Change Your Image
richardblues444
Reviews
Fortunes (2005)
subtle, but consistently amusing character study
I rented this DVD because I was very interested to see how the 3 lead actors played off each other, particularly in light their being, ostensibly at least, such different character types. I'd seen Mike McGlone in Brothers McMullen and She's the One, and then later in the excellent Dinner Rush with Danny Aiello. And James Urbaniak plays the uniquely idiosyncratic lead role amazingly in the seminal independent film Henry Fool, directed by the great Hal Hartley. Finally the least "indie" of the 3, Tony Hale, plays one of the more neurotic characters on one of my favorite (soon to be a "brilliant but canceled") shows Arrested Development and turns in the most realized and comically sympathetic performance in the film.
Although funny and compelling in places, it seemed inconsistent and admittedly I found I was a bit unsure about Fortunes on the initial viewing, but it definitely charmed me into taking another look. And I discovered that what at first felt perhaps more like pacing issues and the absence of the sharp "edginess" that characterizes a lot of independent film was actually much more of a studied, subtle exploration of early life crisis and uncertainty. The film is a sort of dark satire but with a lighter touch, resisting the indie urge at ostentation and grittiness in favor of a more supple approach.
The choice of having such different actors play took on significance and purpose in this context. They develop early on in the film as 3 distinct archetypes a cocksure alpha male investment banker, a workaholic and somewhat absentee father/husband, and a brooding, contemplative artist/writer. Their visit to a fortune teller is the catalyst that sets off their worrying about things all too familiar in an age of self doubt and mass identity crisis. Actually just 2 of them, the father/husband and the writer, get their fortunes read by the enigmatic though very un-stereotypical fortune teller, but the shift in their moods is palpable enough to affect the 3rd character in a way that creates a vicarious, osmotic experience for him as well. The film examines all their collective angst not so much with broad comedy as with a dry, wry humor, and does so patiently, deliberately. Rather than belly laughs, the effect is persistent, and consistent, amusement; the film engrosses not with shock or controversy, but with a sure-handed, steady focus and direction.
And beyond the perhaps somewhat deceptively simple premise of a visit with someone who may have access to a deeper, more mysterious realm triggering the latent doubts and insecurities already present in characters undergoing pre-mid life crises, the film, and not too heavy handedly (in fact maybe too subtle for it's own good) poses one of life's more essential questions are the events in our lives predetermined, does fate exist, - or is life actually something, as we'd generally like to believe, something we shape ourselves as we struggle through existence? Smartly, this film doesn't presume to answer the question or even favor one perspective over the other and chooses instead to observe it's "unanswerableness".
Fortunes ultimately came across to me as a kind of contemporary fable satirizing the same limitations of human consciousness that make us consider that question in the first place. It's more mainstream in some ways but it's an interesting and indie-minded study of character and theme that would have actually benefited, in my humble opinion, from more mood saturation and plumbing the humor of the futility of human inadequacy more in that vein. But the film absolutely grew on me as a very worthy experience more in the spirit of quiet, but playful resolve to convey theme rather than more desperately, more energetically doing so. A tall order given the average attention span. The acting is really good (all 3 of the leads as well as a few of the supporting cast notably the woman who plays the wife, Diana Henry) have terrific comedic and dramatic timing) subtle like the overall film and it's definitely shot very well it's great to look at. And the direction of the film brings all the elements together creatively and imaginatively, but again, with a mature sense of restraint. Getting past the initial sense of deliberateness in the film was a bit like the characters themselves getting past (ie - forced by their uneasiness to get past) their initial, natural cynicism about what a fortune teller has to say in the first place.
