Essentials: When Harry Met Sally

Year: 1989 (USA)
Genre: Comedy/Romantic Comedy
Directed: Rob Reiner
Stars: Billy Crystal, Meg Ryan, Carrie Fisher, Bruno Kirby, Steven Ford, Lisa Jane Persky, Michelle Nicastro
Production: Castle Rock Entertainment

Now I’m not a fan of romantic comedies, at least not recent ones. Most movies already add in a love interest so the notion of making a small perfunctory part of a good movie the whole point of a single picture just seems trifling to me. It doesn’t help that Hollywood no longer tries to make the genre appealing to all or even many; producers only make them desirable to middle-aged women and gullible tweens. Not knocking those demographics, its just not my thing. That being said, When Harry Met Sally (1989) is for all intents and purposes a romantic comedy yet it is a lot more than that.

Please, dear god make it stop!

The story takes place within the space of twelve years. Harry (Billy Crystal) and Sally (Meg Ryan) meet through a mutual friend. Sally agrees to take Harry with her to New York in her car and the two don’t get along famously. Yes, there is banter, yes they eventually fall madly in love, yes every romantic comedy before and after When Harry Met Sally have followed the exact same pattern but here its different.

The late, great Nora Ephron wisely took the romance as a starting point to truly delve into and study the notion of love. Harry and Sally’s story is intertwined with interviews from elderly couples who briefly discuss how they first fell in love. Director Rob Reiner enhances the experience with poignant editing and a smart use of split screen for some humorous and enlightening set pieces along with some truly lovely views of New York City in all its glory.

Twelve years is an awful long time to track two characters and its amazing to see how each time the story jumps to a certain time and place how they have changed yet remained the same. Harry starts out as a little self-absorbed yet always charming and funny in the only way Billy Crystal can be. Years later his character goes through a brutal divorce that humanizes Harry in both the eyes of the audience and Sally. Sally goes through a similar transition through the progression of time. She doesn’t deal with her life altering breakup lying down even though her mannerisms betray her proactive attitude.

Her "Oh" face today

Throughout the movie Harry and to a lesser extent Sally often explore the differences between men and women when it comes to sex and love. Again, this is a common theme in romantic comedies from Adam’s Rib (1949) to The Ugly Truth (2009). Yet while reinforcing gender tropes in the collective minds of the audience, this writing trick serves a larger purpose in When Harry Met Sally. It fleshes out the characters we’ve grown to love. Take the famous scene at Katz Deli where Sally fakes an orgasm proving the point that men can’t tell the difference. Funny? Yes. True? The jury’s still out. Do we love her for it? Of course.

My only real concern with When Harry Met Sally is this; they never seem to be working. Or talking about their work. Supporting characters Jess (Bruno Kirby) and Marie (Carrie Fisher) mention their work albeit casually. Harry and Sally on the other hand almost never do. In an interview with Rob Reiner, the director explained he didn’t want to include their work life because A: its not the point of the movie; and B: no one likes to talk about their work outside of work. Fair enough to the first point but I find it hard to believe that no one in Rob Reiner’s circle of friends talks about their work on a quasi-regular basis. I prefer explaining it away as a question of editing. Within a twelve year span, Harry and Sally talked about work, it just wasn’t filmed.

Where does Ephron explain how to talk to women?

When Harry Met Sally is the golden standard for modern romantic comedy. A standard that many have attempted but few have achieved and fewer still have surpassed. It exhibits the talents of the brilliant Billy Crystal and the strikingly beautiful and exuberant Meg Ryan. It presents the work of director Rob Reiner and Nora Ephron at the top of their game and it showcases timeless love songs by virtuosos George Gershwin and Richard Rodgers. Truly, does anyone know anyone who doesn’t enjoy it? If you do dump them from your life; they’re too high-maintenance.

Final Grade: A

Essentials: Donnie Darko

Year: 2001 (USA)
Genre: Drama/Psychological Drama/Sci-Fi Drama
Directed: Richard Kelly
Stars: Jake Gyllenhaal, Jena Malone, Patrick Swayze, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Daveigh Chase, Mary McDonnell, Homes Osborne, James Duval, Beth Grant, Noah Wyle, Drew Barrymore, Seth Rogen
Production: Warner Bros.

