Wednesday, March 25, 2009
One missing piece
THE WACKNESS. Short post here because I don't have much to say about the movie (trailer) other than this: it had everything for it, except the story. I remember you had it on your honorable mention list, which is fine as I thought it was pretty good in a lot of ways and might have done the same. It had a great atmosphere, pretty snappy dialogue, and fantastic acting -- especially by Sir Ben Kingsly in a role a bit different then, oh, Gandhi. But the story was kind of lame. I found myself groaning at the thought of it turning into another coming-of-age story where the kid learns a lesson and grows up a bit and realizes the grown ups aren't as responsible as he thought. All of the elements where there except for that cliche storyline. That is, at the risk of sounding just as lame, wack.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just for the record, you do sound lame. Just kidding, I actually agree with most of what you said. It is, after all, just a pretty by-the-numbers coming-of-age, first-love story, with the gimmick of its being set in the early '90s. I even think that element kinda backfired; it didn't really bring anything interesting to the movie in an historical sense (they gave a nod to Giuliani-era crackdowns on minor offenses, but that's it), and the more superficial "period-piece" elements seemed corny and took me out of the story a bit—I'm thinking of all the '90s hiphop slang (I mean, it's not like in "Easy Rider" they said "groovy" and "far out" every other sentence), the Fly Girls-esque fantasy sequence, and I remember the main character comparing the girl to someone during their trip to the beach that almost made me laugh out loud it was so self-consciously '90s. That said, I liked enough of the rest of the movie—especially Sir Ben, giving an interesting, touching, not-just-cashing-a-paycheck performance—that it warranted an honorable mention in my Best-Of list.
ReplyDeleteSir Ben certainly was dope. What I really liked was how, like you said, he didn't just phone it in. He went all in and brought so much energy to the role that could have come across as a groaner. I fear you and I will have to differ, however, on the self-conscious 1990s references. First, I think that because these were kids who lived in the upper east side and probably want to seem cooler than they actually are, they are the type that would over-use the slang. I can also see what you're saying as far as it backfiring in "quality of movie" measurements. There was a NY Post cover with OJ on it that caused some eye rolling. But I, and I think I'm not the one, have a lot of nostalgia for the '90s and references to it make me smile. I loved the fly girls and the nod to Billy Jean (which dated before 1994 but still would have been what Lucas grew up on). In nostalgia I think one can get away with some campiness and I, for one, would say that if anything they might as well have gone a bit further so as to not confuse camp with realism.
ReplyDelete