BEFORE: OK, so Super Bowl Sunday happened, I favored neither team, now that Tom Brady's retired, so I didn't care about the game, nor do I enjoy the rap music, never have, so the halftime show was also a bust for me. Since I spent many years tracking animated commercials, especially the high-profile Super Bowl ads, I still watch the game out of habit, but mostly these days I fast-forward through the game, just to see the ads. This might have been the WORST bunch I'd ever seen, except it was nice to get a longer look at the new "Dr. Strange" movie and the "Moon Knight" TV show. But the other ads mostly left me scratching my head, I couldn't even tell what was going on most of the time - I must be getting old. Coinbase? Salesforce? Crypto-currency? What happened to Pepsi and Burger King, even E-Trade and GoDaddy.com? It's a diffferent world now...
But I was forced to conclude that after spending a cool $6 million for a 30-second spot, each advertiser simply had no money left to spend on, you know, making each ad GOOD. This used to be a chance for a product to showcase an interesting story with cool special effects, and I just kept saying, "Where's the story? Why are those people flying around? Why is that robot dog chasing after that car? Why is that woman climbing that tree with a bag of Doritos?" It's like every ad agency copywriter suddenly forgot at the same time how to tell a story. I just didn't get it.
I got more enjoyment out of watching the first half of the Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet, even though I know that game is totally fixed. Kate Winslet carries over from "Ammonite".
THE PLOT: This down-and-dirty musical set in the world of working-class New York tells the story of a husband's journey into infidelity and redemption when he must choose between his seductive mistress and his beleaguered wife.
AFTER: This film is a very weird one, in a way it also reminds me of those Super Bowl ads - I can't figure out the WHY of it all. WHY did somebody determine that this was a story worth telling, because I'm not sure that it is, and then once they figured out the story, WHY did they tell it in this weird musical way? I just don't get it. I think the fact that this was directed by an actor (John Turturro) has something to do with it, because actors tend to be big on this "Greek chorus" method of storytelling, even though most audience members probably prefer a simple story with one point of view that doesn't look like it was heavily influenced by all the music videos made in the 1980's. I mean, some of the songs were from the 1950's, but the concept of filming people breaking character while also breaking into song is very 1980's music video.
It's hard not to think about "The Sopranos", either, even if this was set in New York and not New Jersey - but with at least THREE characters who were seen regularly on that show, I couldn't help but be reminded of it. Also, there was a Super Bowl commercial that riffed on the opening Jersey montage from that show, so of course it's fresh in my memory, too. It's been a fair amount of time since that HBO show ended in 2013, but the loss of James Gandolfini is still pretty tangible - and I have to remember to add the sequel film "The Many Saints of Newark" to my list. Steve Buscemi is one of those "Sopranos" regulars who's also in this film, and I worked a test screening of his upcoming film about a week and a half ago. Thankfully I tend not to get starstruck (with a couple notable exceptions) so I didn't end up fawning over the only actor who managed to appear in both "Pulp Fiction" and "The Big Lebowski".
But when I say this is a weird film, it's not just about people breaking into song - montages of men collectively singing "A Man Without Love" or a church choir backing up Susan Sarandon on "Piece of My Heart", which all end up being weird. (Like, the men are all out on the street, where's the background MUSIC coming from?). The conversations are all very weird, like Sarandon's character shopping at the store where her husband's mistress works, and subtly dropping a lot of insults into the conversation, who DOES that? Characters also have very weird names, like Fryburg or Tula or Rosebud (Rara?) - hell, the lead character is named Nick Murder, but I've never heard of anyone having the last name "Murder", and what is that supposed to signify? Murder? He's not a murderer, as far as I can tell. Just weird. And why is one of the three daughters not really their daughter? That's never explained, and doesn't even seem necessary.
It feels like somebody knew these people, or gave them very specific names and traits when he wrote about them, and I can't quite figure out WHY. The theme is a little more universal, it's about a man who takes a mistress and then gets caught, which as you might imagine, puts a strain on his marriage. But then later on he gets sick and there is some form of redemption, like the couple never gets around to getting divorced because of his affair. But shouldn't they at least consider that? There are about a dozen other plot threads that just don't go anywhere, like the wife's former boyfriend who appears as a ghost, or Cousin Bo, who just got out of jail because he stabbed his girlfriend for cheating on him. Umm, I think? Also, why cast Eddie Izzard as a priest/church organist and then give him absolutely nothing to do? Also weird.
I think somebody had good intentions here, but just sort of forgot to connect some of the dots in the story, so as a result, no questions ever get answered, and as a whole, the story doesn't really go anyplace, it just circles around a bit before coming back in for a landing. The title was totally appropriate for Valentine's Day, as I mentioned, I just wish there had been an equally strong story to back it up.
I've got a big NITPICK POINT here, and it concerns circumcision on an adult male. Nick Murder gets circumcised for some reason, it's got something to do with his mistress, but honestly, the motivation is quite unclear. BUT, I happen to randomly know that if an adult male should get circumcised, that operation would most likely require him to abstain from sex for several weeks, and in this film, shortly after the operation, he's back at it. Nope, that's not recommended. The whole topic just seemed quite lurid, and didn't really add anything to the plot, so WHY is it there? Like most everything else in this film, it just felt like a time-filler.
Honestly, I feel like I could have skipped this one, since it's in-between two Kate Winslet movies, I could have easily dropped it, only I didn't know it would be so painful to watch. Now I've stranded another film about adultery with James Gandolfini which is called "Welcome to the Rileys", maybe I can get to that one next year - only I could have doubled my chances of linking to it if I'd only held back on this one. I think, though, that if I add that movie "Spencer" about Princess Diana, maybe I can work something out next February, I guess we'll see.
Also starring James Gandolfini (last seen in "Cinema Verite"), Susan Sarandon (last seen in "Atlantic City"), Steve Buscemi (last seen in "The King of Staten Island"), Bobby Cannavale (last seen in "The Jesus Rolls"), Mandy Moore (last seen in "Midway"), Mary-Louise Parker (last seen in "Howl"), Aida Turturro (last seen in "Play It to the Bone"), Christopher Walken (last seen in "Spielberg"), Barbara Sukowa (last seen in "Atomic Blonde"), Elaine Stritch (last seen in "Always at the Carlyle"), Eddie Izzard (last seen in "The High Note"), Amy Sedaris (last heard in "The Lion King" (2019)), P.J. Brown, Adam LeFevre (last seen in "Ode to Joy"), Cady Huffman (last seen in "The Company Men"), Tonya Pinkins (last seen in "The Book of Henry"), David Thornton (last seen in "Swept Away"), Kumar Pallana (last seen in "The Terminal"), June Stein (last seen in "Bob Roberts"), with cameos from Tony Goldwyn (last seen in "Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House"), John Turturro (also last seen in "The Jesus Rolls").
RATING: 3 out of 10 shovelfuls of snow (thrown in to the neighbor's yard)
No comments:
Post a Comment