A Welcome Return To Form
I saw three movies this week, two of which were touted--ridiculously--as an epic return to form of the genres they represent. The other one got me thinking about that whole idea and what's wrong with it.
I don't get returns to form and why people are begging for them...but I'll get to that post-mini reviews
The 3:10 to Yuma? I didn't like. It had cool ideas and good actors but the sloppy dialogue and confused themes really pulled me out of it. I get that it was trying to make up for all the post-modern anti-hero Unforgiven-type westerns that took over in the '60s but it couldn't shake the bad, good guy and the good bad guy and the angst and explosions of those movies. I've never been a fan of old westerns (I like the crazy 70s ones and even then mostly because I like their Samurai counterparts) but this is neither and old western or a new western and is instead all over the place. Not bad, but far from anything to write home about...especially the resolution (unlesss you want to make a sweet western video game, then copy it). It's another shudder in the genre rather than a "return". Maybe Brad Pitt will do it but I hear even his is mostly just another revisionist "sad western".
Hatchet is, like 3:10supposed to save it's genre--here the 'slasher' film or I suppose horror in general--from the ironic post-modern quagmire it's been stuck in for the better part of a couple decades. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaand maybe it does? I suppose I have to admit it's a return to form because IT'S A FUCKING FRIDAY THE 13TH MOVIE!!! Ummm lets see, disfigured overalls wearing semi-undead retarded man-child stalking the woods--sorry I mean swamp--for teenagers who remind him of those which caused some parental rage and...well you get the picture. Same damn movie. The slasher even looks like Jason without the mask on. It tries to do something new by adding a lot of comedy (some of which plays but it's a joke a minute so...yeah), upping the gore (pretty impressive, if a bit comically fake) and being all 21st century-bleak. It's an enjoyable enough movie but it doesn't so much re-invigorate a genre as briefly resurrect it, make it do an old dance most people like and then re-kill it when the audience realizes they've seen it-- albeit often worse--1000 times before.
The Lookout, on the other hand, made me realize why I think the whole "return to form" thing is stupid. It fits in the super narrow "person with mental disorder/crime" genre which has such films as Memento and The Machinist and about a million terrible other ones. Rather than simply being a movie about a head injury victim involved in heist it decides "Hey, the form maybe is not so hot...why not use the form but make it different and better".
The Lookout succeeds because it takes its disorder so seriously. Instead of comicbook medicine it really focuses on coping with a head injury which I love. Mostly because head injuries are fucking mysterious. You don't need a disorder with rules and specifics to be mysterious. Plenty of fucked up things can go on and happen to the human body that medicine can barely explain and a head injury is the perfect example. No two the same, no two days the same, no two treatments the same. It succeeds because it's not a thriller involving a handicapped person but instead a drama about dealing with a mental injury with thriller elements. Don't get me wrong it's fucking thrilling as hell, it almost reaches old Cohen brothers level at times, and it uses twists on genre staples to really take the piss out of you when you think you get what's happening. The last twenty minutes of the movie would be easily within the first 40 of any regular thriller and takes this extra hour or so to explore characters and be about more than a robbery. And it works.
Is it really worthwhile to return to form when it seems like the best that can be hoped for is brief, pleasant nostalgia? I think it's much more satisfying to try to figure out what made the form leave in the first place and instead bring in a new, better franken-form. I don't think there's ever really been a successful return to form for any genre. When a genre comes back it's because filmmakers have shaped and adapted it to something new and relevant and not simply because they've made something new perfectly in the classic style. Maybe 3:10 was sincerely trying that when it failed and critics latched on to an old turn of phrase, but Hatchet definitely shows the pitfalls of an honest attempt. And by pitfalls I mean it's making millions and being praised by top critics and directors so...yeah...
But the guy is making a zombie western next and we people of like ideas must support one another.
========
What I did today: It's impossible to walk out of Richmond. Like a Frenchman in Morocco I was let in on my 2 zone buspass but the Nazi paper-checkers wouldn't let me out and without my own personal Richmond Rick's I tried to walk out of Casablanca. No-go unless you can make the choice between being hit by a bike or car walking on a "shared roadway". That said quite easy to charm your way on a B-line if you spend the hour to walk from Ikea to the airport.
Tomorrow: If I have time I'm going to start re-watching the old movies which I think inspired me to be a filmmaker and review them in an attempt to share my love, re-invigorate some creative juices, annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd avoid real writing. woo
Cam
I saw three movies this week, two of which were touted--ridiculously--as an epic return to form of the genres they represent. The other one got me thinking about that whole idea and what's wrong with it.
