The Reluctant Fundamentalist: or why can’t Mira get that Bollywood Music out of her Hair?

Changez (Riz Ahmed, a handsome actor with limited range and modest charisma) is at home in Pakistan for a family celebration. Music plays, men sing, and we begin cross cutting to a kidnapping and the ransacking of an office.  The men sing more, the kidnapping goes on. The men sing louder and it goes on some more.  Louder and louder, to the same beat, without subtitles, although the close ups make it seem important and probably portentous.

And there’s the rub.  Mira Nair, a director of some achievement, just can’t stop the music.  it intrudes over and over in this tale of a Pakistani over-achiever who goes to Princeton, lands at a super charged investment firm, acts instinctively with a ruthless passion for the bottom  line, meets an almost unrecognizable Kate Hudson (it was shot in the aftermath of her second pregnancy) as a playful, formally inclined artist who’s of course the daughter of the firm’s top man, and then inevitably gets caught up in the racist hysteria of post 9/11 that targets him repeatedly as a national security threat based not on his custom made suits but his skin color. If this weren’t dramatic enough (though riddled with plot holes of every size), Nair tacks on the droning but hyperbolic music of Bollywood at its most stereotypical. It makes a decent film close to unbearable.

There is not only Erica’s (Hudson) sudden discovery of politics and the inflammatory 9/11 inspired installation work she comes up with, never mentioning it to her Pakistani boyfriend who had had harrassment aplenty by this point, and Liev Schreiber’s burnt out CIA/reporter character whose multiple identities and motives revolve like a crazy top around his loss of direction, except for finding his kidnapped buddy, an CIA case officer posing as an avuncular academic.  There is also the lame demonstration of Changez’s skill as a ruthless cost cutter with examples so obvioius, and implausible, that one imagines the other newcomers didn’t make them because they knew just how obvious or exaggerated they actually were.  And to top it all, the flashback structure, by which Changez tells his life story while we await, 24 style, the ticking time bomb of an imminent “extraction” of Changez from his university in Lahore where Liev tries to learn the whereabouts of his kidnapped buddy, creates completely fabricated suspense.  Without the flim flam of flashback, were it told chronologically, the implausibility would crush the film, if the music didn’t do it first.  Changez doesn’t know about the kidnapping but to reveal that would rob the film of its overwrought suspense.

Nair has definite talent but like Sidney Pollack she undercuts her material with sentimentality, something Katherine Bigelow learned to avoid in her quest to be even tougher and more right wing than the rest of the boys.

The de Young’s Jolika Collection of New Guinea Art: Imperilled by the Auction Block

I have to confess: I had to be escorted out of the space dedicated to the Jolika Collection of New Guinea art in San Francisco’s de Young musuem.

Not for wrongdoing but because the spirits in that space possessed me.  And I hasten to add: as a film professor, author, and modest art collector, I have my feet on the ground.

On more than one occasion a piece in the collection has riveted me in place.  Energy passed between us and I could not move.  The first time it happened I could not pass out of the room on my own and asked a Pacific Islander, serving as a museum guard, to escort me. He did and I was able to leave. I told him what happened and said to him the space was extremely spiritual and he replied, “I know.”

To me, the Jolika Collection is the greatest treasure in the museum.  Not just for its stunning beauty and remarkable range but for its deeply spiritual quality as well. I have seen Maori pass through talking among themselves, in their native language, in what were clearly tones of awe.  I imagine many others have had comparable experiences but perhaps not the museum staff.

They plan to deacquisition significant pieces from the collection at auction to raise funds fofr the museum, which feels a bit like selling off your first born child to add another bedroom for future children.  How can a museum maintain its stature if it undercuts its own strengths with sales of great art?

Deacquisitioning any of this collection would be a huge loss and could easily imperil its unique qualities, aesthetic and spiritual. The auction date is set but there may be time to try to make reason, and spirit, prevail.

Les Blank

Les was a great filmmaker and friend. He will be missed.

I had the honor of hosting his reception of a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Mendocino Film Fest, a little fest up the N. CA coast, and doing a q/a with him.

Having done this with Haskell Wexler the year before and worrying more about getting a word in than getting him to open up, there was just a bit of anxiety with Les who is prone to the laconic but after a clip from The Blues According to Lightnin’ Hopkins and a little appreciation of his subtle, non-verbal thematics, he lit up and talked freely of his wilder days of parties and partying and his film aesthetic of respect, appreciation and open-endedness. It was a great event and one I will cherish now that he is gone.

Roger Ebert

I miss Roger already.  Whenever I go to IMDB and want to find reviews of a film, his name appears first, if it appears at all, every time.  And I usually don’t go further.  His reviews invariably gave me what I sought: a clear sense of the film’s quality and virtues, some sensitive exploration of the issues it might raise, and an appreciation of its place in the larger picture of things. Be it a trashy B movie or a prestigous Oscar candidate, a difficulty foreign film or a topical documentary, Roger had something insightful to say.  His prose flowed easily, without affect, without the incendiary quality of Pauline Kael but also without the snide, my wit is more interesting than the film I’m reviewing snideness of Anthony Lane. His passion for the cinema stood out.  His clarity of vision and consistency of voice were remarkable.  He is clearly missed by many and the obituaries that have turned up everywhere, from the White House to the trade papers, are a tribute to his success in making movie reviewing an art of real use value to so many.

