Hey, everyone. “Moriarty” here.
It’s been an interesting year so far. It’s not often that January inspires any real passion in filmgoers... I mean, sure, you’ve got a lot of platformed releases of the Decemeber limited release titles, the Oscar fare... but as far as new movies that are being released wide, January normally stinks. 2008 had both RAMBO and CLOVERFIELD, and the audiences that enjoyed those movies reeeeeeeeeally enjoyed them, while the audiences that hated them felt just as strongly. It’s been fun to have something actually worth discussing. And now, February’s off to what I think is a really strong start with at least two intriguing films available for audiences today.
THE BAND’S VISIT
There was some controversy surrounding this film when it was disqualified from the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Oscars this year, but in all the discussion of the movie at that point, none of it seemed to be about whether or not the film is any good. Writer/director Eran Kolirin has done some work on Israeli television, but makes a fantastic, memorable feature debut with this gentle look at Egyptian/Israeli relations over the course of a long, strange night.
The film opens with a single title card:
“Once – not long ago – a small Egyptian police band arrived in Israel. Not many remember this... it wasn’t that important.”
Simple. Funny in a quiet, wry way. Devastatingly self-deprecating. It’s absolutely the set-up for the film, but from that little simple description, Kolirin wrings something so rich, so nuanced, and so human.
The peace agreement between Israel and Egypt is just under thirty years old at this point, so in the grand scheme of things, tolerance between these people is a relatively new idea. The Alexandria Police orchestra is actually eight men, traveling together to Israel to perform at the opening of an Arab Cultural Center. The man in charge of the band, both onstage and on the road, is Lt. Col. Tawfiq Zacharya, played by Sasson Gabai in one of the absolute best performances of 2007, a year that was overstuffed with them. His work is so good that I had to watch the film twice. He’s a yappy little clenched fist at the start of the film, constantly annoyed by the presence of Khaled (Saleh Bakri), who seems to be everything that Tawfiq is not. He’s young, tall, good-looking, confident, at ease with everyone he meets. And most of all... he’s good with women. His very existence seems to offend Tawfiq, who threatens to throw him out of the orchestra for every minor transgression. When the men land in Israel, they get completely lost leaving the airport. Their trip to Petah Tikva gets diverted somehow to Bet Hatikva, a tiny, desolate backwater corner of the desert that’s absolutely not where they’re supposed to be. In an attempt to sort things out, Tawfiq approaches a tiny restaurant to talk to its owner, a striking curvy woman named Dina (Ronit Elkabetz), who seems bemused by Tawfiq from the moment she first regards him from below the heavy lids of those remarkable almond eyes of hers. I'm a big fan of hers from LATE MARRIAGE, and as soon as she showed up, I sat forward, hoping she was going to be a big part of the film.
Sure enough, Dina decides to help these men, and she sets them all up with places to stay for the night so they can be ready to catch the right bus in the morning, once the buses are running again. Her decision is impulsive, arbitrary, and she hands off responsibility for the men to friends and neighbors, taking in Tawfiq and Khaled herself. The way the evening unfolds is full of so many wonderful small pleasures and winning revelations that I don’t want to reveal much. Suffice it to say that the stars of the film emerge as Elkabetz and Gabai, and the relationship that develops between Dina and Tawfiq over the course of the night is beautifully written, smart, adult, and it says as much about the gulf between men and women as it does the difference between Israeli and Arab. The fact that it aims for a sort of heartwarming uplift might be a bad thing if this were a Hollywood movie, but Kolirin proves himself to be a writer of real substance. He never lets these characters off the hook. He never aims for easy sitcom laughs.
The film is definitely funny, but it’s the recognition of the real humanity of these characters that makes us laugh, not silly forced gags. And just when you settle into the groove of the film, it plays rough enough to unsettle. It keeps reaching for the real, even in moments that might otherwise seem cloying. There’s a singalong to “Summertime” after a meal that I found haunting, and there’s an extended set piece at a roller disco that is hilarious, but also quite moving in its way. And the final concert, the reason these men are in town in the first place, is handled so perfectly here that the film finally earned tears from me. Beautifully photographed, with a truly gorgeous soundtrack, THE BAND’S VISIT probably would have changed the landscape of my top ten list had I seen it in 2007. As it is, I can’t recommend it strongly enough. It surprised me, and now I find myself eager to see what this filmmaker will do next.
FOOL’S GOLD
Andy Tennant, on the other hand, is welcome to stop annnnnnny time he likes.
I’ll be honest. I think people are being overly cruel to this film. It’s not a good movie, certainly, but it’s certainly not some hostile affront to the very notion of fun. It’s obvious that someone has a hard-on for ROMANCING THE STONE, and if you’re going to rip off an ‘80s adventure movie, that’s a pretty smart one to rip off. That movie had a phenomenal screenplay by Diane Thomas that perfectly balanced the treasure hunt, the romantic banter, and the sleazy comic supporting cast. FOOL’S GOLD never quite strikes that balance, but I’ll give them points for even getting it in the ballpark. The film’s a more persuasive treasure hunt movie than either THE DA VINCI CODE or NATIONAL TREASURE, both of which seemed so overblown and impossible that they weren’t fun at all. Here, the screenplay by John Clafin & Daniel Zelman & Andy Tennant tries to keep things light, and it tries to generate a big supporting cast to keep things moving forward with some energy and style. Ewen Bremner and Alexis Dziena (the nude Lolita in Jim Jarmusch’s BROKEN FLOWERS, playing a cartoon cutie-pie heiress here) do the best they can with their roles, and Donald Sutherland stands around and smiles gamely.
