Friday, 10 December 2010

Lifestyles of the rich and famous: "Somewhere"

Is it just me, or are actors growing more self-aware as a species with each passing year? Last year's The Wrestler found Mickey Rourke more or less perfectly at home in the role of a washed-up coulda-been clinging desperately to his memories of the roar of the crowd, and hoping beyond hope in his heart for a comeback, one last shot at a title, whether a regional championship belt or an actual Academy Award. Now, in Sofia Coppola's Somewhere, we find Stephen Dorff - of all people - playing a jaded movie star who looks rather to have lost his bearings, in life as much as in his career. Either those casting agents are really earning their money these days, or in both cases the actors involved are smarter than they look.

We learn almost everything we need to know about Dorff's indolent Johnny from two extended shots that make up Somewhere's opening five minutes. In the first, we watch the actor driving his black Ferrari round and round in circles in the desert, the activity of a man with - as the song suggests - no particular place to go. Next, we observe Johnny falling asleep in his Chateau Marmont suite, despite the presence of a pair of twin blonde freelance poledancers (they bring their own fold-up poles) whose bookings are presumably going to see a 250% increase as a result of their appearance in the film.

In other words, Somewhere might be considered the The Stephen Dorff Story, so closely do our assumptions about the actor's Hollywood lifestyle (however inaccurate they may be) mesh with what comes to unfold on screen. In the film's third shot, which is close as Coppola will come to outright action, Johnny stumbles down a hotel staircase under the influence of who-knows-what, breaking his wrist in the process; it's the first of several developments that threaten to snap the character out of this most Californian of funks.

For starters, there are the abusive text messages Johnny keeps picking up - a 21st-century update of those anonymous vitriolic postcards Tim Robbins' studio chief was bombarded with in Altman's The Player. More promising is the reappearance in Johnny's life of his teenage daughter (Elle Fanning), the product of a long-dissolved relationship, whom he finds waiting patiently for him outside his suite as he sets out on publicity duties for his last film and pre-production for the next - the actor's own equivalent of being between addresses. Johnny is characterised throughout as one who drifts: if he keeps nodding off, it's because the boundary between his real life and what anyone else would consider a dream lifestyle is here displayed to be thin indeed.

For all that Coppola - as the daughter of the man who gave the world the Godfather movies - has been born into this lifestyle, you sense she still grasps just how unreal this kind of life is: the parties that break out of nowhere, the endless random blondes offering themselves up to her protagonist, the ability to order all the ice cream on a room service menu, for shits and giggles; the fact Johnny gets driven around between appointments, as though on his own private cloud; that he has to submit, on an irregular basis, to having his face covered in moulding plaster (as an effects aid) and then wakes up to see an old man looking back at him in the mirror; that, indeed, he gets paid astronomical sums for doing all of this.

That a-word may be crucial, for what keeps Somewhere's analysis on the star system from lapsing into complete and terminal indulgence is - as it was in Lost in Translation, and again when Coppola appeared to transplant the court of Marie-Antoinette into an all-American high school - the filmmaker's decision to couch the lives of these landed few as a sunny form of science-fiction, detailing a West Coast equivalent of what for most of us would be unimaginable. For the flooded basements of Solaris and Stalker, Somewhere proposes five-star hotel rooms with their own en-suite swimming pools; for the gleaming space-stations of 2001, it swaps the set of an Italian awards ceremony; and for the curious civilisations of faraway planets, the film takes a trip to Vegas, which seems an acceptable substitute, all things considered.

Ironically, the film's Golden Lion at Venice - handed over by jury president Quentin Tarantino - suggests Coppola has made a film her Hollywood pals can hardly fail to recognise themselves in. Just as Lost in Translation featured Anna Faris as a scarcely concealed Cameron Diaz impersonation, putting the moves on the lead character's hubby, so too Somewhere spies in its party sequences dead ringers for Chloe Sevigny and Benicio del Toro, even before del Toro himself materialises alongside Dorff in the Chateau Marmont lift, which could just be a coded reference to an incident that may or may not have taken place between the actor and Scarlett Johansson at the time of Lost in Translation's release.

The cast are similarly encouraged to play versions of themselves, rather than other people. Fanning is a curious, precocious, multi-tasking teenager, at home with the Sudoku grid, the games console and the egg-poacher alike; her Cleo someone who's been obliged to adapt by this lifestyle, to look after herself in the absence of much in the way of hands-on parenting. Jackass's Chris Pontius is hardly stretched here as a lank-haired hanger-on and purveyor of off-colour remarks about female tennis players. We should, however, credit Dorff for investing Johnny with remnants of boyish, quizzical charm: the characteristics of someone who isn't quite there, but trying his darnedest whenever possible to be - as we might expect from an actor who's been at the fringes of this life for so long now.

