Pauline Kael & I

DL over at The Cellar Door has tagged me in the "meme" making its way across the blogosphere, and since I'm in a generous mood, I've decided to oblige and do my own.

1. Pick a single person past or present who works in the film industry who you'd like to have dinner with and tell us why you chose this person.
This, I think, is the toughest part. Who, out of all my loves in the cinema, do I choose? Do I go with my old-school divas (Bette Davis, Greta Garbo, Judy Garland, Joan Crawford), my new-school loves (Gyllenhaal, James Marsden, Channing Tatum) or the great directors (Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Hitchcock, George Cukor)? It's the ultimate Sophie's choice, but finally I decided. I ditched all of my previous ideas and settled on Pauline Kael.


Pauline who? I know you're giving me that dumbfounded face right now, so just stop and let me explain. Before Roger Ebert became America's most revered and respected film critic, Pauline Kael held that position. Not only did she champion smaller foreign films that otherwise might not have gotten a chance in America (most notably Bertolucci's Last Tango in Paris) but she savagely ripped into films that were universally praised (it was rumored that the conservative McCall's fire her for her review of The Sound of Music, in which she called it The Sound of Money) and attacked others for having pretentious taste in art house films of the 60's. I first discovered her criticisms earlier this school year and I immediately fell in love with her distinctive style of writing that's really more conversational (rather high-brow, but conversation nonetheless) than strict, technical writing. And she definitely wasn't a star fucker either.

2. Set the table for your dinner. What would you eat? Would it be in a home or at a restaurant? And what would you wear? Feel free to elaborate on the details.
I don't believe Pauline would be much for going out to a fancy restaurant and making such a fuss about it, so we would definitely have a quite dinner at home. I'd probably make something simple and unpretentious, such as spaghetti and meatballs with garlic bread and a really yummy chocolate cake afterwards. I'm guessing Pauline would wear something classic, like a blouse and skirt or even pants if she was feeling adventurous and I would put on jeans, a nice shirt and a skinny tie. After dinner, I think we'd settle down and watch a couple of Pauline's favorite films: Nashville, which I love, and...gulp....L'Avventura, which she might be able to explain why this is a good film to me.

3. List five thoughtful questions you would ask this person during dinner.
1. Do you believe that people need formal training in the art of making films (i.e. going to a film school) in order to be successful film critics? Or should they just write what the feel in response to the film they are seeing?
2. In a lot of your reviews, you always seem to mention what fellow film critic Bosley Crowther thought about a certain film and then attacked his opinion. What was it about him that made you so spiteful towards him?
3. In 1985, there was this sort of mini controversy surrounding the 1985 documentary Shoah. A few members of the National Society of Film Critics and New York Film Critics wanted to name it Best Picture, but you fought them on it and said that it would be better suited to the Best Documentary. You got your way, but the Shoah supporters were pissed and pretty much claimed you were anti-Semitic. What was it about this film that you think made the lovers act this way?
4. You love movies that have violence for a purpose, very unusual for a "lady reviewer" of your day. What is it about these types of films that you enjoy?
5. What do you think of the state of cinema today? What films from the past couple of years do you think are the best?

4. When all is said and done, select six bloggers to send this meme along to. Link back to Lazy Eye Theatre, so that people know the mastermind behind this meme.
Everyone I know has already done this or has been tagged, so I'm going to skip this last part. Sorry!

Rants on "Heights"

Okay, so Chris Terrio's Heights is hardly what I would call a masterpiece: the plotting is overly-contrived, the directing is fairly one-note, the characters could have been drawn out a bit more and nearly everything else feels like it has been done before. But it did, however, have some really fine moments- namely every time Glenn Close appears on screen and a couple of scenes featuring James Marsden- that prevented it from a becoming an outright disaster.

The film starts off with some unimportant extras reciting a scene from some Shakespearian play with all the energy and talent of a hibernating bear before Diana (Glenn Close), drama teacher and widely-respected actress, bursts on the stage, admonishes them for not letting the words speak for themselves and then verbally accosts society for not being as mad as hell and not taking it anymore. The example she just happens to mention is finding out your significant other is having an affair and then just going on with your day, possibly crying, without really confronting the person. Now, was it just me, or did anyone else see from a mile away that Diana's husband was going to cheat on her somewhere over the course of the film and that she would react just like she told her students not to? I couldn't have been the only one.

The film then cuts to Isabel (Elizabeth Banks), who happens to be Diana's daughter, and Jonathan (James Marsden).

Well, good morning Mr. Marsden.

