I expected to be completely bored by "Every Little Step," (2008). I have almost no interest in musicals, and even less of an interest in dancing. Since that's what the marketing for the film suggests, I didn't go into the theater thinking that I'd enjoy the content as much as I did. As art should be: it was very entertaining, despite my bias going in.
I suppose it's safe to say that this documentary has been thirty years in the making. It mixes original recordings from the planning stages of 1975's Broadway run of "A Chorus Line," and footage from the original production with revival auditions and production footage. The first half of the film relies almost entirely on what's spoken in the planning recordings. We hear original director Michael Bennett discussing very personal details of his life; in turn, those auditioning share their stories. What results is an incredibly close look into the heart of the story. Cliche? I know. But these recordings, accompanied by grainy archive footage of Michael Bennett interviews, expose the meaning of the film. The filmmakers (Deo and Stern) induce a feeling of nostalgia, but not the kind of nostalgia that hipsters cling to when in the midst of the ever-retro original Nintendo or ugly Ray-Bans. The almost black-and-white footage and the reel-to-reel are moving. I can't speak for everyone in the theater, but I know that I wish there had been more of this. It's not often that I find myself really caring for what the author of the book or song or show thinks. Even with film I try to distance myself from the writer/director while simultaneously combing IMDb and Wikipedia for any sort of revealing facts. Art should be able to stand alone; it is the reader/viewer that should give the piece meaning. With documentary, though, perhaps the expectation is a little different. The audience is supposed to care about what the creator thinks. In this particular case, we absolutely have to know what the authors and directors envisioned and what inspired them in order to be able to grasp fully the concept of this film and the musical to which it alludes. The audience has to know that the only thing the director cared about was doing what he wanted to do. The filmmakers mix in just enough drama to make the audience care, and they most certainly do.
But it's not flawless. I know, I started a sentence with "but." But I'm doing what I want to do, dammit! After the first half, the film wanes a bit. I found that far too much time was spent on the audition footage, especially for some of the performers who were ultimately not cast. I cannot understand why there needed to be as much time spent on the first round of auditions, or the second... What was more revealing were the final callbacks. And the star of the auditions is barely touched upon following his few minute stint. Jason Tam, who auditions for the gripping character Paul, performs so well that he brings the judges to tears... and then we don't see him again, save for a glimpse or two at the end. Clearly he had a big story to tell, but we don't see any of it. Instead we're bombarded in the second half with minute after minute after minute of extreme close up dancing that's no different than anything I could see on a weeknight on Fox, which is the greatest flaw. The filmmakers have to cater to an audience that is regularly exposed to "Dancing with the Stars," and "So You Think You Can Dance," and "Dance Your Ass Off." And so there has to be some resemblance to these shows in order for a greater group of people to give a shit. Which is unfortunate. More attention should have been focused on the roots of the play, on how all of the original ideas fell into place. But I suppose no movie is perfect.
Verdict: Pretty Stoked (For a movie about dancing).
Unfortunately, there was a dismal turnout compared to last week's screening of "The Class," (2008). Probably due to the abrupt change in scheduling, as 2008's "Soul Power," was dropped from the bill. Hopefully next week's Monday streets will be filled with flood water, and Potsdam will have nothing else to do but find refuge in the theater.
-E
Monday, September 28, 2009
Cinema 10 - 9/28/09
Tonight's showing is "Every Little Step," (2008) a documentary about the casting process involved for the revival of the musical, "A Chorus Line." Though I'm not big on musicals, this looks like it could be pretty interesting. Starts at 7:15 at the Roxy Theatre in Potsdam. Tickets are: $3.50 for students and seniors; $4.50 for General Admission. Hope to see you there.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Goodbye, Solo
I wish I had better things to say about this movie, because apparently everyone else on the planet does. I spent a fair amount of time researching Goodbye, Solo (2008) before I went to the theater to watch it, and I cannot recall having seen a negative review. Charlie Rose had the stars and director on for a twenty minute interview that left me Stoked out of my mind for this movie. Roger Ebert said that Ramin Bahrani was the new great American film maker. The film boasts a 7.5 on IMDb. While generally I'm a little wary of a critic's opinion - and herein lies the irony of this blog - I found myself accepting what they had to say. I decided that this movie was going to be fucking awesome, god dammit. But sadly, I literally fell asleep, and have since decided that Goodbye, Solo's folly was not necessarily present within the film, but was in fact the praise that it wrought. Like so many other films before it, Bahrani's was the victim of hype. ...Solo could not have possibly lived up to the praise that it was given before audiences were allowed to watch.
Bahrani says himself - just type the name into a YouTube search and voila! - that the film is an unconventional look at the impossible formation of a loving relationship. It is an unlikely friendship that forms between our protagonist, Solo (Savane), and his suicidal counterpart, William (West). It's suggested that the film is beautiful and deeply personal, while simultaneously presenting ideas that are difficult to comprehend. It prides itself, as do the critics, on its implementation of amateur actors that provide the film with a more realistic feel than your average Hollywood Blockbuster. I also caught wind of there being a strange parallel between the film's characters, and the actors who portray them. All that's fine and good, but what Bahrani seems to forget is that a film is first and foremost a form of entertainment. In order for your audience to be able to consider the message that you put forth, they must be entertained by it. This film failed to do so, almost wholly because of the hype that preceded it. Again, I literally fell asleep.
