you out, to stick with raimi's animal symbolism.

"you work for the american dream, you don't steal it", hank tells jacob and lou in the few moments that he is still hanging onto his ideals. had he known he was in a noir film he might not have said something so naive. noir exists to undermine the american dream. it exists to put statements like this to the test. in this case, his statement turns out to be true. it's hank that fails the test. he's eventually proven right, in spite of his actions. he had the answer the whole time. he just didn't have the wherewithal to put it into practice. in fact, the transformation that hank undergoes almost rockets past noir into tragedy. the ancients would probably find a fair amount that was familiar in scott smith's excellent screenplay. hank is obviously a serious and dignified protagonist. he's the only college graduate we meet, a fact that is referred to on more than one occasion. he has a child on the way and is therefore saddled with adult obligations that neither jacob nor lou have. to say he suffers a reversal of fortune is putting it mildly. his hubris is undoubtedly his undoing. he knows he is the most intelligent of the three men. he judges himself to be the only one capable of holding this thing together, merely the first in an ever-widening spiral of horrible decisions and reckless actions. it takes about twelve hours before he commits his first murder to protect the secret and at every turn he is too clever by half, constantly outsmarting himself. the gods didn't do him any favors from the very beginning, either. the die seemed cast from the moment that sarah noticed lou in the truck when jacob first pulled into the drive that fateful morning. from there, it seems we are hurtling toward the inevitable. plus, as you might imagine, no one doesn't look for 4.4 million dollars.

guess how many sets of tracks there are on the return trip.

the performances from the principals here are solid from top to bottom, including impressive work from paxton and fonda - two actors i typically have little use for. paxton as the brains of the outfit is a nice bit of casting against type and he never lapses into caricature or the histrionics that i find unappealing in some of his other work. fonda's evolution from librarian to lady macbeth is fun to watch from the moment you see the lust sneak into her eyes as she surveys her dining room table covered in bundles of hundred dollar bills. she never slides all the way into villainy, though, and she nails us right in our sympathy with an extended speech about the monotonous grind of coupon clipping and hand-me-downs for their daughter that the days will become without this money. she lays bare the truth that resides underneath the things that we all tell ourselves occasionally to get through our everyday. 4.4 million dollars on your kitchen table blows your illusions of satisfaction all to hell. billy bob thornton tops them all, though. his characterization of jacob is informed by a self-awareness that ultimately makes him the most intelligent of all three. he knows when he has reached his limit. he has worked within these limits all his life and it is what sets him apart. he is wise enough to never let his reach exceed his grasp, an ability that every other character lacks. he never speaks less than the truth. he's not capable of it. it's just a great performance, stirring and sympathetic, providing the pity and fear that cements its status as tragedy. on top of all that, raimi gives them the perfect world to inhabit. in edgar g. ulmer's detour (1945) there is a brilliant shot that pans across the floor of the scene of the final crime in which you pick up the small detail of paint chips coming off the baseboards. it perfectly illustrates the grubby, small-time universe the characters inhabit. i love that shot. there is a similar shot in this film where, just once, in the margin of the frame, you see a tray of perfumes on bridget fonda's dressing table that tells you everything you need to know about the mundane middle class existence she lives and the measures she takes to feel glamorous. it's a great detail and is but one example of how well constructed a universe raimi provides for his characters. if you've never seen it, you ought to, especially if you're only familiar with raimi's hyperkinetic horror offerings or his big budget superhero adventures. it's a remarkable, assured picture that is unlike anything else on his resume.

make sure to stop in at things that don't suck all week long for all things raimi. in addition to bryce's excellent work there are tons of fine contributors chipping in. check it out!

2.19.2011

making my contribution

there are a couple of things on the vitagraph horizon that i am looking forward to that you guys might want to keep an eye out for. first, my friend bryce over at the entertaining and edifying things that don't suck is running a sam raimi blogathon from 3.27.11 to 4.2.11 and it promises to be great fun. i participated in the one he organized last year devoted to christopher nolan and i am honored and excited that he asked me back. in the meantime, read his blog. there's always something interesting going on over there.

second, i threw my hat in the ring for the fifth annual white elephant blogathon over at silly hats only (i think bryce is doing this as well. i hope so).

the rules are simple. you submit a title you want to see someone review and you are randomly assigned one from someone else's submission. we all reconvene on april fool's day and post the results. i received my assignment a couple of days ago and i am/am not looking forward to it. i take small consolation in the fact that, thanks to me, someone, somewhere has to/gets to watch the misunderstood genius that is unmasking the idol (1986). come back on 4.1.11 and see who had the biggest joke played on them.

