Home Artists Posts Import Register
The Offical Matrix Groupchat is online! >>CLICK HERE<<

Content

52/100

[NOTE: Normally I post second-viewing thoughts about brand-new films straight to Letterboxd, as they tend to be very quick hits. This one runs a bit longer, though, and also I don't want to deal with the comments it'd probably generate from my 20,000+ followers there. So you get it first, and they can read it in like 2029 at the rate I'm going.]

Second viewing, up slightly from 48. Opening 25 or so minutes are just glorious, but it once again mostly lost me when the Gary Goetzman anecdotes take over. Having read an interview in which PTA clarifies his intentions...

The thing is, when your source material is just stories…when you’re adapting somebody’s bullshit tales they’re always telling, they jump along exactly like that. They always tell it to you sort of in terms of highlights. Like, “Hey, did I tell you about the time I was on The Ed Sullivan Show in 1968 with Lucille Ball?” Dot dot dot. “Oh my God, wait, did I tell you about the time I was arrested at the Teen-Age Fair for murder?” Dot dot dot. And then what happened? And then what happened? “Well, it all went belly up because of the gas crisis of 1973.” The movie is structured like that, like wild tales.

...I tried this time to think of it as his Radio Days, with the quasi-romance serving as anchor à la Joe's family. Rather than explicitly position Goetzman's "bullshit tales" as discrete, unconnected anecdotes, however, Anderson ambitiously attempts to weave all of them into a single coherent narrative. Masterful if you think it works, but I'm afraid that I just don't—the shoehorning feels blatant, especially w/r/t stuff like Alana's acting ambition, which gets dropped as unceremoniously, once it's served its purpose, as Alana from the back of "Jack" Holden's motorcycle (his jump being the purpose in question). This might actually be my fundamental problem with several of PTA's films, come to think of it; Boogie Nights and Magnolia (both of which I like, but mildly) feel similarly "assembled," which I'd always attributed primarily to his formal Altman and Scorsese lifts. 

Also, "I love you, Gary" as the final line really bothers me—so much, in fact, that I now think it may have retroactively diminished my appreciation for Haim's performance the first time around. Quite unfair, obviously—it's not her fault, and would be dwarfed by her truculent magnificence throughout even if it were. (This is why I make an effort to rewatch celebrated movies prior to submitting my Skandies ballot, on which I'd had her as a token 5-pointer. Not anymore!) But man, the way that line and its dreamy delivery and their positioning (hand in hand, she running behind him, as if being pulled along) and the sudden shift to slo-mo all suggest Alana belatedly/finally coming around, as if the film constitutes her three-year(ish) journey to recognizing how wonderful Gary is (as opposed to the two of them finding each other), makes me cringe way more than do the Japanese-accent bits. Those at least are clearly meant to be grotesque. 

Files

Comments

Anonymous

When does the “glorious” stuff stop for you? Is it the trip to New York, waterbed venture, or something else entirely?

gemko

I’m mostly okay with New York, though that’s my least favorite sequence up to that point. Gary walking into the waterbed store is where it starts feeling forced to me. (In part because I grew up with a waterbed in my house and they just look like a bed from a distance. It’s not something you’d spot through a store window and then ask the clerk “What is that?”)

Anonymous

Think you’ve perfectly summarised my issues with the film. I described it somebody as either too plotless or not plotless enough, and it’s because it tries to feel like a coherent linear narrative whilst also digressing into random shaggy dog stories and vignettes. I would have much preferred if PTA had just dropped the love story entirely and hung out with Alana/Cooper.

Anonymous

Interesting that you clocked the movie as taking place over about three years. My instinct was 6-9 months. Are there any concrete clues?

gemko

Toward the beginning, when Gary’s eating fast food with his mom in the car, the radio DJ calls <i>Something/Anything?</i> Todd Rundgren’s “new album.” That came out in February 1972. The gas crisis was summer 1973 and pinball was legalized in summer 1974. So maybe only 2-2.5 years.

Anonymous

I love the movie, but I completely agree with you about the final line. It turns the smile on my face into a frown every time.

Anonymous

The timeline of the film is completely jumbled. The oil embargo began in October of '73. Joel Wachs lost his primary in April of '73 but we see Alana and Gary working for him after the embargo put their waterbed company out of business. And the pinball legalization happened in '74 as you say but within the film it's concurrent with the campaign in '73. It's established Gary's 15 in the opening scene yet his and Alana's big fight in the third act stems from him driving himself which is only a big deal if he's not old enough to drive (otherwise who cares?) My theory is the entire film is meant to take place over the course of one endless summer (post school picture scene) which is why Gary and his buddies are never in school and are out late every night and it's using all of these events as an amorphous version of the 70's that wasn't designed to be scrutinized.