I met him at the Hawaii Film Festival years ago when he gave a more or less shot by shot analysis of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe and I thought to myself, I’ve been doing shot analysis in classes for a decade or more but I’ve not turned into a story telling form the way Roger has.  He led the audience through the film with a sense of drama and suspense, as we anticipated what the next insight would be as another shot appeared on screen.  he didn’t disappoint; he invited us to enjoy and even revel in the art of discovering and appreciating what makes a great film great.  That was his gift; if only more had it, film reviewing might be in much better shape than it is today.

 

The Oscars: Boobs and Buffoons

The real boob here was the host, Seth MacFarlane. If “the hook” still existed from its vaudeville days, the first line or two of his “I saw your boobs” song (using the word extremely loosely) would have warranted putting it into play.

The Academy’s membership and its viewing demographic skew upward, into the mature and elderly.  They know they need to reach a younger, more diverse audience.  Instead they seemed to have decided that all they need is to reach teen age boys on testosterone binges, the kids who flock to gross out comedies, horror films and action movies.  MacFarlane gave that group lots to laugh at, but noting the aghast expressions, cut short by the show’s producers who must have realized the reaction shots were of appalled female stars who couldn’t believe their ears, Captain Kirk’s judgments were being born out as he tried to jokingly side step the disaster Kirk warned of.

How to fix it? Apart from banishing MacFarlane back to juvenline TV shows, the Academy should do 3 things:

1. Downplay the host role.  At best the canned humor and ad libs pale compared to solid stand up comedy.

2. Play up the movie role.  Give more time to the films celebrated. Show more clips, but in the spirit of the now ubiquitous but seemingly unknown to the Academy Bonus Material on DVDs.  Add commentary by participants, add interviews and voice-over, add “making of” coverage and behind the scenes moments.  Help viewers appreciate the magic that lies within all great or even really good films.

3. Banish “thank you” from the winners’ vocabulary.  How can anyone hunger to hear winner after winner thank people we have never heard of?  As one winner said this time, “I will be thanking the people who helped win this over the next two weeks,” as well all winners should.  Let winners Thank the Academy. Period.  Let them say a few words about what they did or how they did it, or what working on the film was like, or how it came about, or what was most challenging or rewarding.  Let them share with us something of what brought them to the stage in terms of what they did.  And then let them exit with dignity, not with fanfares of trite music as if they were uninvited party crashers.

These three changes along with banishing buffoonery from the show will make The Oscars the kind of “inside” celebration, which, once shared “outside” the industry in a live television broadcast will linger in our minds as something memorable and not because it’s  a disturbing demonstration of how many boobs it takes to mess up a potentially great show.

House of Cards: aces high

Netflix is full of surprises.  First the pricing debacle last year when arrogance seemed to triumph over customer relations and now their first self-produced tv series, if I might use that anachronistic term in the age of digital convergence.  House of Cards is a quality production.  It works.  It captures and holds attention and the fact that the entire series is immediately available anytime for viewing is a huge plus for audiences no longer forced to wait a full week for the next episode of a popular show.

Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright make the series.  They are omnipresent and their relationship as a married couple whose bond revolves around power and the manipulation of others just gets more and more fascinating. To wait for a moment of complete tenderness is to wait for hell  to turn to lemonade.  They genuinely respect and support each other in their nefarious dealings, they both clearly love power more than anything else and see romantic love, fidedity, monogamy, tenderness, and compassion as the Achilles heels of those they manipulate.

Spacey’s frequent asides to the viewer draw us into their warped view of life even further and the entire series treats government as a cauldron of deceit, betrayal and oneupsmanship.  Spacey is the master these dark skills, save for an amazing moment of melt-down on national tv in the middle of the series.  The chess board in the background of several scenes at the Underwood home is clearly there as metaphor for his ability to plan more moves ahead than anyone else.  We think we see where he’s going and he consistently surprises us by pulling another ace from the hole and gaining the leverage he seeks rather than the outright triumph he appears to want.

It’s a game of delayed gratification as he plots his moves to avenge a slight delivered by the President in the first episode: he seems poised to gloat at bringing someone low only to show us, over and over, that he could care less about gloating now that he has them by a sensitive genital appendage: they will do his bidding as a freshly recruited pawn in a game that unfolds with a deliciously pointed, powerful pace and yet extends hours after hour.  The script shimmers with callous, outrageous double-deaing. Honor, integrity, principle, values, service–the sacred cows of government service are but code words to deploy when necessary and mock whenever possible.  The series doesn’t present a pretty picture of politics, nor, to the extent it bears echoes of the world from which it stems–Hollywood or Neflix–of the entertainment industry. Not surprising, that, but House of Cards pushes its portrayal of the abuse of power with a relentless determination that remains rare.  I haven’t gotten to the end game yet so I’ll have to see if these comments call for revision but as of now, squarely in the thick of the series, it exudes a fascinating bleakness, a captivating, sordid appeal that seems to match perfectly the deeply disillusioned sense of a people tired of a government that postures more than it acts.