Comments for Perhapses http://www.perhapses.com The flickering light between emptiness and nihilism Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:42:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 Comment on American Splendor (2003) by Britt http://www.perhapses.com/2009/07/18/american-splendor-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-149392 Britt Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:42:23 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=951#comment-149392 I disagree that American Splendor is a film about depression, loneliness, and marginalized people or people with artistic sensibilities crushed by the weight of their daily lives. The directors have the opportunity to shoot for more but they instead chose to wrap Harvey's life into a neat MOW package and focus on the basic "man facing a grave life challenge" story. I didn't get the feeling that Harvey (as played) has any sense of self-awareness about himself and his role. I definitely never got a sense of the landscape or his real environment. All the shots seemed to be the same reference over and over. For example, an lengthy early scene shows Harvey waiting in line at a supermarket behind an older lady with a bunch of coupons. What was his reaction? Frustration. Was it any different than what you would expect of anyone else? No. If that scene was an actual event in Harvey's life, why bother to include it? If it didn't happy, why make up something so common? It was one dimensional and gave no insight into Harvey's life other than he gets frustrated when expected. That is why they added the comic book characters to that scene because it lacked any depth and they needed to fix it. If you watch the actual clip of Harvey's blowout on the Late Night show and compare it to their version, they actually do it a disservice. I get way more feeling for Harvey based on the actual clip than I do from the film version. Likewise, why bother adding the comic versions of Harvey to the scene when Joyce shows up at the train station? It would have been more powerful to let her scan the crowd. We know what her anxiety is. Don't dumb it down by filling in the blanks for me. The ending was way too sentimental. It was your typical wrap-it-up-nicely Hollywood ending so the viewers can laugh a little at this odd man and feel good that he's gonna be OK. It's not a bad film and perhaps my harsh criticism isn't entirely reflective of my appreciation of it. But I know it could be much more. Perhaps the filmmakers wanted to originally do something that took more risks but it is a standard guy meets girl story with a few quirks thrown in. If you can't see that, you need to expand your horizons of what you watch. I disagree that American Splendor is a film about depression, loneliness, and marginalized people or people with artistic sensibilities crushed by the weight of their daily lives. The directors have the opportunity to shoot for more but they instead chose to wrap Harvey’s life into a neat MOW package and focus on the basic “man facing a grave life challenge” story. I didn’t get the feeling that Harvey (as played) has any sense of self-awareness about himself and his role. I definitely never got a sense of the landscape or his real environment. All the shots seemed to be the same reference over and over.

For example, an lengthy early scene shows Harvey waiting in line at a supermarket behind an older lady with a bunch of coupons. What was his reaction? Frustration. Was it any different than what you would expect of anyone else? No. If that scene was an actual event in Harvey’s life, why bother to include it? If it didn’t happy, why make up something so common? It was one dimensional and gave no insight into Harvey’s life other than he gets frustrated when expected. That is why they added the comic book characters to that scene because it lacked any depth and they needed to fix it.

If you watch the actual clip of Harvey’s blowout on the Late Night show and compare it to their version, they actually do it a disservice. I get way more feeling for Harvey based on the actual clip than I do from the film version.

Likewise, why bother adding the comic versions of Harvey to the scene when Joyce shows up at the train station? It would have been more powerful to let her scan the crowd. We know what her anxiety is. Don’t dumb it down by filling in the blanks for me.

The ending was way too sentimental. It was your typical wrap-it-up-nicely Hollywood ending so the viewers can laugh a little at this odd man and feel good that he’s gonna be OK. It’s not a bad film and perhaps my harsh criticism isn’t entirely reflective of my appreciation of it. But I know it could be much more. Perhaps the filmmakers wanted to originally do something that took more risks but it is a standard guy meets girl story with a few quirks thrown in. If you can’t see that, you need to expand your horizons of what you watch.