How this film may have affected me had I not been exposed to the mass of information available, I cannot say. Such an endeavor is pointless; I cannot separate myself from the hype surrounding it, and so I must say that the movie is mediocre at best. Few films can live up to the hype that precede them. I can think only of two offhand: The Dark Knight and District 9. Certainly there are others. But when you hear a review of a movie, you never hear that it's terrible. What the fuck would be the point in that? That would not get you Stoked about a movie at all. It's safe to say that one should be skeptical when going into a theater. Though I told myself to put the hype as far out of mind as possible when I sat down, I could not help but be let down. The principal actors were wonderful, especially when one considers that this was their starring premiere. The supporting cast, however, weighs down the film so much that it's hard to enjoy what the leads are doing. Bahrani also has placed, seemingly arbitrarily, a number of lingering shots that serve no purpose. The plot is less than remarkable, so much so that one must argue that the film is merely a character study in order to salvage some sort of credibility. That alone does not save it, though. While many things happen, they're never very interesting, and if they are, it's because they're unrealistic, which completely negates Bahrani's intention of being as true-to-life as possible.
Verdict: Not Stoked.
More importantly is that a million and a half people turned out to watch the movie, not all of whom were required to do so because of class obligations. Which is awesome. No matter what they thought, people still showed up and talked about the movie. Whether they were bitching, or raving, what's crucial is that they were discussing it. No matter what I thought of the movie, the fact that I watched something with people in my town means I had something to talk to them about. Which is always better and more productive than sitting around watching douchebags get makeovers on some reality show.
Ultimately, see the film for yourself and decide, but make sure you talk about it with someone after. Otherwise, what's the point?
Bahrani says himself - just type the name into a YouTube search and voila! - that the film is an unconventional look at the impossible formation of a loving relationship. It is an unlikely friendship that forms between our protagonist, Solo (Savane), and his suicidal counterpart, William (West). It's suggested that the film is beautiful and deeply personal, while simultaneously presenting ideas that are difficult to comprehend. It prides itself, as do the critics, on its implementation of amateur actors that provide the film with a more realistic feel than your average Hollywood Blockbuster. I also caught wind of there being a strange parallel between the film's characters, and the actors who portray them. All that's fine and good, but what Bahrani seems to forget is that a film is first and foremost a form of entertainment. In order for your audience to be able to consider the message that you put forth, they must be entertained by it. This film failed to do so, almost wholly because of the hype that preceded it. Again, I literally fell asleep.
How this film may have affected me had I not been exposed to the mass of information available, I cannot say. Such an endeavor is pointless; I cannot separate myself from the hype surrounding it, and so I must say that the movie is mediocre at best. Few films can live up to the hype that precede them. I can think only of two offhand: The Dark Knight and District 9. Certainly there are others. But when you hear a review of a movie, you never hear that it's terrible. What the fuck would be the point in that? That would not get you Stoked about a movie at all. It's safe to say that one should be skeptical when going into a theater. Though I told myself to put the hype as far out of mind as possible when I sat down, I could not help but be let down. The principal actors were wonderful, especially when one considers that this was their starring premiere. The supporting cast, however, weighs down the film so much that it's hard to enjoy what the leads are doing. Bahrani also has placed, seemingly arbitrarily, a number of lingering shots that serve no purpose. The plot is less than remarkable, so much so that one must argue that the film is merely a character study in order to salvage some sort of credibility. That alone does not save it, though. While many things happen, they're never very interesting, and if they are, it's because they're unrealistic, which completely negates Bahrani's intention of being as true-to-life as possible.
Verdict: Not Stoked.
More importantly is that a million and a half people turned out to watch the movie, not all of whom were required to do so because of class obligations. Which is awesome. No matter what they thought, people still showed up and talked about the movie. Whether they were bitching, or raving, what's crucial is that they were discussing it. No matter what I thought of the movie, the fact that I watched something with people in my town means I had something to talk to them about. Which is always better and more productive than sitting around watching douchebags get makeovers on some reality show.
Ultimately, see the film for yourself and decide, but make sure you talk about it with someone after. Otherwise, what's the point?
Cinema 10
For the remainder of this fall semester, the blog you see before you will be devoted to reviews of films shown during this season's Cinema 10 run. Oh, you don't know what Cinema 10 is? Well hell. This is what it is. If that tells you nothing, then you didn't read anything at all, and I'll just tell you.
Cinema 10 is a non-profit organization operating in the frozen tundra of Potsdam, New York. Run on a volunteer basis, it is devoted to exposing our little town to independent filmmaking that our radar wouldn't catch otherwise. Each season, it features ten independent films from around the world, whether documentary, or drama, or comedy, that have had some sort of impact on the world of Film. This fall, they've arranged to show a wide variety of films, some with completely untrained actors, while others star the likes of Paul Giamatti. Stoked? It's cheap, so that should do something for you. Tickets at the Roxy Theatre are $3.50 for Students and Seniors, while Adult tickets are $4.50. In any case, what else are you going to do? Especially when October 5th rolls around, and you've got two options: a heated theater and popcorn... or MANswers and Pabst Blue Ribbon. If the latter of the two has you Stoked, turn away now. Find some other blog.
-E
Cinema 10 is a non-profit organization operating in the frozen tundra of Potsdam, New York. Run on a volunteer basis, it is devoted to exposing our little town to independent filmmaking that our radar wouldn't catch otherwise. Each season, it features ten independent films from around the world, whether documentary, or drama, or comedy, that have had some sort of impact on the world of Film. This fall, they've arranged to show a wide variety of films, some with completely untrained actors, while others star the likes of Paul Giamatti. Stoked? It's cheap, so that should do something for you. Tickets at the Roxy Theatre are $3.50 for Students and Seniors, while Adult tickets are $4.50. In any case, what else are you going to do? Especially when October 5th rolls around, and you've got two options: a heated theater and popcorn... or MANswers and Pabst Blue Ribbon. If the latter of the two has you Stoked, turn away now. Find some other blog.
-E
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)