BBD Comments:
Aaah, Charlie Kaufman.
He is such a unique writer. Not only do I admire him and his cunning whimsy a great deal, I feel a kinship with his chosen craft. Kaufman, as I have done from time to time, writes one man shows. While this is much more apparent in the equally brilliant, if somewhat less fulfilling ‘Adaptation.,’ it is true of ‘Being John Malkovich’ as well. This film is about identity, and specifically I believe it to be about Kaufman’s identity.
Much like Craig Schwartz, Kaufman is a puppeteer. He manipulates the idea of people and relationships into a concoction that is searing in it humor and almost overwhelming in its depth. If there is a downside to Mr. Kaufman’s form, it is that he indeed is writing a one man show. The differences between the characters on the page seem slight indeed. They all conform to the bizarre and fascinating logic of Kaufman’s creative mind. As I have heard Wiener complain about Aaron Sorkin’s ‘The West Wing,’ it is as though the characters all speak with the same voice.
But there is little to complain about in this wonderful film. Spike Jonze’s direction seems effortless and fun. He labors very little on “selling” the high concepts at work in the film, and even the magnificent set-pieces are grounded and never smack of over-indulgence. Jonze has passed this aesthetic on to his excellent ensemble and many of them (particularly Cameron Diaz) turn in the finest performances of their careers.
While the space was still cramped, and we were still indoors, I had more fun at 7850 than I did the week before. As much as I long to get back outside, I now feel that the experience in my joint is still worth the trouble.
‘Being John Malkovich’ was a fitting choice for our new temporary home. The cramped environment of the 71/2th floor seemed to feel Movienight’s current pain of living without a Back Yard. I was sorry for Netti being stuck on the floor, but perhaps the scarcity of seats will encourage our recidivsistic late comer to mend his ways and show up a little bit earlier next week.
Who’d a thunk we’d make it to 75 picks? I sure didn’t. But man, has it been a lot of fun getting here. I hope if Nubs holds his place in the rotation all the way to our 100th pick he goes a little further in terms of celebrating the occasion. It also might be nice if he took a little trash with him on the way out the door.
Onwards.
Brandon Comments:
Films like ‘Being John Malkovich’ are the sole reason that I consider movies to be looked at as art. Where else could we find a plot about a puppeteer who gets a job on the 7 ½ floor of a building, only to find a portal into Malkovich’s mind? What novel or stage play or painting could take us to this place? Not one, at least not so well.
Aside from this being an entertaining film with great performances by its actors, ‘Being John Malkovich’ is also a lesson in existentialism: Who are we? What is the soul? What is life? Are we all connected somehow? This film is a journey into madness and multiple personalities, religion, love, and eternity – it questions the very fabric of a higher power, of a god, of heaven. And it does it well…very well.
The tight quarters in Tooda’s crib definitely reflected in the 7 ½ floor angle of the film – very clever, Nubs. And the dark and creepy vibe of the movie drew me in and took me to a place that I haven’t been to in a while. But this film also brings up a good point that Tooda and I argued about after it aired: What constitutes a “Slam Dunk” of a film? To me, I would rather watch an obscure gem of a film that I had never seen before (or hadn’t seen in a long time), even if it’s not an Official “awesome” Selection. I would rather see a strange and weird film that never bleeped too brightly on the radar as opposed to a genuine “classic” film. We can always watch a classic film; we all know they are called a classic for a reason. But it’s rare when you can sit down with friends and be treated to an odd film, or a film you have never seen before, and examine a piece of art that the SELECTOR finds so beautiful. That, to me, is the beauty of Movienight: not to just watch great films on the Stucco or the widescreen, but to watch pieces of the SELECTOR’s heart and soul…to sit for two hours and watch a piece of cinema that was chosen for that night. To me, the SELECTOR plays the part of Morpheus or Morfeo: the god of dreams. The SELECTOR becomes the artist who paints our dreams for the night – sometimes they’re bad dreams, sometimes lovely dreams, and sometimes strange and surreal dreams…but who are we to judge these dreams. We are merely spectators to this new world for a short time.
Nubs, great choice! You were an excellent Dream Operator on Wednesday night, and I happily took that journey to StrangeVille on your recommendation.