]]> Comment on American Splendor (2003) by filmwork@comcast.net http://www.perhapses.com/2009/07/18/american-splendor-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-149156 filmwork@comcast.net Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:52:29 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=951#comment-149156 Happened to stumble upon the review and I must say I was somewhat stunned to read an essay as undeveloped and ill thought out as this. I find it particularly interesting that the reviewer remarks on the fact that Harvey Pekar, narrator, continually states the obvious throughout the film. I personally cannot remember reading a review on a serious film site that was more guilty of this very crime. "I'm inclined to think that the flatness of the film was intentional. From the initial meeting... it all seems wrapped in the confines of a comic book." Do you think? Since you seem to have missed the entire essence of the film, I will try to help you out. American Splendor is a film is about depression, loneliness, and marginalized people. It's about people without connections or money who live lives of quite desperation. It's about people with artistic sensibilities who are crushed by the weight of their meager daily lives, but want more than anything to be heard, to express the existential angst, pain, heartache, disappointment, and loneliness they've experience. Giamatti, in a marvelous performance, captures the essence of Harvey without resorting to mere imitation. How many actors other than he and the luminous Hope Davis would attempt to take on the portrayal of two physically unattractive characters who also were both appearing in the film with them. That's brave. As you failed to note in your review, Berman and Pulcini take a meta approach, which is obviously an attempt at commenting on the nature of fame, and the fact that Harvey's entire life's battle, his running rant if you will, is about his intolerance for bullshit. The subtly humorous scenes with the real-life and character Toby are attempts to provide comic relief, but also demonstrate Harvey's humanity (he is nice to Toby) and show him in relation to someone who is an even greater outsider than he. The fact that you state "more interesting to many viewers might be the question of who is Toby?" is probably as good an indication as any that you have missed the very heart of the film because it speaks to your desire to be titillated, amused, and Harvey and Joyce aren't quirky enough, or are too depressing for your taste. You speak nothing about the wonderfully complicated relationship between the fictional Harvey and Joyce, which is not sentimentalized in any way, and yet manages to convey how much each of these two offbeat people need one another. Throughout, Harvey continues to bitch and moan and cast a negative light on all of his experiences, but there is a beautiful success story here - it just isn't lined up and sign-posted like the normal Hollywood treatment would entail. And instead of praising American Splendor for its innovative technique and risk taking, you criticize the film for... what exactly? There doesn't seem to be a cogent point to be made anywhere in the entire piece. "I say that not to degrade what he has done, but out of a desire to better understand it." I have never read a single comic book from Harvey Pekar or anyone else, but I understand Harvey because the film beautifully evoked his humanity. "I felt as if I didn't get the whole thing." Wow. Probably best next time to leave the film criticism to people who do. Criticism is usually reserved for those who have thoughtfully taken in and analyzed a piece of art, judging it in the context of like work past and present. Understanding it is usually taken as a given. Happened to stumble upon the review and I must say I was somewhat stunned to read an essay as undeveloped and ill thought out as this. I find it particularly interesting that the reviewer remarks on the fact that Harvey Pekar, narrator, continually states the obvious throughout the film. I personally cannot remember reading a review on a serious film site that was more guilty of this very crime. “I’m inclined to think that the flatness of the film was intentional. From the initial meeting… it all seems wrapped in the confines of a comic book.” Do you think? Since you seem to have missed the entire essence of the film, I will try to help you out. American Splendor is a film is about depression, loneliness, and marginalized people. It’s about people without connections or money who live lives of quite desperation. It’s about people with artistic sensibilities who are crushed by the weight of their meager daily lives, but want more than anything to be heard, to express the existential angst, pain, heartache, disappointment, and loneliness they’ve experience. Giamatti, in a marvelous performance, captures the essence of Harvey without resorting to mere imitation. How many actors other than he and the luminous Hope Davis would attempt to take on the portrayal of two physically unattractive characters who also were both appearing in the film with them. That’s brave. As you failed to note in your review, Berman and Pulcini take a meta approach, which is obviously an attempt at commenting on the nature of fame, and the fact that Harvey’s entire life’s battle, his running rant if you will, is about his intolerance for bullshit. The subtly humorous scenes with the real-life and character Toby are attempts to provide comic relief, but also demonstrate Harvey’s humanity (he is nice to Toby) and show him in relation to someone who is an even greater outsider than he. The fact that you state “more interesting to many viewers might be the question of who is Toby?” is probably as good an indication as any that you have missed the very heart of the film because it speaks to your desire to be titillated, amused, and Harvey and Joyce aren’t quirky enough, or are too depressing for your taste. You speak nothing about the wonderfully complicated relationship between the fictional Harvey and Joyce, which is not sentimentalized in any way, and yet manages to convey how much each of these two offbeat people need one another. Throughout, Harvey continues to bitch and moan and cast a negative light on all of his experiences, but there is a beautiful success story here – it just isn’t lined up and sign-posted like the normal Hollywood treatment would entail. And instead of praising American Splendor for its innovative technique and risk taking, you criticize the film for… what exactly? There doesn’t seem to be a cogent point to be made anywhere in the entire piece. “I say that not to degrade what he has done, but out of a desire to better understand it.” I have never read a single comic book from Harvey Pekar or anyone else, but I understand Harvey because the film beautifully evoked his humanity. “I felt as if I didn’t get the whole thing.” Wow. Probably best next time to leave the film criticism to people who do. Criticism is usually reserved for those who have thoughtfully taken in and analyzed a piece of art, judging it in the context of like work past and present. Understanding it is usually taken as a given.

]]> Comment on Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 by Daily News About Film : A few links about Film - Tuesday, 28 April 2009 22:16 http://www.perhapses.com/2009/04/28/antonioni-v-lumet-match-1-set-2/comment-page-1/#comment-141220 Daily News About Film : A few links about Film - Tuesday, 28 April 2009 22:16 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:16:26 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=566#comment-141220 [...] Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 [...] [...] Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 [...]