I don't get returns to form and why people are begging for them...but I'll get to that post-mini reviews
The 3:10 to Yuma? I didn't like. It had cool ideas and good actors but the sloppy dialogue and confused themes really pulled me out of it. I get that it was trying to make up for all the post-modern anti-hero Unforgiven-type westerns that took over in the '60s but it couldn't shake the bad, good guy and the good bad guy and the angst and explosions of those movies. I've never been a fan of old westerns (I like the crazy 70s ones and even then mostly because I like their Samurai counterparts) but this is neither and old western or a new western and is instead all over the place. Not bad, but far from anything to write home about...especially the resolution (unlesss you want to make a sweet western video game, then copy it). It's another shudder in the genre rather than a "return". Maybe Brad Pitt will do it but I hear even his is mostly just another revisionist "sad western".
Hatchet is, like 3:10supposed to save it's genre--here the 'slasher' film or I suppose horror in general--from the ironic post-modern quagmire it's been stuck in for the better part of a couple decades. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaand maybe it does? I suppose I have to admit it's a return to form because IT'S A FUCKING FRIDAY THE 13TH MOVIE!!! Ummm lets see, disfigured overalls wearing semi-undead retarded man-child stalking the woods--sorry I mean swamp--for teenagers who remind him of those which caused some parental rage and...well you get the picture. Same damn movie. The slasher even looks like Jason without the mask on. It tries to do something new by adding a lot of comedy (some of which plays but it's a joke a minute so...yeah), upping the gore (pretty impressive, if a bit comically fake) and being all 21st century-bleak. It's an enjoyable enough movie but it doesn't so much re-invigorate a genre as briefly resurrect it, make it do an old dance most people like and then re-kill it when the audience realizes they've seen it-- albeit often worse--1000 times before.
The Lookout, on the other hand, made me realize why I think the whole "return to form" thing is stupid. It fits in the super narrow "person with mental disorder/crime" genre which has such films as Memento and The Machinist and about a million terrible other ones. Rather than simply being a movie about a head injury victim involved in heist it decides "Hey, the form maybe is not so hot...why not use the form but make it different and better".
The Lookout succeeds because it takes its disorder so seriously. Instead of comicbook medicine it really focuses on coping with a head injury which I love. Mostly because head injuries are fucking mysterious. You don't need a disorder with rules and specifics to be mysterious. Plenty of fucked up things can go on and happen to the human body that medicine can barely explain and a head injury is the perfect example. No two the same, no two days the same, no two treatments the same. It succeeds because it's not a thriller involving a handicapped person but instead a drama about dealing with a mental injury with thriller elements. Don't get me wrong it's fucking thrilling as hell, it almost reaches old Cohen brothers level at times, and it uses twists on genre staples to really take the piss out of you when you think you get what's happening. The last twenty minutes of the movie would be easily within the first 40 of any regular thriller and takes this extra hour or so to explore characters and be about more than a robbery. And it works.
Is it really worthwhile to return to form when it seems like the best that can be hoped for is brief, pleasant nostalgia? I think it's much more satisfying to try to figure out what made the form leave in the first place and instead bring in a new, better franken-form. I don't think there's ever really been a successful return to form for any genre. When a genre comes back it's because filmmakers have shaped and adapted it to something new and relevant and not simply because they've made something new perfectly in the classic style. Maybe 3:10 was sincerely trying that when it failed and critics latched on to an old turn of phrase, but Hatchet definitely shows the pitfalls of an honest attempt. And by pitfalls I mean it's making millions and being praised by top critics and directors so...yeah...
But the guy is making a zombie western next and we people of like ideas must support one another.
========
What I did today: It's impossible to walk out of Richmond. Like a Frenchman in Morocco I was let in on my 2 zone buspass but the Nazi paper-checkers wouldn't let me out and without my own personal Richmond Rick's I tried to walk out of Casablanca. No-go unless you can make the choice between being hit by a bike or car walking on a "shared roadway". That said quite easy to charm your way on a B-line if you spend the hour to walk from Ikea to the airport.
Tomorrow: If I have time I'm going to start re-watching the old movies which I think inspired me to be a filmmaker and review them in an attempt to share my love, re-invigorate some creative juices, annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd avoid real writing. woo
Cam
posted by Cam at 1:36 AM
2 Comments:
I still regret using the phrase "return to form" in my Simpsons Movie review . . . even though it was a single show and not a genre.
http://scotobuki.livejournal.com/
Post a Comment
<< Home