Buffy Comments:
I feel this Nubs’/Buck’s pick was one of the finest films I’ve seen. Excellently written, fun to watch, keeps ya guessing. A note of thanks to all for the consideration going around that evening, setting me up with ottoman, cigs, bob, chocolate, cookies…Johnnie G. and Netti get the special award for snack-run excellence…
I confess that something about last Movienight didn’t sit well with me, though I don’t know what it is exactly. So I’m going to sit with that feeling for a while and see what gives. I’m sure it’s just me. Below are the thoughts I could piece together, I seem to just be repeating in my head things we discussed in person that night and would rather not write them down, except for how cool I think it is still that I only saw 15 minutes of this movie previously. I love shit like that. Anyway, what happened to my reality? If you find it, let me know.
*This movie reminded me of ‘My Dinner with Andre,’ can’t you see Andre discovering a portal and this is the sequel?
*The training movie was probably the most perfect thing I’ve ever seen.
*I wish Cameron Diaz still had frizzy hair these days, and wasn’t always talking about how pretty she is rather than doing anything cool.
*John Malkovich is utterly awesome…
*I still think it was what’s-his-face in that shot of the big-time puppet master working Emily Dickinson. The psychic detective dude from ‘Boondock Saints.’
*I like when movies make me wanna cry a little, like those baby cries from deep down, and also make me laugh those little baby laughs. This pretty much did it. In the end I felt it was a little too clever (“clevah”), but hell, that’s like complaining about too much whipped cream. I would never do that.
Would this be a three-pointer? Thank you, Buck.
Coolbaugh Comments:
I thought it was funny, in hindsight, that Amy spent Nubs’ set-up time out on the 3 ½ floor. The roof over our head, as Nubs pointed out, was well timed for this pick. This was the first time I’d seen it, and I didn’t have any idea what it was about. But it grabs you early, and the quirky storytelling unfolds a surprisingly engaging tale…with really cool puppets. I kept saying, “nah…that ain’t a real puppet.” but I guess it is.
I know that I wanted to hop in that tunnel, especially when that chick from ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ (Catherine Keenan?) came over to Malkovich’s for some action. Mr. Schwartz, I don’t think I would lock my chick in a cage (especially if it was Cameron Diaz) while I went and fucked some other hot chick with somebody else’s dick, but I feel you, she was great. She really was the ultimate puppeteer that commanded the screen from early on, and she commanded the libido. And you, Schwartz, you almost got Cameron Diaz and her in a threesome in the process? Almost man, almost. Damn.
I kept trying to think of a deeper meaning that those whimsical little mind trips meant, but at the end, I tend to think it was just goofy fun. Not a lot of residue, but a great night in a great pad and, as always, there’s never one person there who I’m not happy to see.
Thanks for hosting Davis…good times.
Netti Comments:
I have not seen this film since I saw it twice in the theaters. It is rare that I would see something twice. It only happens about once every two years or so. This was one of them. I was struck by the largely handheld camerawork in this viewing whereas before I think I was more cognizant of the performances and the writing. The handheld camera work gave it a verite feel and gave the viewer the sense that their window into this reality could go anywhere at any moment which I think was appropriate to the content. There is a certain verbal and visual elan to this film, that I think makes for a very unpredictable and tongue-in-cheek lightness that complements well the moments of gravity. However, this does exceed its own intentions at times. There are moments that pushed too much or rather just technically could have been stronger. For instance, the lines given by the restaurant patron who speaks to Malkovich about his nephew, the retard. The patron says retard three times. After the second time we got it. The third time we were ahead of it. But I'm nitpicking. This film was fantastic.
As I looked at the Twin Towers from the Jersey Turnpike when Craig Schwartz is ejected from Malko's brain, it cemented a feeling that I had had throughout watching this film that this is definitely a pre-9/11 film. I feel that in someway this kind of adventure into the surreal was possible only in a time of cresting cultural self-satisfaction and complacency. Films like this and ‘Fight Club’ projected a feeling that some kind of boundary had to be tested, the envelope had to be pushed. I felt this personally when I viewed these films in the theater. I felt this when I created theater. I felt that there was a need to shake. To rattle. And in far off corners of the world others were thinking the same thing. However, their act of theater was the most effective I will ever witness. Perhaps it is all just coincidence. Perhaps it is just hindsight highlighting a particular progression of events out of the massive jumble, but I feel that these inclinations towards spasmodic iconoclasm in the late nineties were premonitory pre-flight movies. "Please direct your attention to the screen for a very important safety message." It makes me love artifice all the more. And more and more, fear it.
