BEFORE: Julia Roberts is the link from last night's film, and this film kicks off a chain of films about fame and performing (actors, musicians and such) - which is a topic I covered last January, but a new crop of films on the subject has appeared on the list since then. Hollywood just loves making movies about itself...
THE PLOT: A movie publicist deals with the messy public split of his movie's co-stars while keeping reporters at bay while a reclusive director holds the film's print hostage.
AFTER: This is a movie that works in very broad stereotypes - actors are all self-obsessed neurotic egomaniacs who are only concered with their looks and their public images. OK, so they got that one right. But film directors here are all demented experimental auteurs, publicists are all smiley-slimy weasels, and studio executives are spineless worrywarts. Hey, some of my friends work as publicists!
And I'm trying to reason out the romantic quadrangle represented in the film - we see the fractured remains of a relationship between two actors, one who's moved on and one who hasn't. And the actress has a sister, so we're led to believe (in standard rom-com formula) that a newer, better relationship can be forged from the remnants of the old, volatile one that ended. Just get single person A together with single person B, and everything else will fall into place, all past grievances will be forgotten, and the birds will start singing again.
But when you scratch the surface, it all starts to fall apart. What if person A doesn't like person B? Here that's a given, but it ain't necessarily so. It's like the writer forgot to tell us WHY persons A + B are right for each other, aside from the fact that they're together in the same place, a true relationship of convenience. And we're supposed to believe that Julia Roberts' character is a truer, more sincere person than her sister - why? Because she's not an actress? Because she's a former fatty? Again, I'm not sure I'm following the logic that someone failed to supply me with.
The only thing that really rang true here was the actions of the publicist character - because he's ready to exploit whatever situation comes up. If the actors are dating, he was ready to exploit that angle. If the actors were fighting, he would leak a different tape to the press. And if there was a fist-fight in a restaurant, well, that's publicity gold right there. Contemptible, yes, but probably accurate.
Four movies in to the new year, and I'm still looking for some sympathetic characters, someone I can get behind. Mostly it's been people only looking out for their own interests, or crazy loons. I've often said that there's no such thing as sane, just five billion forms of crazy - but it would be nice to get back to movies where I care about the protagonists.
Ah well, some films are bricks and some films are the mortar, and this one is clearly the latter. I picked it to bridge the two topics anyway...
NITPICK POINT: A film director would never, ever be allowed to screen a film for the press without getting approval from the studio. Any studio executive worth his salt would at least demand to see a rough cut. I don't care if your name is Coppola or Scorcese, this would immediately get you removed from the film. Simply put, the studio has every right to see how their money is being spent.
Also starring John Cusack (last seen in "Serendipity"), Catherine Zeta-Jones (last seen in "Ocean's Twelve"), Billy Crystal (last seen in "Mr. Saturday Night"), Seth Green (last seen in "It"), Hank Azaria (last seen in "Heat"), Stanley Tucci, Christopher Walken (last seen in "The Dead Zone"), with cameos from Alan Arkin (last seen in "Mother Night"), Rainn Wilson (last seen in "The Rocker"), Larry King, Eric Balfour, and Byron Allen.
RATING: 3 out of 10 softball questions
No comments:
Post a Comment