Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp
Cyrus: Instant Cult Classic – Ray Schillaci
Run to the theaters before this gem is lost in the summer shuffle. “Cyrus†is the best comedy of the year. It may be the best comedy of this decade, because we have not seen anything like it since the outrageousness of such underground subversive classics as “Harold and Maude†and “Where’s Poppa?†Now mind you, I know those movies are not for every taste, but my lord what a breath of fresh air “Cyrus†is. Both uncomfortable and downright hilarious at the same time, “Cyrus†soars to the heights of cult classic with the combination of talents; its three stars John C Reilly, Jonah Hill, Marisa Tomei and writers/directors Mark and Jay Duplass.
The great thing about “Cyrus†is that it never quite goes over the top like some of the comedies of late. There are scenes that are awkward and make one uneasy, but we end up too busy laughing to dwell on it. As much of a Judd Apatow fan that I am, I find some of the gags, just that – gags. The grossness of the gag puts the brakes on the story and character. “Cyrus†is wonderfully underplayed and works beautifully. It takes a very bizarre situation and puts real people in it and allows the audience to enjoy it. In some ways, it has actually tapped into the strange attraction to reality TV in the way the whole subject matter is handled.
John C. Reilly plays John, a middle-age dysfunctional, anti-social loser who still lives with his ex-wife (in separate rooms), Jamie, played to perfection by Catherine Keener. Jamie is about to be remarried and attempts to get John out of his room and her house. She and her fiancé encourage John to join them at a party so he can mingle and maybe meet somebody. The result is John making an ass out of himself by being way too open and awkward. But one sweetheart, Molly played by Tomei, at the party actually finds some redeeming value in John and semi-invites him into her life.
Problem being; Molly has a secret – a very unusual relationship with her 21-year-old son (still living with her) that puts the kabash on anything that remotely appears to be an adult relationship. Enter Cyrus, Jonah Hill’s best performance ever. Hill is not used as a sight gag or somebody we wait to emit the laugh lines. This is a deep, 3 dimensional look into a seriously disturbed person that at times almost makes us feel that he could be capable of just about anything – including violence. Don’t misinterpret, Hill is funny but in a very dark sense. It’s an edgy representation that fuels the other performances and it’s what keeps us watching with baited breath. Cyrus is more dysfunctional than John, manipulating and totally into mindf*@#ing his opponents for his mother’s attention.
Everything that John goes through to keep the relationship and try to deal with Cyrus while growing as a mature adult himself is worth the price of admission. John C. Reilly has proved on several occasions how well he can convey the life of a loser. But in “Cyrus,†Mr. Reilly brings a genuine angst and a wonderful touch of someone truly fighting his inner child that so many men deal with. It is such a beautifully natural portrayal that it’s almost a crime to even think of it as a performance.
Then there is Marisa Tomei’s character that is caught in the middle. She’s not entirely blameless for the way Cyrus is. She is both frustrating and endearing trying to appease the mess that has been created. She wants to be a woman again and longs for an adult relationship while being afraid to let go of her over 200lb baby boy, funny and touching. I believe Ms. Tomei is one of the most under-appreciated talents in the business. She has a tendency to imbue her characters with an uncomfortable honesty while remaining sexy and fun at the same time and it works to perfection in this film.
What makes this movie so damn hysterical is how blatantly honest it is. The characters actually say things that you think you’d say but maybe it would be too hurtful. It isn’t, it’s necessary and political correctness is thrown out the window with glee. This is a wonderfully adult comedy that hearkens back to the golden days of Hal Ashby (Harold and Maude, Being There). Jay and Mark Duplass are to be commended for such a brave film during these overtly politically correct times. There is nothing more to say without giving away all the wonderful surprises except, “Cyrus†is priceless.
The Maid – DVD Review
A movie that, on the surface, looks like it does not say much The Maid is a wonderfully deceptive movie about one woman’s life who seems so much a part of, yet detached from, one family’s journey. Somewhat taken for granted by the family that employs her, the maid Raquel (Catalina Saavedra) simply is a fondly thought of woman who helps act as the rudder for the lives she literally cleans up after.
While the movie shows this dour, and many times morose, woman navigate her life in relation to the family the film is a delicate portrait of someone who has so intertwined their being with the work they do that it becomes nearly impossible to separate the two. While everyone else is able to enjoy the pleasures of swimming or ping pong, as the children are wont to do on this movie, Raquel’s world is the home. There is no refuge. Her room feels and is shot, through the warm eye of Chilean director Sebastián Silva, like it is her own cell. A prison of her own making but, and this important, she equally finds comfort in her role however diminutive it is in relation to everyone else in the family.