]]> Comment on Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 by Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #1 < Perhapses http://www.perhapses.com/2009/04/28/antonioni-v-lumet-match-1-set-2/comment-page-1/#comment-141219 Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #1 < Perhapses Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:04:19 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=566#comment-141219 [...] light between emptiness and nihilism < Auteur Tennis, Match #1: Antonioni v. Lumet Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 [...] [...] light between emptiness and nihilism < Auteur Tennis, Match #1: Antonioni v. Lumet Antonioni v. Lumet: Match #1, Set #2 [...]

]]> Comment on Auteur Tennis by Auteur Tennis, Match #1: Antonioni v. Lumet < Perhapses http://www.perhapses.com/auteur-tennis/comment-page-1/#comment-139885 Auteur Tennis, Match #1: Antonioni v. Lumet < Perhapses Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:51:21 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?page_id=317#comment-139885 [...] to Auteur Tennis, a new feature here at Perhapses. The goal of Auteur Tennis is to compare key films from two [...] [...] to Auteur Tennis, a new feature here at Perhapses. The goal of Auteur Tennis is to compare key films from two [...]

]]> Comment on Universal Soldier: The Return (White Elephant Film Blogathon) by Matt Zoller Seitz http://www.perhapses.com/2009/03/31/universal-soldier-the-return-white-elephant-film-blogathon/comment-page-1/#comment-138712 Matt Zoller Seitz Fri, 03 Apr 2009 14:32:51 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=296#comment-138712 "This film sends a strong message about using technology and reconstructive surgery to make everything, boobies or soldiers, bigger and better." So it's basically "Brave New World" by way of Cinemax. Gotta check this out! “This film sends a strong message about using technology and reconstructive surgery to make everything, boobies or soldiers, bigger and better.”

So it’s basically “Brave New World” by way of Cinemax. Gotta check this out!

]]> Comment on Universal Soldier: The Return (White Elephant Film Blogathon) by Stacia http://www.perhapses.com/2009/03/31/universal-soldier-the-return-white-elephant-film-blogathon/comment-page-1/#comment-138295 Stacia Wed, 01 Apr 2009 06:22:57 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=296#comment-138295 Ah, that was terrific. You reviewed the movie I submitted for the blogathon, by the way. I chose it before I realized there was a Part III in the works, though, if that makes it better. It probably doesn't. I think Luc's daughter was born before he was zombified. No, wait, that doesn't make sense, as he was originally killed in Vietnam. You know, I've actually seen both the original and this sequel and I don't have a single answer to the questions that trouble our minds. Ah, that was terrific. You reviewed the movie I submitted for the blogathon, by the way. I chose it before I realized there was a Part III in the works, though, if that makes it better. It probably doesn’t.

I think Luc’s daughter was born before he was zombified. No, wait, that doesn’t make sense, as he was originally killed in Vietnam. You know, I’ve actually seen both the original and this sequel and I don’t have a single answer to the questions that trouble our minds.

]]> Comment on Universal Soldier: The Return (White Elephant Film Blogathon) by Kevin J. Olson http://www.perhapses.com/2009/03/31/universal-soldier-the-return-white-elephant-film-blogathon/comment-page-1/#comment-138288 Kevin J. Olson Wed, 01 Apr 2009 05:31:43 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=296#comment-138288 Great review. I remember seeing the original in the theater and thinking it was quite "bitchin'" -- okay so I was only in 7th grade or so, but still... The only thing I remember about "The Return" is that it had wrestling superstar Bill Goldberg in it. He even got to use some of his wrestling moves on some of the extras. Anyway, these are truly awful (which means wonderfully entertaining in my book) films. Great review. Great review. I remember seeing the original in the theater and thinking it was quite “bitchin’” — okay so I was only in 7th grade or so, but still…

The only thing I remember about “The Return” is that it had wrestling superstar Bill Goldberg in it. He even got to use some of his wrestling moves on some of the extras.

Anyway, these are truly awful (which means wonderfully entertaining in my book) films. Great review.

]]> Comment on 12 Angry Men (10/40/70) by rombesnd@udmercy.edu http://www.perhapses.com/2009/03/06/12-angry-men-104070/comment-page-1/#comment-135969 rombesnd@udmercy.edu Sun, 08 Mar 2009 01:30:01 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/?p=241#comment-135969 Great post--especially the comments about Juror #8. Nicely done. Great post–especially the comments about Juror #8. Nicely done.

]]> Comment on Rumble Fish by Tinkerbell http://www.perhapses.com/2008/01/18/rumble-fish/comment-page-1/#comment-105102 Tinkerbell Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:38:32 +0000 http://www.perhapses.com/2008/01/18/rumble-fish/#comment-105102 I think people who don't like this film is just because they don't understand what does it mean. Lucky them. I think people who don’t like this film is just because they don’t understand what does it mean.
Lucky them.

]]>