Sometimes under the right circumstances a movie of high quality can be made by a director who may not otherwise know what they’re doing. These movies need the right conditions socially, the interest of the youth, and the right kind of financial support to be propped up and revered. Otherwise such a film would fall into obscurity and eventually get lost in the shuffle. Such movies include Napoleon Dynamite (2004), Empire Records (1995) and, of course Donnie Darko (2001).

Oh, the wisdom of youth

When Donnie Darko hit the theaters in early 2001 few people knew or cared much about it. The critical reviews were lukewarm at best and within a week or two, the movie was pulled from even select theaters. Then HBO happened. People; especially introverted and impressionable youth like myself started warming up to it. It balanced fate and freewill, faith and agnosticism, love and fear and discussed at length the idea of time travel. This was very appealing to a boy who was just introduced to the idea of parallel universes only a few short months ago.

Meanwhile in a parallel universe...

To me Donnie Darko is more of a nostalgia trip than a “great movie” (of course not saying that it isn‘t). Watching it for the first time in years, I immediately traveled back in time to the first night I viewed it, just after 12am on a Thursday morning on TV. After watching it the first time, I discussed, out loud and at length the ideas behind the movie to myself. At that moment I was no longer the little boy whose favorite film was BASEketball (1998); I was a critic and philosopher with a keen eye for interpretation. Of course I was fourteen.

Donnie Darko tells the story of the titular character (Jake Gyllenhaal), a troubled young high schooler with a bad habit of sleepwalking. His therapist believes he may by schizophrenic and his parents do their best but are simply overwhelmed by their brilliant but depressed son. One night after wondering off in the dark again, Donnie meets Frank, a six-foot-tall man in a creepy rabbit costume who informs him the world will end in a few weeks time. The next morning he wonders back home to find a jet engine had crashed into his bedroom and no one has any idea where it came from.

Memories notwithstanding, I still enjoyed watching Donnie Darko again. The photography and the set design of the film really does bring you into the 1980’s world of the characters. It’s a perfect backdrop for the feeling of impending doom one feels watching Donnie Darko, especially when faced with Frank, Donnie’s time traveling rabbit friend.

The entire movie, we see most things from the perspective of an increasingly hostile Donnie. After the arrival of Frank he sees more and more strange things happening including globs of effervescent strings leading people as they walk and a book that seems to explain everything he’s experiencing, published by a local author.

The “normal” world around him also becomes increasingly bizarre through the oppressive power of his health instructor Kitty Farmer (Beth Grant). Playing the part of the resident closed minded religious zealot, Beth Grant steals every scene she’s in and seems to relish in a part that lets the character actress flourish. The young Jena Malone also appears as the new girl in town and Donnie’s love interest. She seems drawn to the erratic Donnie and while she may be too young and naive to know he’s trouble, she stumbles down the rabbit hole with an eerie sense of control. There is one scene where Donnie asks her and his friends to leave a party with him to break into a house. She oddly enough takes it in stride as if she knew what he would do.

Many people, including myself  have conflicting theories as to what’s really going on in Donnie Darko. I won’t bore you with my ramblings but I will return to the subject of director/writer Richard Kelly and his assumed ineptitude. After the success of Donnie Darko he wrote the story for the vapid Tony Scott film Domino (2005) and in 2009 he directed a famously maligned film called The Box starring Cameron Diaz.

He's just as surprised at his lack of success as you are

Both films pale in comparison to the truly awful Southland Tales (2006) which, like Donnie Darko tried to insert metaphysics into the equation. To me Richard Kelly is like director Troy Duffy only with more tact. At his worst, his movies ramble on and on, raveling in their own intricacies yet looking visually like a used cocktail dress. He’s like the guy in your college dorm room who wouldn’t shut up about existentialism because he read an excerpt from Heidegger’s Gelassenheit.

But where Southland Tales failed miserably, Donnie Darko truly soared. It’s a moody, dark and trippy movie that opened my eyes to the possibilities of film. Like the movie’s themes about time and space, I was shuffled back and forth between now and my childhood. Back to a time when I was still figuring out my place in the world and forth to a journey still unfinished.

