The Movie Club Redux, Part 13: Shortcuts to the Mindless Mouth-Breathers

TO: Boltron, Tavis, Levi
FROM: Lin
RE: Selling Stupid

I'll start off by mentioning a little something that, while off-topic, might allow everyone the opportunity to dismiss everything I say hereafter. And I say, Bring on your dismissal! I'm a man, I can take it! (sniffs quietly inside). So, my first exposure to the Indiana Jones movies was seeing the third one on cable (wasn't River Phoenix in that one? That's probably why I watched it). I thought it was fine, I don't really remember it. Much later, after college, I watched Raiders on video and thought, "Meh, what's all the fuss about? I'm probably just too old for this now." The one thing I remember was the duel scene, where Indy pulls out his gun and shoots the other guy, and I thought, Well, that's funny and everything, but that pretty much sums up my problem with this movie. It takes short cuts and it's smug about them. Now that that's become the template (along with Star Wars) for movies of almost any genre, I can accept it as a harbinger of where things were headed. But I don't have to like it (speaker sports a curmudgeonly pouting lower lip).

On a slightly related note, Tavis, you write, "I love mindless entertainment — it's just a shame that so much of it is made for mouth-breathers." Well, technically, it's ALL made for mouth-breathers, as they are, by definition, mindless. Mindless entertainment isn't made for smart people. Sure, smart people can enjoy it from time to time (I certainly have my favorites), but your complaint is kind of like saying, "Well, I like vegetables, but I don't see why so many vegetarians have to eat them." When you guys ask why big-budget movies have become so stupid, it's because we keep paying to see them! Levi, you mentioned giving up on the Pirates of the Caribbean series despite an interest in seeing "how it finishes." How what finishes? These things aren't designed to finish, they barely even start. I will admit to seeing the first "installment," so I am equally guilty of paying into the Dumb Hollywood Down hedge fund, but as I recall, it was just 2.5 hours of cinematic time-marking, like running in circles or watching wallpaper peel. And you can argue that you won't know it sucks until after you've bought your ticket, but I say, 9 times out of 10, yes you can. They're sold stupid, it's what you go in paying for, they don't claim to be well thought-out or challenging, quite the opposite. And I also maintain that the ones that are good, the "mindless" entertainments that I believe Tavis is referring to, ARE intelligently made. Raiders is a good example of that, an escapist entertainment that is well-crafted and smartly executed, my reservations about the material aside.

Tavis: Darjeeling's on my Favorites of the Year list, and I'm disappointed to see it's not on others, primarily because I think it's a big movie, bigger than Life Aquatic (which I also loved, but maybe not as much), and way bigger than any of his other movies. In terms of themes, character development, sense of place, I think it's a new direction for Wes Anderson and I think it's unfortunate that so many critics have trouble seeing past his (admittedly attention-grabbing) production design. But there were some big ideas wrapped into that production design (beyond the luggage), and a lot of history and a lot of sadness. Those people are really trying to get outside of themselves, a new topic for Wes, and I think it shows that he's maturing into a deeper filmmaker. I hope it continues.

And I never answered your other question about scripts. I don't really read them. I probably should but, well, I don't. Mostly because I would only consider reading them after watching the movie, and then it feels like going backward. Do you guys usually read scripts before watching the movie? (Sounds like you do.) Does that ever get in the way of watching the movie, or does it enhance it?

Boltron: Sondheim's notoriously unhummable. That's kind of the running joke about him. And they slowed down the songs so you could actually hear what people were saying, which I appreciated. But sadly, I have nothing to counter your argument with. I had a great time at that movie.

Speaking of great times: I saw The Savages this weekend, and it shoots right up onto my list. In fact, it was so freaking well done, I'm a little pissed it's not getting more attention. I think the problem is that we expect a certain amount of perfection from people like Laura Linney and Philip Seymour Hoffman, and so when they deliver it AND make it look so easy, it's more a confirmation than a surprise and no eyebrows are raised. But MY GOD they're good, as is the entire cast, and the writing is almost beyond reproach. Also, it was so nice (much like with You Can Count On Me) to watch a movie on a subject I'd never seen addressed before. Several subjects in fact, and I also wish THAT got a little more notice. Sure, I love No Country, but I've seen the struggle between lawmen and one-off vigilante crazy-asses before, many many times, and the same goes for There Will Be Blood, Before The Devil, all those movies. I love a tight construction as much as the next person (no comment) but it should count for a lot when a movie navigates into more uncharted territory. Especially when it's done with such grace and fearlessness.

As for No Country, I don't think it matters what exactly happened at the end. The thing I love about that movie is that, beginning with Llewellyn's death, none of the remaining murders are committed on camera. In a story that would ordinarily escalate into a bloodbath, the Coens stop showing you the blood, because they've got something bigger on their minds. The movie ceases to be about who did what to whom (and all of this may be a cover-up for the fact that I personally lost track), and becomes, like any good Western, about the descent into lawlessness and the fragile mortality of America's better angels. Also, for me, the tension gets ratcheted up every time they DON'T show someone getting killed, because you don't get the cathartic release of a gunshot, the movie just keeps getting quieter and quieter until you're left trapped in a tight shot with the face of a lost and broken old man. What's happening with the plot and the bad guy has been pushed off-screen in favor of what's happening inside this one man's heart.

Whew, I think I've gone on for long enough! Feel free to fire back at me.