But if you want to know where the film ultimately fails, it’s on the shoulders of the leads. I find it frankly amazing that there are people out there demanding new films with Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey together. They’re not terrible as a screen couple, but they’re also not compelling in any way. They amiably shamble their way through the film, and neither one offends, but I’m baffled what it is that people might actually like about them. And let’s be honest... McConaughey’s had a lot of chances at this point. He plays a spirited goofball here, and I get the feeling this is his comfort zone. If he could be shirtless and charming and disheveled every second of every film, I’ll bet he would. Kate Hudson looks good in a bikini, and she channels some of the same hippie-dippie energy that made her mom’s early work so much fun, but I don’t ever really buy her. Maybe that’s the biggest problem with these two... they get through each scene with their charms (such as they are) intact; it’s just that I never believe I’m watching anything but two actors having a gas. It’s all so Teflon, so patently insincere. The reason ROMANCING THE STONE is so great is because you believe Michael Douglas would (A) fuck the shit out of Kathleen Turner given half a chance and (B) fuck her over as soon as he does because he loves the treasure more. There’s no danger of Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey fucking here, no friction between them. Their sex scene is a typically toothless THREE’S COMPANY-level affair with them banging into furniture and breaking things instead of actually having sex. It sums up the “heat” between them. As in... there is none.
And without heat, does it really matter if they do a decent job of laying out the various steps of the treasure hunt and even build to a solid action ending? If you don’t believe that McConaughey’s crazy about something... anything... then FOOL’S GOLD becomes aptly named; it looks like a movie and it’s structured like a movie but there’s nothing real about it. In the end, there’s nothing there.
IN BRUGES
I’m not sure I’d call this one a complete success, but it’s got enormous personality, and this is a real win for writer/director Martin McDonagh in terms of putting him on the map with his first feature film.
Like THE BAND’S VISIT, this begins with a very simple fish-out-of-water premise: two hitmen from the UK are told to hide out in Bruges after there are complications during a job. Just what those complications are, we don’t learn up front, but it’s obvious that they’re taking a toll on Ray (Colin Farrell). His partner Ken (the superb Brendan Gleeson) is determined to enjoy himself while in town, playing the dutiful sightseer and following the instructions of Harry, their unseen boss, as closely as possible. For the first part of the film, the shaggy charm of the thing is just watching them mark time, and watching how Ray can barely hold his shit together.
The movie’s deeply silly in places, like Ray’s infatuation with the filming of midgets, and at other times, it’s so dark that it’s startling, like when we finally learn what happened that forced Ray and Ken on the road in the first place. McDonagh knows how to shock, and he does it a few times in the film, and he knows how to use it right. If he didn’t push a few extreme images, the film wouldn’t hit you with the same degree of power. There’s a possibility for something like this to turn cute, to play too broad. The longer Ken and Ray stay in Bruges, the darker they get, and the more complicated they are. Ken’s given an unthinkable order, Ray turns suicidal, and Harry finally shows up in the form of Ralph Fiennes, who has never looked stranger than he does here. He’s like a polished Doberman’s skull in an expensive suit, incredibly high-strung and psychotic. Harry Potter fans will be pleased to see Clemence Poesy play a major role here, as will pretty much most heterosexual men. She’s adorable and genuinely affecting as Chloe, a local drug-dealer-to-film-crews who crosses paths with Ray. She’s got great chemistry with Farrell, who does some of the best work of his career in this film. He’s a hard guy for a lot of directors to figure out, but McDonagh gets him. He gives Farrell the room he needs to carve out this edgy, hollow-eyed portrayal, and Farrell manages to play every bit of vulnerability inherent to the role. If Farrell is the broken heart of the film, then Gleeson is the soul, decent even when making terrible decisions, willing to make those decisions because he knows someone has to. His scenes opposite Fiennes toward the end of the film are crazy, dark and funny and then wrenchingly sad. Like with most good road movies, this one comes down to chemistry, and it’s got plenty of it.
If I have a complaint here, it’s that the film tries to play with some big ideas, but I don’t think it really has much to say. The performances are great, the film is entertaining, and there are some great laughs, but there are also places where it feels like it’s trying way too hard, like most of the material that has to do with Jordan Prentice, playing Jimmy, the dwarf who Ray sees filming a movie and who ends up delivering a racist diatribe in one of the most forced sequences in the film. Still, as a first film, it’s enormously promising, and between this and THE BAND’S VISIT, I’d say there’s plenty to see right now if you go looking. Both films are playing limited release, with IN BRUGES opening wider this Friday. Keep your eyes open... they’re worth the effort.
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
|
