A certain story telling theory holds that there is only a limited amount of stories. Each of these stories is like a multi faceted gem. The task of a story teller now is to take one and hold it to the light in ways so as to make the reflecting light sparkle in new directions. And have the viewer marvel at it. Mind you, this is not the same as rebelling against convention. This is about respecting the gem and trusting that each facet will do its magic, as long as it is turned in the right direction. And that is just what this movie does, written by Stuart Blumberg and brought to the screen by his buddy Edward Norton. This is the one about the rabbi, played by Ben Stiller, and the priest, played by Edward Norton, who fall in love with the same secular woman, played by Jenna Elfman. Stiller has this eerie skill to do outrageous comedy while maintaining a connection with the viewer because he remains so utterly human and not a comedy prop, from "There's something about Mary", to "Mystery Men", to "Meet the Parents". Not quite happy enough with being one of the best and most versatile actors of his generation and having proved such in "Fight Club" and "American History X", here Norton also turns to producing and directing and whaddayaknow, next to doing an incredible job at all three in a genre so unlike his previous work, at about the same time he also dated Salma Hayek. When it rains, it pours with this guy. These two teamed up along with such ace quality screenwriting would need no more. But the real treat, the icing on the cake that will actually make you lick every slice instead of actually eating it, is Jenna Elfman. I dare say to every male that has reached the age of reason, if you like this movie, by the end of it you will find yourself smitten with Elfman's character Anna Riley, regardless of whatever undoubtedly wonderful woman you are with in daily life. The Norton / Stiller chemistry turns the gem and makes it shine almost effortlessly; however, it is Elfman's portrayal of Riley that makes it sparkle so brilliantly to the extent that light will make sound, and will blind you to the point that you will see white spots for some time to come. She is truly amazing. The core of the gem lies of course in the screenplay, written by the guy who played the car salesman in Fight Club that gets beaten up by Norton's character. No, really. What makes it even more incredible is that this funny and brilliantly structured piece of work actually marks Stuart Blumberg's debut as a screenwriter. An easy paced story, it has highly original characters next to the leads, from the multi-religious bartender, to the rock-hard abs date-from-hell, and last but not least, Don the Karaoke machine vendor (he truly deserves a tv spin off of his own). It contains razorsharp dialogue and truly heartfelt romantic story telling, and without any disrespect integrating such a precarious subject as religion without ever having it become any issue that interferes with just this very thing: a great romantic, intensely funny story. Feel-good movies like this walk a thin line between heaven and hell and most of them indeed do end up in purgatory. Not this one. Meg Ryan and Sandra Bullock may have started the book on contemporary female feel-good romantic leads, all pales compared to the next chapter. Move over. Heeeeeeerrrrrrre's Jenna!
Reviews
5 Reviews
The Muse
(1999)
A horse named Confusion
26 February 2001
Insanity gets you money to spend on even more insanity. This appears to be the equation that reflects the nature of the beast residing under the infamous Hollywood sign. It is also the equation that ensures a steady flow of that fascinating product you cannot get enough from. We shouldn't question it too often. Let it run this town in doing what it has done best for the last eighty years or so. And if do you question it, do the only sensible thing possible: make tremendous fun of it. Robert Altman did just that in "The Player"; the same goes for Arthur Hiller in "Burn Hollywood Burn: an Alan Smithee Film". While the former was another multiplot, multicharacter masterpiece that indeed did show the very nature of the beast and the latter too much incrowd tongue-in-cheek to be appreciated by the average viewer, with "The Muse" Albert Brooks managed to deliver a relatively small but hilarious film that looks at, frowns upon, wonders at and then declares terminally insane the world these characters inhabit. Playing a screenwriter who comes to a point in his career where he has lost his "edge" and stumbles upon a rather miraculous woman claiming to be a genuine muse, he basically does the thing Ben Stiller is now making buckets of money out of, playing a no-nonsense, do-goody schmuck who does not understand a bit of, but has no choice but to ride the lightning of circumstance. What I found was depicted rather well was the credibility of this insane world: an actual muse straight down from the Greek gods providing inspiration to the deprived (but rather wealthy) who, although demanding outrageous conditions, is revered by the elite of the Hollywood industry, because she, well, inspires. You think I'm kidding? Had the makers of "Blair Witch Project" decided they should make a mockumentary on this, I would have bet good money people all over this town would be begging their agent to get her number. The cast of this movie clearly had a great time doing this one. Apart from the numerous cameos of rather famous directors and actors, I reckon it must indeed have been fun for these people to have a go at their "workplace". As previously stated, Brooks is great and there's rather funny supporting roles for Jeff Bridges and Andy MacDowell. What is not supported as always is Sharon Stone's chest, who actually does a great job as the very out-there muse and, although non-nude throughout the movie (welllllll, almost) still doesn't need a bra (or silicones). This is not a brilliant movie, it's not even great, it certainly isn't anything like The Player, but put down a couple of bucks in your videostore and what you'll get is just a plain hilarious comedy, sharp and witty, courtesy of Brooks delivering his own script under his own direction. And if you are wondering about the title of this little review, look out for the party scene shot in Hollywood's most famous restaurant "Spago's", during which Brooks' character is trying to explain to someone what it is he does for a living. Promise me that in the unlikely event you totally hate this movie, you will wait for this sequence. It had me rolling off my couch with laughter. The stuff of legend. Or rather, that's what I would have said had I lived under the Hollywood sign.
Hannibal
(2001)
Less would have been Moore.