Final Grade: A

Essentials: Shoeshine

Year: 1946 (Italy)
Genre: Drama/Coming-of-Age/Prison Film
Directed: Vittorio De Sica
Stars: Franco Interlenghi, Rinaldo Smordoni, Annielo Mele, Bruno Ortenzi, Emilio Cigoli
Production: Societa Cooperativa Alfa Cinematografica

Just two years before Vittorio De Sica changed the world with The Bicycle Thieves (1948), the universally famous actor/director made a small, simple and beautiful movie by the name of Shoeshine (1946). Taking place in war ravaged Italy, the film features the stories of two young shoeshine boys who are tasked with delivering black market goods and get caught in a web of intrigue. Once they are caught by the police, their friendship is challenged when they're sent to an overcrowded boy's penitentiary.

See what happens to most child actors?

The majority of the film takes place in the penitentiary where the two boys (Franco Interlenghi and Rinaldo Smordoni) are separated from each other almost instantly. Forced into separate cells each holding five boys, they become the center of their own maelstroms when one mistakenly betrays the other. I won’t ruin the whole picture other than mentioning that the main source of motivation early on is a horse they bought together.

The period sets the tone for the film. Despite a bouncy score that highlights every small victory experienced by the characters, the lack of sustenance and poor conditions of life in and out of the penitentiary keeps things gloomy. The boys eat gruel which the warden calls “passable”, medical help is slow and ineffective and beds are riddled with lice. Even one of the more kind-hearted superiors finds objection to the state of things. Yet at one point one of the boys calls his new home “paradise” because of its only slightly better living standard than sleeping in an elevator.

The film is considered one of the first Italian neorealist works which would leave an indelible mark on Italian cinema and movies worldwide. The form contends with economic hardship and moral denigration as a canvas. Many times they would shoot in and around the streets of Italian cities and even hire non-professional actors to intensify the realism. Often this was for practical reasons. The aftermath of World War Two left the film industry (previously under the close watch of Mussolini) unable to maintain their studios.

Why yes, we are the shit thanks for asking

The Bicycle Thieves stands as the pinnacle of Italian neo-realism but for my money Shoeshine is the better movie. Both stories are quite compelling but from an outsider’s perspective, the multiple Italian customs and the research required to understand them are much more-a-plenty in Bicycle Thieves. Additionally the main characters of Shoeshine are children no older than twelve. While in many cases this would be a slight when comparing one movie to another, the actors in Shoeshine act much more authentically to their predicament. There is one scene where the boys trot a horse down the street as the other shoeshine boys either cheer in zeal, or jeer in jealousy. They preen and strut like they’re the talk of the town, the belle of the ball, or to put another way; two poor kids with a horse. How can you not smile at that image?

There is a famous review of Shoeshine by the famous Pauline Kael where she mentions a “…petulant voice of a college girl complaining to her boyfriend, ‘well, I don’t see what was so special about that movie.’” She then claimed alienation from those who could not experience “the radiance of Shoeshine.” In many ways I feel the same about it. If you’re not effected by De Sica’s first classic then you’re not fully human.

You're a monster!!!

Final Grade: A

Essentials: Raising Arizona

Year: 1987 (USA)
Genre: Comedy/Screwball Comedy/Crime Comedy
Directed: Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
Stars: Nicolas Cage, Holly Hunter, John Goodman, William Forsythe, Sam McMurray, Trey Wilson, Frances McDormand, Randall 'Tex' Cobb
Production: Circle Films

The Coen brothers have made a name for themselves as a pair of brilliant masters of their craft. They build on a solid foundation aided by philosophy, literature and the Hollywood Golden age. Using a palpable mix of classicist storytelling, idiosyncratic characters and dark humor they have made an undeniable contribution to cinema that will never be washed away. So why am I not sold on the countless insta-classics that they churn out every few years?

We're artists, ARTISTS!!!