The film is undeniably slight - it is, above and beyond all else, an L.A. story, which means any depth is inevitably illusory - and slips into outright tweeness when Dorff and Fanning begin gambolling around by the pool. But it's a sweet one, and finally very human in its quest for connection: yes, there's a lot of insider business going on, but I think the rest of us will recognise a degree of commonality in the sequence where father and daughter, having just checked into their Italian hotel, sprawl on the bedspread watching dubbed episodes of Friends - just because it's on, and because the faces, if not the words, are comfortingly familiar. This scene, like many others in Somewhere, feels like the work of a filmmaker whose still sometimes shaky feel for narrative propulsion matters less than her acute grasp of the delicacies of mood, character and place; far from the daddy's girl she was formerly dismissed as being, Coppola is coming to seem increasingly like a Claire Denis training bra.

Somewhere opens in selected cinemas today.

Fieldwork: "Enemies of the People"

Compared to the wall-to-wall dissection of the Nazi project in certain outlets, the atrocities committed by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in the late 1970s remain woefully under-documented. Yes, the events were brought to wider attention by the David Puttnam-produced The Killing Fields, but there's been very little in the cinema since, with the exception of Rithy Panh's sober, deliberately pedantic documentary S21 (2003), which adopted the working methods of Claude Lanzmann's seminal Holocaust document Shoah, and sought to set out the very nuts and bolts of the Cambodian genocide - the framework that made conceivable such mass slaughter.

Enemies of the People, co-directed by Rob Lemkin with Thet Sambath, follows the progress of a far more personal undertaking. Every weekend for almost a decade in the 2000s, Sambath - senior reporter for the Phnom Penh Post - left his family home in the city to travel into the country and speak with Nuon Chea, former right-hand man to Pol Pot. For Sambath - whose father died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, obliging his mother to marry a militia who threatened to kill the rest of her family if she refused him - it's clear this is his own private battle to get closer to the truth of Pol Pot's regime.

Chea, for his part, strikes a largely unrepentant figure, speaking of how the KR were finally undermined by "treacherous activities"; when he talks of ideology on camera, it's as though he's addressing his generals. For every step forward in Sambath's progress - getting Chea to admit on tape that if the KR "had shown mercy, the nation would have been lost", thus acknowledging at least an awareness of the killings - there follows a step back. Confronted by images of Saddam Hussein's execution, an event that sparks renewed public interest in bringing the Khmer Rouge's own tyrants to justice, Chea's only lament is for "the fate of a patriot in an unjust society".

With two million Cambodians slaughtered, there had - by definition - to have been many slaughterers, a sizeable percentage of whom have thus far escaped prosecution for their actions. Whereas Nazi war criminals - many of whom had links to the aristocracy - could flee to South America as the net closed in in the years immediately following the War, the poverty-stricken footsoldiers of the Pot regime, chiefly farmers and labourers tied to the land, had nowhere else to run. It's this Sambath is relying upon when he visits some of these men in their homes, with the aim of recording their experiences to take back and show Chea as evidence of the human cost of KR policy decisions.

What we watch here is a gradual process of trust-gaining: Sambath sits down with these killers, eats with them, assures them they're unlikely to face prosecution while their superior officers remain at large, slowly working his way up and along the chain of command. He retrieves extraordinary, unforgettable detail. Two of the interviewees blithely discuss how they supped on human gall bladders in order to cool their own flesh amid the killing, literally making themselves cold-blooded; one footsoldier speaks - much as a tennis player or cricketer might of their chosen equipment - of how he came to change his grip on the knife he used after finding the alternatives uncomfortable: "I slit so many throats my hand hurt."

In places, Sambath's story threatens to get in the way of the bigger picture. There are framebreaking retreats to the journalist's video editing suite, when the material might have been better presented as filmed, and a little repetition creeps in towards the end, but otherwise this is a superior example of the documentary as collated testimony: a way of gathering together crucial oral history before its subjects can pass on - or a way for said subjects to get something off their chest and make peace with their past, perhaps easing the passage between this world and the next.

It builds to the inevitable moment where Sambath will confront Chea with the truth about his own murdered relatives, hoping for a response forged of the many hours the two men have spent in each other's company. Not to give anything away, but the outcome will depend on how you as a viewer interpret the older man's words and body language, which is perhaps why Lemkin cuts away to Sambath's camera resting atop a table shortly afterwards: what, we might wonder, was his co-director looking for? Revenge? Catharsis? A simple airing of truths, possibly: as Sambath confesses in the wake of this confrontation, "After I told [Chea] about my family, I felt better".

This weekend project has become a way of overturning decades of propaganda and lies: one of the footsoldiers Sambath interviews himself arrives at a similar conclusion. "Every time someone confesses, I feel better," he volunteers. "I want this documentary shown in the provinces, and in the cities, so the people who were killers in the regime will come forward and say 'Yes, I did that, too'." Enemies of the People leaves us with Chea being brought in from the wilderness in a police helicopter to face trial, and Sambath vowing to spend his days off from here on out among his family, starting a farm; on the killing fields of Cambodia, there are, at last, a few green shoots of hope.