The real treat in this film is seeing how Raquel reacts when the family decides to employ another maid to help out around the home. In almost slapstick fashion Silva creates an environment of bizarre and hilarious moments that juxtapose well with Raquel’s sour disposition at the mere thought or implication that she is being replaced after so many years with the family. She isn’t and she’s not but it’s the idea of it that sends Raquel into a mental tailspin where she is leading maids out the front door so she can lock them out or sending another so much into a torturous rage that the viewed interloper scales the family home just to make it to the backyard, though the back door, and upstairs in order to give Raquel a proper thrashing. Others meet the same passive aggression but it’s not until we meet yet another maid, Lucy (Mariana Loyola), where things turn and the film becomes something so much more than just the defrosting of a frigid woman.
It’s equally sad and funny but I would assert that it’s Silva who wants it that way. It would be too easy to have a movie where you have a character like Raquel represent class struggle and all the metaphors you want to heap on top of her but that would be doing the movie an injustice. You certainly can see that in this film but the movie becomes much more enjoyable when you consider the nuances of personality that Saavedra is able to channel through her face. So forlorn yet still capable of so much humanity the movie undermines your expectations and delivers a movie that is rich in character, spirit, and the strength inherent in the belief that work should not define who we are, we should define it for ourselves.
About the film:
After 23 years working as a devoted maid in an upper class Chilean household, embittered and ailing Raquel (Sundance Film Festival and Gotham Award winner Catalina Saavedra) can no longer care for the family alone. Trapped by guilt, matriarch Pilar (Claudia Celedón) refuses to let Raquel go, even though it is clear their longtime maid is slowly unraveling. Instead, Pilar hires more help, throwing Raquel into a jealous frenzy. The seemingly happy home soon becomes the stage for Raquel’s dirty tricks as she attempts to drive away anyone who threatens to take her place with darkly comedic, and in the end, endearing results.
DVD Features
Behind the scenes video clips with the cast and crew
From Sketch to Screen – a video comparison of storyboards to scenes
Photos from Sebastián Silva
BURMA VJ – DVD Review
Forget about the easy lines of “The revolution will be televised” when seeing a movie about the tyrannical rule exerted by the forces of the Burmese military junta that suppress any public declaration questioning their authority. You think marching around your town with a picket sign is the work of brave people? Try doing it in that country.
Burma VJ, shot with handheld devices, small digital cameras, objects that have gloriously allowed people to inconspicuously shoot video, stands as a document for those who want to see what true oppression can do to a populace. What you initially notice about those who would try and demonstrate is that, at first, no one really notices or cares to. One moment they’re out telling people about the grave injustices done to them by their government and all seems well. But it’s not until you see the plain clothes, government stooges round any dissenter up with the kind of speed and inconspicuousness of a shoplifter, that you start to see this is the stuff of bogeymen. Watching what could be an ordinary person on the street literally pull you through the street, throw you on the back of a truck, swallow you in the congested traffic of the city, possibly never to be heard from again, it’s then when you realize how frightening it must be for these people on a daily basis to simply exist.
The film chronicles many stories just like this, narrated by a man simply known as Joshua, whose true identity is kept secret due to his involvement with the pro-democracy movement, and exposes the supposed government as a ruling force that not wants to stay in power but will do anything to stay there. From the aforementioned kidnappings, let’s call them what they are, to soldiers who open fire on a gathering of many, Burma VJ is a collection of clips and recordings that show you the true cruelty of oppression.
The movie, directed by award-winning Anders Østergaard, is not only a story of how one regime can keep a population down but yet it’s also conscious of how technology can televise a revolution. While it seems that the proliferation of modern accouterments of daily life would help make a world aware of the cruel and inhumane things done to citizens of Burma the reason why this film even exists is because people are unaware, or are ignoring, the plight of so many. While some moments are blurry, intelligible, or confusing there is nonetheless a certain kind of outrage that steadily builds as you watch this documentary. It’s a documentary that shows you the power of the 21st century that can, for the first time, tell this story in living color but it’s also a testament to how far some regimes will go to keep people from standing up, from speaking out. It’s truly inspiring in a way that doesn’t seem forced or manipulated as the whole point of the movie is to tell this story from those who were there, who are still there, living in fear of a government that could make them disappear should it find out who these individuals are.
It’s something that’s frightening and comforting at the same time, knowing that the fight still rages on certainly inspires but knowing this document now exists for others to witness is a small victory for those looking for change.
About the film:
Anders Østergaard’s award-winning documentary shows a rare inside look into the 2007 uprising in Myanmar through the cameras of the independent journalist group, Democratic Voice of Burma.