Don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of The Big Lebowski (1998). Miller’s Crossing (1990), Barton Fink (1991), True Grit (2010), Fargo (1996) and No Country for Old Men (2007) all have their moments and heck, I even like their lesser works: Intolerable Cruelty (2003), The Hudsucker Proxy (1994) and The Ladykillers (2004). Still, as I have always said, to me for a film to rise above it needs to be an experience, not just a film. In that respect only two films have risen to that level, at least for me. The aforementioned Big Lebowski and Raising Arizona (1987).

Joel and Ethan wanted to make a movie as far different from their first feature Blood Simple (1984) a neo-noir that won the Palm d’Or for the auteures celebres. So instead of something dark they made something light. Instead of slow it was quick and instead of starring Frances McDormand, it starred this guy…

If the term “screwball comedy” is applied to the work of Preston Sturges then I am at a loss as to what one would call Raising Arizona. The breakneck speed at which it throws things at you is mesmerizing. Yet the story is told with such a firm hand that watching the movie at times feels like being in the cab of a Nascar; claustrophobic yet invigorating.

Guess which is which

For the uninitiated the story takes place in and around Tempe Arizona. Ed (Holly Hunter) and H.I. McDonough (Nic Cage) are as unlikely a couple as you are likely to find. One is an ex-cop while the other is a repeat offender with the attitude of a high school drop out and vocabulary of a Sunday preacher. They get married and figure the next logical step is having a kid. But after they find out they can’t conceive, they steal a quintuplet from a local millionaire in desperation. It all goes pretty haywire from there with car chases, prison breaks and one scary looking bounty hunter but the oddball characters stay true to their oddball selves from beginning to end.

Should have used Depends bitch!

The Coens showed a visual aptitude in Blood Simple but here they unleash their talents with reckless abandon, throwing the audience face first into a rube-golberg they themselves designed. The centerpiece of their contraption is a ten minute chase through the houses, convenience stores and supermarkets of Tempe with multiple people in pursuit of H.I. holding a package of Pampers. There is another point where H.I. and Ed try to keep the kid out of the bounty hunter’s hands in an epic showdown that is as tense as it is funny.

Raising Arizona is certainly not just a movie, its an experience that registers on an emotional level. H.I. finds that he’s out of his depth when it comes to becoming a parent and attempts to recede back to his former state of irresponsible ineptitude. Yet, as with all times of trial, it’s impossible to revert, you must always move forward, no matter how painful. A lesson that in my mind, is ultimately more important than anything said by a toque wearing cop with a Minnesotan accent.

Yeah? Yeah!

Final Grade: A

Essentials: Brick

He who smelt it dealt it

Year: 2005 (USA)
Genre: Drama/Crime Drama/High School Movie
Directed: Rian Johnson
Stars: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Nora Zehetner, Lukas Haas, Noah Fleiss, Matt O'Leary, Emilie de Ravin, Noah Segan, Richard Roundtree
Production: Warner Bros.

Double Indemnity (1944), The Big Sleep (1946), Touch of Evil (1958); all dramas that exhibit a sense of style and story unlike many others. They inhabit a world full of darkness, hardboiled antiheroes and glamorous femme fatales. No one is truly innocent and those who avoid the eye the intrigue never leave truly unscathed.

Brick (2005) lives comfortably in the den of noir, adding to the mix a little bit of chic and style. The story takes place in and around a high school in sunny California. Brendon (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a derisive yet determined loner receives a distressing call from an ex who dumped him in search of opportunity. When Brendon finds her dead, he pulls out all the stops to find out what happened; first setting his sights on the popular clique of ne’er-do-wells.

Sincerely yours, the Casablanca Club.

The ages of those involved, and the setting of the sordid story would lead you to believe Brick is a high school movie. But believe you me, director Rian Johnson’s freshmen feature has more in common with The Maltese Falcon (1941) than The Breakfast Club (1985). The serpentine plot and the cynical characters that exist in the realm of San Clemente High School are pulpy, manipulative and mesmerizing.

Rian Johnson took certain visual cues from Chinatown (1974) with a dash of The Lady From Shanghai (1947) but he wisely retreated to the main source for his story borrowing heavily from dime store novel master Dashiell Hammitt. The dialogue lays on a thick swirl of clandestine lingo and clever turn-a-phrase which would sound oddly plausible in grade school if not for the absence of LOLs and YOLOs.