7.14.2010

this is why i always have a pen

my pal bryce over at things that don't suck is devoting this week to all things christopher nolan in anticipation of inception (2010) opening friday.


so, for the occasion, i thought i would go back and take a look at memento (2000), one of the finer neo-noir films i have seen.

those of you that haven't seen it still might be familiar with the title due to how much attention was paid to its somewhat novel structure. the scenes that comprise the main portion of the narrative run in reverse order. this backwards chronology, shot in color, runs alternately with an expository thread, shot in black and white, in which you see leonard, our protagonist, engaged in a phone conversation with an unidentified party. on paper, it sounds a little confusing. on film, it is deftly handled by nolan and is a compelling example of form following function.

the story follows leonard shelby, an insurance investigator who suffers from anterograde amnesia due to an injury suffered at the hands of the person he believes raped and murdered his wife. simply put, he cannot create new memories. he retains everything right up until the point this trauma occurred, but since then it is impossible. his memories fade as thoroughly and quickly out as the polaroids he takes to help him remember names, numbers and faces fade in.


the pictures, combined with notes, numerous tattoos and police files make up the trail of clues that he hopes will lead him to his wife's killer so justice may be served. leonard is meticulous and orderly about his routines. it's how he gets by in his condition. the one thing that other detectives have, even when all else has deserted them - their wits - are in full revolt in leonard's case. memories and motivations stick in his head just long enough to be tantalizing and frustrating. and in some cases, hilarious/potentially fatal.


as the alternating timelines converge, we pick up our femme fatale and a cop who works in the more gray areas of the law, to put it diplomatically. very satisfyingly noir. intercut with everyone who has a stake in manipulating leonard to their own end is the story of sammy jankis. sammy's case was one that leonard investigated in his earlier life and the first place he encountered the phenomenon that is anterograde amnesia. ah, the fickle finger of fate. sammy's story has now become leonard's story. one wrong turn, one bad decision and the cosmos deals the good man the bad hand. also very satisfyingly noir.


everything about the production is strong. solid writing, great performances and excellent direction from nolan. its structure would be a liability in less skilled hands but here it is never less than compelling. the story might not be quite as much so if it were told in a straight, linear fashion but i see this as more than just beneficial gimmickry. the structure suits and serves the story. it corresponds to our narrator's mental state and puts us very solidly in his shoes. it is no parlor trick.

and you want noir? it is deep black. it may take place mostly in the light but it is a worthy successor to those dark and shadowy films that first began to explore these themes in the forties. when noir really began to bloom at the end of world war two some pretty existential seeds had apparently been sown. two world wars, a great depression and a spanish flu pandemic is a lot to deal with in a thirty year stretch. the crisis of masculinity felt by men transitioning from a theater of war to the daily routine of home and work was profoundly reflected by these noir protagonists. "what do i do now?" rang in the heads of millions of people, men and women, as the adjustments to normal life were struggled with. well, memento is these existential noir questions to the nth degree. leonard, very much like the veterans of the forties, may know who he used to be but he certainly has no idea anymore. he is more than just the literal embodiment of this crisis. he is its terminal point.


and when you contrast his story with sammy's you are opening a veritable pandora's box of questions about the role of knowledge versus instinct in developing that identity that is so much in question here. is there any position except the amorality so essential to good noir when you have no hope of a future? what do you do when your only choices are a tragic past and this moment you are in right now? when there is no tomorrow, nothing to keep going on for, your very soul is at risk. you cannot hold on to the things you know, the things you learn, therefore you are operating on instinct. and when your instinct is unreliable? it's something we all face to one degree or another. at one point leonard explains that memory is only an interpretation, not a record. so, if you give that any credence, not only is he an unreliable narrator in his story, we are unreliable narrators of our own. combine that with the fact that we are all at the mercy of fate's fickle finger. memento gives us quite the puzzle to work on, both during and after the film. exceedingly satisfyingly noir.

in addition to the noirish psychological underpinnings, i like to read leonard's job as an insurance investigator as a nod to double indemnity (1944). unfortunately for leonard, the little man who lives in his stomach can't remember anything any longer than he can. and while i am thinking about it, i know we're supposed to prize versatility and no one wants to be typecast, but i think genre films, noir and horror in particular, sometimes suffer these days for the fact that there aren't those faces you see over and over in these types of roles. you had a certain understanding with humphrey bogart, alan ladd and elisha cook jr. guy pearce has made two of the best neo-noir films our generation has seen, the other being l.a. confidential (1997), and it would be a shame to see someone so well suited to it not make another.

if you want to catch up on other nolan-related items, old and new, before you go see inception go take a look at things that don't suck for bryce's daily posts. you will also find those of several other worthy contributors. except teddy. don't believe his lies.