Change Your Image
wdanehy
Reviews
Freddy Got Fingered (2001)
Not for everyone's tastes but has a certain mad genius
Rating: ***
First off, this is the most disjointed movie that I have ever seen. There is no build to any scene, no narrative flow from one scene to another. The whole thing comes off as a random series of visual gags loosely based around a sick, semi-autistic manchild and his warped view of the world. However if you turn off the rational and moral parts of your psyche, taking in the stream of consciousness lunacy as it comes, you might find yourself laughing. Referring to Tom Green as an "artist" on par with Salvador Dali or Luis Banouel might be a huge stretch. He was not intending to be a surreal artist. If you listen to the DVD commentary, it is clear that he just put together a deliberately stupid movie with elements based on his television show, his real life, and his bizarre sense of humor. Mr. Green is not even smart enough to be pretentious and that is part of what makes this film so great (so to speak.) The end product is a personal comic vision not unlike Andy Kaufmann reading the entirety of "The Great Gatsby" onstage. This is art in _that_ sense, in the personal integrity sense, as a few other critics have pointed out. He is doing stuff that he finds amusing and doesn't give a s*** what you think.
But does it all work? Is it funny? Depends on your sense of humor. Many of the gags would have faired better in my view had they some kind of build. Yet giving the movie any kind of routine structure would have spoiled the chaotic lunacy and would have made it just another young adult gross out comedy. We need something like this to balance out the endlessly calculated likes of "Tomcats" and "Scary Movie 2."
If Tom Green decides to do another film, I hope that he works his ideas into a coherent narrative in order to bring out more of the humor in them. Until that day ever comes, I will enjoy the neo-Kaufmann in this offbeat little gem.
Happiness (1998)
Disappointing follow up to "Welcome to the Dollhouse"
At least this movie wasn't boring. There was never a dull moment in this mess which might convince many viewers to overrate it. Fortunately dear reader I am not such a viewer.
I enjoyed this movie while watching. Perhaps I would have rated it higher if not for the ending which I shall not spoil, not that very much would be spoilt in any case, but I won't spoil. I would have rated it higher if my enjoyment was less derived from pure voyeurism and more from well developed characters and a terrific story. This is the kind of film that's well directed and acted enough to resemble art but depraved and disgusting enough to appeal to the voyeur in us, so we can excuse ourselves for sitting through it. The artistic elements did not outweigh the negatives, as you shall see in the following paragraph.
The situations in the film were just not funny, and thus in no sense can this be called a comedy. Pedophilia is especially not very humorous. There were scenes that I found to be quite gripping between a pedophiliac father and his son but they belong in a much better film, not in a film that turns everything into a joke with an ending that made me mad. Everything here deserves a better ending, perhaps a more tragic ending, but at least a conclusion that wraps everything up in a way befitting a drama and less befitting a Jim Carrey comedy.
There also just isn't much substance here. Characters make obscene phone calls. They have sick fantasies. They hurt others and themselves. The lesson that loneliness and desperation breed perversion is hammered into our heads with one shock after another. We learn that seemingly banal and normal families have skeletons. We learn that a child masturbating is funny. We learn all of his and more, but what is the point? Don't waste your time here trying to find one. It's all shock and no substance. The material is better handled in "American Beauty", a more mainstream and also flawed but far superior film.
If "American Beauty" is rented out or something, or there is nothing else on cable, watch this. You won't be bored but you certainly will not be enlightened.
On another note, I very strongly recommend the director's prior film, "Welcome to the Dollhouse" which is quite easily one of the greatest and most perceptive movies about teenagers.
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Misunderstood Movie
I think the people criticizing the film for being "style over substance" because of the fancy editing have missed the point. The director seems to be using these effects for a purpose, to portray psychological time accurately, and in my opinion he succeeds. By slowing down time in some scenes or by speeding up events, he is showing us how it feels to be his characters, either under the influence of a drug or in a hurry to the next fix.
Also notice that he does not hit us all at once with these devices. He starts out slow and gradually builds to the horrifying climax. I am not claustrophobic but I felt that way during the final 15 minutes all because the movie forced me to understand on a psychological level what was happening.
Blue Velvet (1986)
Great film not for all tastes
Now here is a film that polarizes its audience. Everyone who has seen it either loves or hates it. Some, such as Roger Ebert, find it to be well made but morally offensive for how Lynch uses the actors. Others enjoy the stylish aspect of the movie and give it high marks. I fall into the latter camp but I also don't think that it's quite morally contemptable either.
First of all, the acting is all around excellent. Dennis Hopper is especially convincing as a sadistic personality. Isabelle Rossellini will also haunt you in her performance as an abused, masochistic woman under the perpetual torment of Hopper. All of this depravity plays against the backdrop of a corny neighborhood and characters that seem straight out of a 1950s sitcom.
Ebert thought that Lynch wasn't playing fair by having his characters tormented and humiliated in one scene and then having silly ironic humor in the next. This is the same Ebert who loved Pulp Fiction. Is PF any better when it jokes about accidently shooting an innocent man in the back of a car? How about the homosexual rape sequence? Is that any less perverse?
But I digress. Yes this movie jumps between two extremes of human nature but in my opinion in doing so it is making a statement. Most of us have skeletons in our closets and if not, we know people who do. We put on a facade of "normalcy" so that we can coexist but just under the surface there is still that animal nature, that beast waiting to get out. There's a little bit of Dennis Hopper in all of us. Perhaps this movie is so upsetting because it forces us to realize that truth.
***1/2 out of **** stars