And then Kelly was all like OMG

The story behind Brick, much like the stories of most old-timey detective mysteries is simple yet incredibly complex, both emotionally and linearly. But lest you think Brick is cheap imitation I assure you its fresh and new, and not just because its set in a high school. I’m confident that if the story of Brick were told with veteran actors in a dirt encrusted city it would be up there with new classics like L.A. Confidential (1997) if not rank with the likes of Double Indemnity, The Big Sleep, and Touch of Evil.

Final Grade: A

Essentials: Talk Radio

Year: 1988 (USA)
Genre: Drama/Media Satire
Directed: Oliver Stone
Stars: Eric Bogosian, Ellen Greene, Alec Baldwin. John C. McGinley, Leslie Hope, John Pankow
Production: Ten-Four Productions

If ever there was a director who exemplified the liberal Hollywood attitude that many people scour at, Oliver Stone is that man. Since gaining prominence in the 1980’s for such classic and caustic socio-political statements as Wall Street (1987), Platoon (1986) and Salvador (1986), Oliver Stone has since become a mouthpiece for issues ranging from the importance of Wikileaks to Scientologist rights in Germany.

Whatever you may think of his politics you have to admit his films are powerful and poignant pieces of art; not the least of which is his tiny 1988 indie-flick Talk Radio. Released a year after the influential Wall Street and a year before the infamous Born on the Fourth of July (1989), Talk Radio never really made waves or felt especially important except for those familiar with the subject matter.

Alan Berg was a radio host who was slain by neo-Nazis in 1984

The film is primarily based off of two main sources; the play Talk Radio written by Eric Bogosian and the book Talked to Death: The Life and Murder of Alan Berg written by Stephen Singular. Incidentally Bogosian earnestly plays the lead role surly shock jock Barry Champlain, a role he first starred in when the play showcased in Oregon. You may remember him, as I did the first viewing, as the bad guy in Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (1995). I remember thinking the man had a sinister vibe and a great voice. Both traits serve him well in the role of Barry but his emotional investment in the character, no doubt from years of playing him, creates a level of unseen yet often felt intensity.

It is that intensity that becomes the spirit of Talk Radio. You match it with the whims of a singularly passionate director and you have yourself a story that’s way, way, way too big for its britches. This is not altogether a bad thing. The claustrophobic atmosphere of a fishbowl radio studio coupled with the incessant calling of a masochistic listening public dialing on the phone every two seconds makes things almost too hard to bare. The tension leads to a boiling point and catharsis near the end of the film when Barry finally looses it and spits bile into the airwaves. He chastises and insults his listeners with a barrage of taunts and pessimistic musings all of which falls on deaf ears.

While Talk Radio is essentially a one-man-show, supporting cast does include the versatile Alec Baldwin as well as the enigmatic and underutilized Ellen Greene. One would wish that in a movie so filled to the hilt with rub-against-the-grain cynicism, calmer heads would give the story and audience a much needed respite. This is not the case in Talk Radio however. The only time we see Barry or anyone for that matter outside of the studio is briefly at a basketball game and in a flashback.

That kind of overwhelming energy flow however can be forgiven given the subject matter. Barry isn’t just a churlish radio personality but a target of anti-Semitic harassment. Many of the callers Barry is charged with communicating on his program are neo-Nazis and racists whom he gives airtime for the soul purpose of cutting them down the size. In those moments Barry is seen as a man of conscious but far from a good man in general.

Well these guys seem to be on the up-and-up

Just like in Salvador, Born on the Fourth of July, et al., Talk Radio is ultimately a character study about a man who has lost his faith in humanity. He sees a sliver of hope and salvation but finds it dashed by fate and the powers that be. Few main characters from the works of Oliver Stone come from favorable stock. They are our antiheros, the cautionary tales; the men we don’t want to be.