The Brown Bunny (2003)
riveting and indulgent- film mirrors its characters
I'm in the small, but perhaps vocal, minority of viewers who found The Brown Bunny to be a stunning, hyper-realistic, profoundly cinematic, and most importantly, original, piece of work. Fellatio happens. That Chloe Sevigny was brave enough to not rely on smoke, mirrors, and camera tricks is an absolute testament to her commitment to serious, well
commitment. It's the most climactic sequence in a series of quietly riveting, haunting, vaguely aimless occurrences and encounters. If you're willing to surrender to the mood of the film however, each has meaning and substance though the feeling of emptiness is probably the most palpable quality of the film. On the surface it seems to meander, but I think, very much on the contrary, its direction is focused and precise, which is a significant accomplishment for a film concerning lost souls and their barely perceptible, faint shadows. What is so remarkable to me about the film is that it manages to convey the vacancy of its characters by taking on a shape that is itself seemingly vacant. And for me the risk pays off entirely this is a film in which the mood is truly another presence, a character inhabiting the bleak but ultimately cathartic sensibility of the overall piece. I guess the film is arguably also self indulgent and perhaps demands more patience of the viewer than it should. But again, this is a film about self-indulgent, intensely selfish and damaged people. The film is like its occupants. And vice versa. They mirror each other.
Obviously it's a style technique that has been used ever since filmmakers starting truly integrating aesthetics in a purposeful way, but transforming the ennui and day to day mundanity of an emotionally injured, lovelorn person into a searing portrayal of a disfigured, but somehow in tact, human being, is nothing to jeer at. Of course you have to share the opinion that Vincent Gallo's character is riveting and that his behavior is as powerful as it is strange. For me, his particular idiosyncrasies have always possessed a depth beyond merely quirky they seem very organic and real in spite of the obvious arrogance. Like the filmmaker documented Overnight he is unreservedly and unequivocally himself. And to me that demonstrates a great purity to the degree that the flaws the film is frequently accused of having are not only forgivable, but intentional. Not to mention virtually impossible to pull off. The Brown Bunny is like a surgical view of this particular life and the appendages and organs of which it consists. There is a certain routineness and detachment to such dissection, but the irony is that the "sub-surface" of our psyches is actually ultimately not that different from the impressions we convey of ourselves. That is a extraordinarily complex concept, however, to disseminate through any means of expression.
Overnight (2003)
stranger and vastly more unsettling than fiction
I just got the DVD of Overnight, which I had seen once already on digital cable movies on demand and knew I had to have it as part of my permanent collection. This true story is brutal, jaw-droppingly unsparing and honest, and utterly devastating. Not for the squeamish. Troy Duffy, the hardcore bar tender of a Boston bar transforms into an even bigger monster than the movie exec (Harvey Weinstein) who ultimately dashes his dreams of being the next Tarntino, on the rocks. One wouldn't think it possible for a character to emerge in any story as more arrogant, unlikeable, not to mention horribly charismatic, as a Weinstein, but Duffy manages to do just that and it is painfully exhilarating, to watch his behavior intensify, rather than become accommodating, as the nightmare unfolds. He's arrogant to the point of cartoonish, but what is so compelling about him is that, in spite of his total disregard for the genuine efforts of his bar buddy/associate partners, he stays precisely true to his nature to bitter end. His story is like the (sort of) parable about the frog who give the scorpion a ride on his back across the river because the scorpion promises not to sting him with his venomous tail. Of the course the scorpion does because, as he puts it, it is his nature he simple cannot help himself. Similarly, Duffy injects everyone around him with his poison from close friends to stuck up Hollywood producers but he never once makes any pretense about being anything but who he is. The difference is that he does not make it to the other side in fact the frog (Weinstein) abandons him and pretty early on, presumably to teach him a lesson about who the bigger reptile is and Duffy scrambles to secure financing from another source. He eventually succeeds but with only half the original budget. And while it's sad that the movie going public was perhaps deprived of what might have been a stronger film (had the original budget remained in tact), this documentary is a brilliant consequence of the entire debacle, a phoenix that rose from someone else's ashes. Not that I've seen Boondock Saints, it's next on my list, but the general consensus is that it certainly does not live up to it's pre production hype, and that certainly makes sense under the circumstances.