Enemies of the People opens in selected cinemas today.

"On Tour" (Metro 10/12/10)

On Tour (15) 111 mins **

Best known to UK cinemagoers as a sprightly actor’s actor, in films like 2005’s Kings & Queen and this year’s Wild Grass, Mathieu Amalric has a growing rep in his native France as an actor’s director. In this curio, his third film in the chair, Amalric plays Joaquin, a tour manager dragging five burlesque dancers (and their multiple costume changes) around dingy venues on the French coast. Between rehearsals and gigs, he attempts to keep appointments of his own – with a furious brother (fellow director Damien Odoul), a hateful father, and the wife and sons he himself abandoned.

Though Amalric pays lip service to the New Burlesque ethos – that it allows women to take charge of their bodies – his dramatic subtexts remain generally patronising. While the boys sport black eyes and bruised emotions as badges of their seriousness, the girls – played with varying degrees of competence by real-life burlesquers – are employed as light relief: all hairspray and nipple-tassels, and no credible suggestion of any life beyond the footlights. Their live routines form the ramshackle highlights, but with none of the relationships going anywhere satisfying, the film’s low-key razzle-dazzle comes to seem vaguely suspect: like Showgirls with subtitles.

Monday, 6 December 2010

On DVD: "Erasing David"

The eye-catching, thought-provoking documentary Erasing David plays like a Morgan Spurlock project in thriller rather than comic mode. Piqued by a letter he received from the Government, informing him that some agency or another had mislaid his family's bank details, the documentarist David Bond wondered how much more of his essential information could be vanished into the ether. His plan was to go on the run across Europe for thirty days with a team of private investigators on his tail, obliged to go through his bins, access his Facebook page, etc. to see just what they could ferret out about his whereabouts. At the centre of this stunt is the recent growth in databases, an official form of the covert info-gathering once practised by certain oppressive historical regimes.

It is, undeniably, a somewhat self-serving exercise, allowing a previously unknown director the chance to play at being Jason Bourne; the title, not to mention the giant photo of Bond's face tacked to the wall of the PIs' office, serves notice of the filmmaker's desire to put into play not just his own life, but the lives of those around him, principally his seven months pregnant wife Katherine. Yet in doing so, Bond more successfully exploits the layer of personal tension mined by Spurlock in Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?; his inquiry is exactly that of someone concerned with what kind of world his children are going to grow up in, now we have biometric fingerprinting technology in our classrooms.

Some staginess and construction is evident: the paranoia Bond spirals into while off the map, dismantling his kit like Harry Caul in The Conversation and flailing in Blair Witch night vision when he finally retreats to the woods, is all too clearly (and, over the long run, monotonously) a performance. The film's strongest material is unfaked, and taps into the high anxiety of the age: while ducking his pursuers, Bond discovers the extent to which his favoured online retailers and service providers have documented his every move, not to mention several case studies of individual lives ruined by heinous data mismanagement. Aggressive lobbying by the private security sector, coupled with our administrators' nannying influences, have, we learn, combined to leave the UK the third biggest surveillance state behind China and Russia (who have form in this field) - and that's before we factor in ID cards.

Erasing David is avilable on DVD from today.

He's a brainiac: "Megamind"

With the market for multiplex 3D animation becoming as saturated as it is, it is, perhaps, inevitable the films should start to repeat themselves. DreamWorks' Megamind is one of two rival comedy animation projects to take up more or less where the final reel of the gold-standard The Incredibles left off. Despicable Me had Steve Carell and Russell Brand among its voice artists; this one has Will Ferrell, Tina Fey and Jonah Hill, plus Ben Stiller on board as producer. You pays your money, you pay a little bit extra for the glasses, you takes your choice.

A smart nature-versus-nurture prologue sets out the long-term rivalry between the two central characters. The title character, voiced by Ferrell, is a socially inept would-be evil genius with a domed forehead and a BluTack-like pallor who pronounces the name of his hometurf Metro City to rhyme with "atrocity". His arch-nemesis is the square-jawed, conventionally handsome Metro Man, a too-good-to-be-true caped crusader who, at the inauguration of the museum commemorating his life and works, juggles babies and comes to walk on water. (Inevitably, the character is voiced by Brad Pitt.)

This pair have been fighting so long that it was always likely Megamind was going to get one over his opponent - monkeys and typewriters and all that - but when he finally does vanquish Metro Man and assumes control of the city, he quickly gets bored of such unchallenged power. His solution is to manufacture an entirely new adversary - rechristening as Titan the formerly klutzy TV cameraman Kit (Hill) - only for the latter to prove harder to control than originally expected. Both, it turns out, have the hots for news reporter Roxanne Ritchi (Fey), a damsel so often kidnapped and rescued she's now practically impossible to wow. Critics will know how she feels.