While 100,000 people (including 1,000s of Buddhist monks) took to the streets to protest the country’s repressive regime that has held them hostage for over 40 years, foreign news crews were banned to enter and the Internet was shut down. The Democratic Voice of Burma, a collective of 30 anonymous and underground video journalists (VJs) recorded these historic and dramatic events on handycams and smuggled the footage out of the country, where it was broadcast worldwide via satellite. Risking torture and life imprisonment, the VJs vividly document the brutal clashes with the military and undercover police – even after they themselves become targets of the authorities.
DVD Features
Audio commentary with BURMA VJ director Anders Østergaard and film critic John Anderson
FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM – a video interview with BURMA VJ “Joshua”
Burmese Monks’ stories from the uprisings televised on Democratic Voice of Burma
A video message from Richard Gere
CROSSING MIDNIGHT – a riveting film about refugees on the Thai/Burma border
Worth Reviving: A Boy and His Dog – Ray Schillaci
It’s been far too long since I’ve treated all of you to a dip into the revival pool. So I had to dig down deep to exonerate myself with something so fun, titillating (love that word – it brings out the eight-year-old boy in me) and downright obscure that perhaps you will find this piece worthy enough to continue on with. In today’s words “A Boy and his Dog†is the shits!
Even by today’s standards it is still subversive. At first glance, it could be passed on as just another post-apocalyptic tale. But wait, it’s taken from a story by Harlan Ellison and known as the inspiration to the “Mad Max/Road Warrior†movies. Aside from that how would one bark balk at an allegory involving man having a telepathic communication with his best friend (his dog) and hunting down meals for him as the dog reciprocates by hunting for women (not for a meaningful relationship). The best part – this is done long before the overuse of computer generated talking animals. So we forego the cutesy animated lips that Disney and so many others perpetrate on the animal kingdom.
This also stars a very young, pre-Miami Vice, Don Johnson, playing a none-too-bright, wide eyed horn dog. Johnson, along with the rest of the cast (including Jason Robards and a very funny Tim McIntire as the voice of the dog) is spot on with this apocalyptic satire. Johnson is Vic, a ragtag dimwitted loner, who is consistently losing a battle of wits with his telepathic pooch, Blood. One can easily tell the influence this film has had on films from “Mad Max†to “Book of Eliâ€. That wonderful desolate world-has-gone-to-shit look, trash and all perpetrates through a good part of the film. Those who are not savage are ravaged.
Avoiding other marauders, hunting down food and women, poorly, Vic stumbles upon the yummy Quilla June Holmes, played by Susanne Benton (see Playboy cover May 1970). She’s not like the other women who have suffered through the apocalypse. Ms. Benton, back then, was what young men’s wet dreams were made of. Quilla is a heartthrob mystery woman who leads Vic to a secret underground society that appears right out of Stepfordville. Interesting side note; both “A Boy and his Dog†and the original “Stepford Wives†were released in 1975. But the former was written earlier in 1969. The funny thing is, just when you think you have this film pegged, it takes a wild darker tone once Vic enters the underground hometown. Don’t want to give too much away since there are several double-take moments that have you want to hit the pause button and say to yourself, “You’ve got to be kidding me!â€
Although an independent cheapie at the time, “A Boy and his Dog†is a biting masterful piece of work capturing the true essence of Harlan Ellison. Direction is tight and creative, and the cinematography is perfect, capturing both the post apocalyptic world and the underground society with a hint of “Twilight Zone.†Acting is wonderful with Jason Robards giving a fantastic low-key performance. But what it really comes down to is not the chemistry between luscious Susanne Benton and Don Johnson, which is fine, but the near comic timing between Johnson and the dog. It’s wonderfully and refreshingly adult with a hint of bringing out the juvenile in the male species.
This is not a date movie! Do not make that mistake. The ending will have guys roar and women cringe. It’s misogynistic and hilarious, and it’s meant to be to the fullest degree. This film was done during a time when people were not so uptight and politically correct. It’s also hard to see how it could be remade in our time. But somebody has the asinine notion to attempt such a defeat. I just heard that David Lee Miller (My Suicide) is now attached and making an animated film out of this. If you ask me (for what it’s worth) this is as wrong-minded as Joel Silver’s decision to remake Don Quixote with the fantasies being real. That negates Cervantes’ whole work. Of course, what does a literary genius like Silver care if there may be a few million bucks in it and a toy franchise? Either way, rent or buy “A Boy and his Dog†and be the judge. This film should not be remade; it’s as classic to the underground, cult movement of the seventies as Wizard of Oz is an endearing classic of its time.
Comments: None
Leave a Reply |