23 February 2001
Telling a good story, either book or script, needs to be victorious in two wars: one, it needs to take the reader or viewer away from his familiar surroundings and not have him flee, and two, in this strange and wondrous universe, without missing a beat it needs to lead him back to his very own soul. To have an event driven genre meet these requirements is incredibly hard, but two of the most famous of these battles already waged in the Hannibal universe succeeded in this gloriously and at the same time form this film's main enemies. One is the film Silence of the Lambs, through the fantastic performances of both Foster and Hopkins that are led through its universe by the hand of scriptwriter Ted Tally and the eerie directing skill of Jonathan Demme, that effortlessly returns as the conqueror in both wars. The second is the book that the film Hannibal is based on. I remember starting in the bathroom sometime in the afternoon and reading it cover to cover, skipping every meal until sunrise was nigh. An amazing tour de force that had me diving deep into the darkest ponds of the soul and sympathizing with one of the most ruthless killers ever invented while wondering more about the writer than the characters. It is not easy to join these ranks. In my opinion this film came close, but no cigar. The creative powerhouses in this movie all claim that one should judge it on its own merits, but during the movie, one can't help but noticing it still relies heavily on the memory of the viewer regarding its prequel. True, Scott, Zaillian and Mamet have made a serious attempt to capture Hannibal's playground adequately, true, Hopkins delivers memorable moments, true, Moore is a more than worthy successor to Foster, but frankly I think they haven't tried hard enough to win the war. In my opinion the Hannibal universe is equally character driven as it is event driven, but sadly, focus was put on the latter. The script allows for generous leaps in the storyline and suffers from loss of the threathening peace and tranquility that made the book and its prequel so enormously good; the musical score is way towards orchestral overkill (they should have stuck with Howard Shore, instead of the incredible amount of people this uneven score took); and oddly enough, there is just, well, too much Hannibal and too little Mason Verger (who in the book after making Martini's out of childrens' tears after he psychologically tortures them immediately ranked among my top list of seriously evil characters). I would have liked it more if the focus of the movie was kept on Starling and if Verger was fleshed out some more. The 40 odd minutes of Hannibal in Silence were of incomparable quality; now, I found only about 60% of his screentime to be actually memorable. I would have liked smaller but more powerful dosages. This time the film was more of a Hopkins vehicle and that simply does not enough credit to the rest of the story. In its favor I should point out that I liked it for Moore's performance, Scott's dark directing skills and its clinical use of extreme violence that Scott has written the book on (although I would very much have liked to see how David Fincher of Seven, The Game and Fight Club, would have handled this one), Oldman as Verger who turned in yet another good show and sadly got way too little screentime, the pigs were there (not credited in Snatch) and oh, for readers of the book, also the dinner scene at the end, that I have to admit was actually one of the sickest things I have ever seen. All in all, a bit disappointing, but worth watching.
White Men Can't Jump
(1992)
It's hard being this good
21 February 2001
Surely you will know of a sandwich shop somewhere in your neighborhood or the city you live in that, when viewed from the outside, holds little promise. There is no way to tell if they sell anything out of the ordinary, to say it is properly decorated would be an insult to the very craft of decorating, the menu is unclear and priced so low it can't be any good and on top of that, the patron doesn't look very inviting. But since it is cold and you're hungry, you go in and order that Daily Special that with a grunt from aforesaid patron is prepared for you. You sit back and take a bite. And then it happens. Wow. How can something this lame looking be this good? This review comes rather late in the day, given the fact that this movie was released already a while back, but every time it's on TV I take a bite and marvel at how bloody entertaining it is. This is no Oscar winner, no earth moving experience, but just proof that an entertaining story might just come careening around some corner you didn't expect it to come from. Don't expect a social commentary on the black 'n white boundaries and life in the ghetto or a senseless showcase of how entertaining great basketball is to look at, although Snipes and Harrelson surely deliver. Be prepared to be taken into the world of a group of characters that do need a little effort to identify with. And see how from the fairly uninviting premise of the blacktop of ghetto basketball courts, two very cocksure basketball hustlers, mating the naive and the somewhat worldwise, a girlfriend obsessed with Jeopardy and the ever so strange ethics involved in wagering bets, a frankly heartwarming story is squeezed, juggling fast-paced and often hilarious dialogue with life-turning -nasty-tricks drama, that is so utterly recognizable that at one point you wish you could hug Harrelson's character. Oh, and play ball like Snipe's. There is chemistry here people, both on the funny and the dramatic side, and it's a shame they didn't manage to repeat it on The Money Train. It is brought to the screen using unpretentious, almost nonchalant directing showing a clear love for great ballplay. Don't be deterred by Snipe's recent duds and Harrelson's somewhat beyond-your-grasp acting choices. In the words of Snipe's character, don't listen, but hear. Go rent this or switch to that channel and take a bite. You won't regret it.
Hurlyburly
(1998)
A little quality gem in drama, reminiscent of Less Than Zero.
14 July 2000
Though a little slow paced here and there, this is vintage material for both Penn and Spacey lovers, and Hollywood industry haters. Although it doesn't much deal with the industry directly, it reflects the desperate emptiness of the players involved. This is very, very much a dialogue driven ride, but who would object to that if you pit the likes of Palminteri, Penn and Spacey against each other. The coke induced introspective chit chat is at times plain hilarious. The acting is Oscar worthy: while Penn's and Spacey's acting powerhouses are awesome as always, Palminteri, in a part very much unlike the usual cocky Italian mobsters he is often typecasted in, gives a memorable performance as a suicidal manic depressive victim of the insanity that the vitriol mix of Hollywood and coke is famous for. The story is pretty thin, in terms of events creating a story arc, but I have seldom seen shallowness depicted so strikingly dead on the mark. The message of it seems to be that you can never hide from being human after all, especially not if you are covered in all the coke and money in the world, and once you come out of hiding, you may not like what you see in the mirror, and then it may be too late. This film will not brighten up your day but reflecting on it will. Go see it.
Tell Your Friends