Judging by its box-office receipts, Despicable Me contained enough cute stuff to go over big with young cinemagoers. Megamind skews demographically older, its reference points - Donkey Kong, Brando in the Superman films, AM radio favourites Minnie Riperton and ELO - extending seemingly beyond even teenagers with some knowledge of comedy and comic-book conventions. (All the same, the film's ideal viewer would perhaps count Spider-Man and Anchorman among their favourite films.) Though the storyline raises the vaguest hint of a free will-versus-determinism theme, mostly the impression is once again of skilfully (in places, very skilfully) rendered distraction. The design work, writing and Ferrell's typically unpredictable rhythms combine to make Megamind himself one of the more distinctive characters in this particular tsunami of animation, but the film as a whole can't think of anything to do with his relentless shapeshifting save to make us laugh.

Again, it's a regrettable inevitability that one should feel obliged to make the comparison with Pixar, but that's the marketplace these films enter into, and Megamind never quite does anything as moving or oddly profound with its antagonist as the Toy Storys did with Buzz Lightyear. The one death scene here is played strictly for laughs, and it ends with a dance sequence because that's what the filmmakers have seen a half-dozen or so other successful releases do. (Director Tom McGrath's prior credits include Madagascar, so in a sense he's only continuing a trend he began.) It's something of a shame, as the film's timing is pretty much immaculate elsewhere, the Ferrell-Fey influence making itself apparent in a number of throwaway gags worthy of the pair's live-action work: Metro Man's concealed musical ambitions, say, or the door in Megamind's lair marked EXIT ("It's short for exciting") that duly opens onto a dozen alligators snapping away beneath a glitterball.

Megamind is on general release.

Sunday, 5 December 2010

For what it's worth...

Top Ten Films at the UK Box Office
for the weekend of November 26-28, 2010:

1 (1) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (12A) **
2 (new) Unstoppable (12A) [above] ***
3 (new) London Boulevard (18) ***
4 (2) Due Date (15)
5 (new) The American (15) ***
6 (3) Despicable Me (U)
7 (new) The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest (15) **
8 (5) Jackass 3D (18) **
9 (4) Skyline (15) ***
10 (new) Machete (18) ***

(source: UK Film Council)

My top five:
1. Monsters
2. Of Gods and Men
3. Megamind
4. Waiting for "Superman"
5. London Boulevard


Top Ten DVD rentals
:

1 (4) The Karate Kid (PG) ***
2 (new) Toy Story 3 (U) ****
3 (9) How to Train Your Dragon (PG) ****
4 (1) Iron Man 2 (12) ***
5 (2) Disney's A Christmas Carol (PG) **
6 (3) Heartbreaker (PG) **
7 (5) The Blind Side (12) **
8 (6) The Ghost (15) **
9 (8) Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (12) **
10 (re) The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (18) ***

(source: lovefilm.com)

My top five:
1. White Material
2. Inception
3. The Sorcerer's Apprentice
4. Erasing David
5. Eclipse

Top five films on terrestrial TV this week:

1. The Shootist (Saturday, five, 3.10pm)
2. OldBoy (Wednesday, C4, 1.20am)
3. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Saturday, C4, 11.45pm)
4. Mrs. Doubtfire (Saturday, ITV1, 3.05pm)
5. Analyze This (Tuesday, ITV1, 10.35pm)

"Miral" (Metro 03/12/10)

Miral (12A) 112 mins **

Artist-turned-director Julian Schnabel won legions of new admirers with 2007’s The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, but the fanbase is unlikely to be bolstered by this turgid follow-up, a self-consciously respectable history piece undertaken not out of any urgency or relevancy, rather that it’s the sort of thing expected of a Serious Filmmaker. Colluding with novelist Rula Jebreal, Schnabel here awkwardly tacks together the experiences of four Palestinian women living in the Occupied Territories. It’s an hour before we meet the eponymous heroine, played by Slumdog’s Freida Pinto as a bright-eyed, L’Oreal-locked filly who skips from schoolgirl to political prisoner to published author without being observed writing a single word.

Schnabel uses the downtime to give his celebrity contacts a chance to show their support for the cause. Vanessa Redgrave hands round trays of entrees; Willem Dafoe shuffles on in army uniform, to no particular purpose; Miral’s guardian Hiam Abbass dons a Mrs. Merton-style granny wig. None of this can distract from the absence of credible Israeli characters, or the fact Miral never seems to have choices to make: Pinto’s altogether blithe progress is halted only so supporting characters can remark on her prettiness. Schnabel presumably intended this as a grand humanitarian gesture, but it’s an empty one, strangely bereft of drama and relentlessly uninteresting as cinema.