SELECTOR Comments:
‘Being John Malkovich’ was my favorite movie the year it came out. 1999 was a very significant and groundbreaking year for cinema. I didn’t see it a second time until recently this past year and now with this, my third viewing, I can truly say it gets better each time. Of course, every movie is better in the Movienight forum but this is such a dense, rich, cleverly layered cake of a film that the each viewing unravels new joys.
With the first viewing I, as most audiences, was grasping on to reality and classic narrative. Though, I laughed throughout I kept waiting for all the nonsense to be explained away somehow. I remember leaving the movie theater trying to put together all the theories of time travel, human portals, eternal life, and the subconscious mind. As Craig, our hero turned anti-hero asks, “It raises all sorts of philosophical questions about the nature of self, about the existence of the soul. Am I me? Is Malkovich Malkovich? Was the Buddha right, is duality an illusion? Do you see what a metaphysical can of worms this portal is?” The first half of the movie is so outrageous that one hopes their intelligence will be as stimulated as their senses by the end. Like the film’s characters, once the portal is discovered the possibilities are endless for the audience. It’s an exhilarating movie experience.
The absurdity of the story and the breakneck pace are why multiple viewings serve the theme. As the movie progresses, the audience learns to turn off the Craig/artist part of ourselves that questions why, and to take advantage like Maxine, the opportunist. Like Maxine, we accept that it exists and instantly begin exploiting it for our amusement. The plot turns happen so fast that by the time Dr. Lester pulls out his book of explanations its not near as important as what crazy thing could happen next. It is why ‘Being John Malcovich’ succeeds where ‘Adaptation.’ does not - because the characters and plot drive the cleverness and absurdity of the theme rather than the writer forcing the characters in a direction to make his point.
In terms of execution, the direction, the performances, and the score are all brilliant. Kudos to Spike Jonze for casting Cameron Diaz off-type as a plain wet blanket. It is easily the best performance of her career. In acting we talk of finding “discoveries”. The genuine excitement of Lottie’s discovery of herself is amazing to watch as an acting study. John Malkovich’s work playing himself is in congruence with all of the other characters who inhabit him is worth noting as well.
I had forgotten how breathtaking the score was. Whatever minor complaints I had with the brightness of Wednesday’s showing, Tooda’s surround sound was kickin’. I’m ashamed to admit my ignorance, but I didn’t know Carter Burwell’s extensive repertoire. I kept thinking, “I haven’t been this moved by a score since ‘Hudsucker Proxy.’ I didn’t realize it was the same artist. The same composer that gave me ‘Raising Arizona’s hilarious score among others, was responsible for this fine score as well.
Besides his excellent work with the actors, Spike Jonze’s cinematic ingenuity remains ahead of its time. Elijah the chimp’s flashback should be enough to illustrate the balls-out approach he uses to such great effect. He manages to get a lot of Hollywood icons on board with a truly wacky, unique bit of filmmaking. My only complaint is in the flash forward where he uses the television broadcast to wrap up the exposition of eight months of character growth. The device itself I understand in order to keep up the overall pace, I just never believe that a television retrospective would tell us about the subject’s growing indifference with his spouse. It’s a small complaint but it sticks out.
When I coincidentally waited on Spike Jonze and his new love Drew Barrymore at my restaurant last Friday, I already knew I’d be showing his gem. I wished I could invite him, or had asked him to explain some things about the film. I really wished that he had paid the bill rather than his friend so I could get at least a 20% tip. Alas modesty required I remain known to him as merely a waiter. He may never know my true identity as a Member of Movienight, that elite organization which spins the wheels of Hollywood far more than the more widely credited “Gay Mafia.” Perhaps he will become Movienight’s Myspace friend and realize our gratitude (and power).
_112_Minutes_files/shapeimage_5_link_0.png)