Oliver Stone is certainly a man I don’t want to be. While I say what I must, I am far from a firebrand and polemic figure of the Hollywood elite. Yet Stone is a fascinating figure that draws my attention both in his movies and in his political advocacy. Some cannot divorce the man from the artistry but I implore you that even if you’re not a fan of Oliver Stone, you take a good look and listen to Talk Radio.

Final Grade: A

Advise and Consent

Year: 1962 (USA)
Genre: Drama/Political Drama
Directed: Otto Preminger
Stars: Henry Fonda, Walter Pidgeon, Charles Laughton, Franchot Tone, Lew Ayres, Don Murray, Peter Lawford, Gene Tierney, Burgess Mededith
Production: Otto Preminger Films

I have been getting into House of Cards (2013) as of late. The cynical, subversive politics of the show combined with Kevin Spacey's gravitas and Robin Wrights icy dame act makes for exciting TV. Since the first episode was released on Netflix, I binged on all thirteen, forty-five minute episodes like a fat kid in a pastry shop. The results were delicious.

I eat men's souls

In many ways Otto Preminger's Advise and Consent (1962) makes me feel the same elation. Its a smart, under-the-radar, slow-cooking potboiler, providing many characters and angles. Like House of Cards, Advise and Consent also has a killer cast who ooze credibility and snake-like charm. Henry Fonda, Walter Pidgeon, Burgess Meredith, Franchot Tone, Gene Tierney, Peter Lawford, Don Murray, Lew Ayres, George Grizzard and the great Charles Laughton in his last film; now there's a line up only Otto Preminger could scrounge up.

The movie starts with images of the star spangled banner. This is promptly followed by scenes in front of the Capitol, characters walking in, chomping at the bit about the nomination for Secretary of State. Thus the wheels are set in motion for a showdown that at times is exhilarating and at

And I say Michael Keaton was the better Batman!

other times exhausting. Secrets are spilled and hidden, political tricks are used and people are destroyed.

To many Advise and Consent might be a bit dry. There are many scenes where Senators are going back and forth on the senate floor and in committee rooms. I dare say the amount of pomp and circumstances adds to the realness of the situation. The tension isn't felt artificially but rather experienced vicariously through the characters.

The most tragic of these characters is Senator Brigham Anderson of Utah (Don Murray). A man used and abused by powers on opposite ends of the nomination. While many secrets are revealed to the audience, Anderson's clandestine doings are certainly the most audacious. Even today, the story of Anderson would peak the interest of the public, even a public that has gotten used to politicians cheating, bribing and sleeping their way to infamy.

Anderson's story however is only an hors d’oeuvre when compared to the dirt people  have on Robert Leffingwell (Henry Fonda) the soon-to-be Secretary of State. His story, while a little dated by today's standards, would have turned some heads in 1962.

Turns out video privacy was a huge deal back then

I'm eluding to stories and dirt because I don't want to spoil the fun should you chose to watch Advise and Consent. Political junkies especially would enjoy the movies harder edges provided by a stellar script by Wendell Mayes, based on the book by Allen Drury.

Yup, that was her

Director Otto Preminger has always had an eye for controversial projects. He made waves in film noir with Anatomy of a Murder (1959) and Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950) by playing on suggestive and sexual themes, and he turned exploitative addiction movies on their heads with The Man with the Golden Arm (1955). But while those films featured great actors and actresses at the top of their game, Advise and Consent showcases the entire life of a star. Henry Fonda and Gene Tierney at their apogee, Charles Laughton at his end and Betty White at her very beginning. This paradigm doesn’t even include the work of Don Murray and George Grizzard, both of whom were eyes of their respective torrents yet never went on to do anything else of grandeur.

Never let it be said that Preminger was schlocky

Unfortunately Otto Preminger’s career became a shadow of its former self after 1962. Likely seeing the validity of employing a powerhouse cast, he rested on his laurels with such clunky trifles as Skidoo (1968) and Hurry Sundown (1967). But even in his later more schlock films, Preminger never ceased to captivate his audience through strong, pulpy stories to which Advise and Consent stands as the apex of high art, and low sensationalism. So the next time you see House of Cards on your instant queue or you’re longing for another gander at episodes of The West Wing remember, there was a time in the 60’s where things weren’t always red white and blue.

Final Grade: A