They are planning their upcoming wedding and, except for what could be interpreted as pre-wedding stress, they seem to be happy and comfortable together. But, as with many movies of this nature, we know that everything is not as it seems and a whole shit storm is about to errupt.

Two other subplots unfold later on: One involves Alec (Jesse Bradford, of Bring it On fame), a struggling actor who auditions for Diana's off-Broadway play. After monotonously reciting this ridiculous monologue that made Diana Scarwid's God-awful interpretation of Antigone in Mommie Dearest look impressive, Diana goes crazy for him and starts having a conversation with him. It turns out that, surprisingly, he lives a couple floors above Isabel and Jonathan and yet they had never met. Crazy, I know; that is some coincidence. But as I was watching this scene, I think the following shots explain what I was feeling.

Yes, Jesse Bradford is that dull in this role. Boy am I glad, however, that Glenn Close is there to liven everything up and show this kid what acting is all about. She runs circles around him and like the alpha dog, pees on Bradford to show him who's in charge. It's much like Meryl Streep's scenes in Rendition where, on separate occasions, she basically tells Jake Gyllenhaal and Peter Sarsgaard "Don't fuck with me fellas! I'm Meryl motherfucking Streep."

The other subplot involves a writer who has to write something about the models of his supposed photographer lover's male subjects. Apparently, they all think he's a prick and...yawn. I'm getting bored just writing it out. Let's just say that the only (loose) connection this plot has to this film is that Jonathan modeled for this photographer and possibly had a sexual affair with him when he was younger.

More shit goes down as the night progresses: Diana's husband is (shockingly!) having an affair and she (surprisingly!) cries and goes on with her day. Isabel's pesky wedding interferes with a potentially great opportunity. Jonathan responds to the author's calls and tells him that he is preventing the homoerotic photos of him from being displayed. Alec gives up the chance to go to Diana's party in order to meet with some mysterious lover about potentially ending the relationship or something.

There was this great scene where Isabel is going to return Alec's coat after he left it at Diana's theater and she puts the coat on. When Jonathan sees this, he goes a little insane/jealous and insists she take it off. Isabel taunts him and then he throws her against the wall and they have the most angry make out sessions I have since Brokeback Mountain and A History of Violence (coincidentally, all three movies were released in 2005). It might have led to equally angry sex, but Diana calls and leaves a message on the answering machine, cockblocking Jonathan to no avail.

The final scenes are where a lot of Heights' problems come out into the open. If you plan on seeing this movie, then you might not want to read this because there are a few spoilers (although if you don't give a shit, then, by all means, go ahead and keep going).

Remember that mysterious person that Alec was supposed to meet instead of going to Diana's party? Well, it turns out that it was Jonathan. And what do you know, they are having an affair together.



Marsden plays this scene wonderfully in a Jake Gyllenhaal in Brokeback I-need-you-or-I'm-going-to-die sort of way. But my problems with this revelation are this:

• Why does Jonathan have to hide his homosexuality? He isn't ultra-religious or anything, he doesn't seem to be under the scrutiny of disapproving parents and this isn't 1950. I can see him maybe not dating because he's ashamed or whatever, but does he really have to fake a relationship with Isabel?
• Why is Alec with this closet-case? Does he have that little self-confidence that he can't find a man who's not attached to a woman? From the brief glance we get into their relationship, it seems that a lot of their time together (which is only one night a week) is spent fighting about Jonathan's relationship with Isabel.

Of course, Isabel catches them in the act and wildly proclaims "Now I have a reason to leave" (or something to that affect). For some reason this phrase stuck with me and after thinking for awhile, I realized that it reminded me of that famous Pauline Kael essay "The-Come-Dressed-as-the-Sick-Soul-of-Europe Parties." There is this section in which she's discussing Antonioni's La Notte and how miserable the two leads are together and she wonders why, if they are so unhappy together, they remain together? Nothing is keeping them together. The same can be applied to Isabel and Jonathan. Isabel could have left long along if she was not happy instead of remaining with this "dead shark" (as Woody Allen put it).

And the ending where Alec takes back Jonathan really left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Alec was being such a, for lack of a better word, pussy by opening the door and basically saying "I am okay that I was the other woman all while you were with Isabel and now that she's dumped your ass, you're running back to me." There's no guarantee that this relationship will ever work (more likely than not it won't) but that glimmer of hope is annoying.

Overall, Heights is a decent enough movie with some first-rate acting from Close and, at times, Marsden, but too much of it is hampered by the weak script. And it's a shame, because a great film could have emerged from this beautiful mess.

My Rating: ** 1/2