Top 5 Favorite Comic Performances

5. Rick Moranis - GhostBusters
4. Jack Black - School of Rock
3. John Candy - Planes, Trains, & Automobiles
2. Owen Wilson - Bottlerocket
1. Val Kilmer - Real Genius

Man On Wire

90% of Man On Wire was recreated with actors and sets. They’re not meant to be the real thing but rather represent the real thing and yet the documentary plays like a thriller. The first twenty minutes are cut and narrated as if a conspiracy of murder is about to take place. However it is soon revealed that the event in question is really just an elaborate prank not meant to hurt or embarrass but to awe and inspire.

Petit Phillippe is a high wire walker who believes that in 1974, the world trade center towers were being created for him to walk between. He watches as they are constructed and eagerly awaits his chance to fulfill his dream. It’s interesting to see how, for Petit, the world revolves around him but not in an egotistical way. It’s obvious that Petit does his high wire acts for other people to enjoy but he also sees the world as a sort of playground for him to do what he wants.

I saw this film at Sundance in 08 and it’s no wonder why it won the audience choice award. Phillippe tells much of his own story in a close up interview and he tells it as if he still has not come down off the high of it (pun intended). A Documentary's success is heavily based the director's vision or the editor's skills. Man On Wire is somewhat cinematic but I think it's Petit's storytelling that makes it great.

The film challenges you to be original, daring, and enjoy life. To most of us, Petit’s hobby is silly and ridiculous but to him it is serious and by the end of this film, he will convince you that nothing is silly and ridiculous.

The Son

I was reminded of this film by Drew's post about Baghead. I haven't seen baghead, and the duplass brothers seem like they would annoy me. But maybe not. Anyway, this is definitely a film worth checking out. It's an unconventional mystery/revenge thriller. Shot like a documentary, handheld, with only a 50mm lens (i.e. no telephoto or wide angle shots), and with no coverage. The only editing is between scenes or locations or gaps in time. Something about the way this is done, and how our view is limited is so intense and unpredictable. I would love to try making a film like this. But you'd have to have some seriously good actors to pull it off.

Mermaid Tails

1. Weta, who did the special effects for Lord of the Rings, is a great company. Pixar great. This is a quick read but absolutely worth it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4839818/Disabled-woman-given-mermaid-tail-to-help-her-swim.html

Baghead

There’s a fine line between being scared out of your mind and laughing your head off. At first thought it would seem that these two expressions of emotions would be at opposite ends of the spectrum but in fact they are very nearly separated. If you’ve seen a good horror movie in the theater you know this because the audience gasps in horror and then laughs afterward as a way of releasing tension. The Duplas brothers’ want to exploit this phenomenon with their new mumblecore film, Baghead.

The majority of scripts coming out of the beginning screenwriting classes at both USC and UCLA are about one of two things: either they are about making films or about people with OCD. Baghead treads on the former making it a better festival movie than anything else.

PLOT:
After seeing an awful independent film, four adults set out to a cabin in the woods to write and shoot a feature film in one weekend. Strange things begin to happen and they try to incorporate these events into their script.

The movie starts out strong with some good comedic propulsion in the first act. The characters are given motivations and a context to exercise them in. Between the first and second act the film begins to take on a Charlie Kaufmen like quality…maybe something thrown away from Adaptation. But then it wallows in this strange place where the character seem less interested in what they had set out to do then in playing jokes on each other. I became less interested too. The third act picks up again as it begins to resolve some of the questions hanging in the air. However it never really pays off in any way and maybe reaching for realism over structure is a mumblecore staple. If this is the case then why borrow the conventions of a thriller's structure to start the film and leave them out to finish it.

I’m no expert on mumblecore but it seems that the movement freely borrows from conventional Hollywood only to make the statement that they don’t need the conventions of a Hollywood film and certainly not the budget. Their hearts in the right place and I do think the Duplas brothers are excellent at getting genuine performances and taking those performances from something we recognize to something downright uncomfortable. It’s this authentic quality that makes them interesting (see Puffy Chair). They never seem to know how to get back from the uncomfortable and maybe they don’t want to. They enjoy leaving a slightly bitter taste in your mouth. I think they want the audience to feel smart and not betrayed by manipulative conventions. Baghead is effective at being comedic and scary at times but otherwise pretty forgettable.

Last Chance Hoffman

Harvey is a commercial jingle writer. While his career choice could be mined for much comedy gold, writer/director Joel Hopkins chooses not to. So why else make him a commercial jingle writer? Maybe there is something shallow and detached about commercial jingles that represent how Harvey lives his life. I would love to meet a real commercial jingle writer but for none of the reasons explored in this movie. Emma Thompson is an airport interviewer for a British agency named Kate Walker. I think the only reason is perhaps so Harvey can go looking for her in a crowded place at a key moment in the film.

The movie takes about a half hour to get going which leaves about an hour of good material. This is a simple plot of guy gets girl, guy loses girl, guy gets girl. The audience should hope they get together but fear they won’t. That romantic tension dynamic will keep them in their seats. It's not that the movie has to follow this but that it wants to and doesn't, but nobody told the composer this. The film is scored as if we are already invested and sold on this relationship.

Harvey doesn’t do much but stare at Kate. They never make a connection that is really worth pursuing at least on screen. That fact that he's much older and shorter than she is puts him in the underdog category but not every underdog is worth cheering for. There is one touching moment when Harvey swallows his pride and makes a sweet gesture at his daughter's wedding. Perhaps this is the moment when Kate finds him attractive but but we're never really clued into this, in fact she tries to leave the party.

Somewhere near the last half hour, the film begins to get to some real issues. There is a great scene where Emma Thompson finally expresses her real fear of getting into the relationship and it’s very legitimate. But it never has as much impact as it should because there is no hint of this feeling early on in the film and it comes as a surprise more than a release of tension.

This film is simple, sweet, and enjoyable but if you’re a long time Hoffman fan, you’ll keep wondering when he’s going to do something really interesting and he never does. Maybe he was trying a less is more approach or maybe the script just didn't have enough for him to do. Both Hoffman and Thompson give good performances in fact they were both nominated for Golden Globes. But this not a comedy of manners, it's a love story and it demands more than good acting.

Hoffman hasn’t done a lead role in several years. Maybe this was his last chance to do a romantic film and he took it and didn't look back. If that is true, then it explains why he was drawn to this role, and maybe why Harvey is drawn to Kate.

L'enfant

It doesn't take long to figure out who "the infant" is in this powerful film by Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne. Jérémie Renier plays Bruno, a petty thief who lives moment to moment selling whatever he can get his hands on and then immediately spending the money on whatever catches his eye. He's completely impulsive, selfish, and childlike. He only places value in his own immediate needs.

But Bruno has a love in his life - Sophie. And the love they share is the one force pulling against his persistent selfishness. And then there's their nine day old baby - Jimmy. The weight of this fact has not settled on Bruno in any real way. To him, their child is like a novelty item - linked to the owners only by material possession. So naturally, when the situation presents itself, Bruno sells young Jimmy on the black market to an adoption ring for a hefty sum.



This isn't much of a spoiler as this plot point is used on the back of the DVD in a summary of the film. The film isn't about this one event as much as it is about an immature and highly flawed person realizing the weight of his sin and desperately trying to claw his way toward redemption.

The direction and acting were amazing (notice the music as well). This is the type of film that gets me excited about watching more movies (there are many that do the opposite).