"Pi" (A Symbol) and Beware Kristen Stewart Maybe Can Act...Films 121-124

Well, another great weekend spent outside, for the majority of it. I also hit up the USM Bike Swap and purchased a new road bike for myself. I'm psyched to get back on the road again. I love riding my bike!

_________________________________________________
Film 121
"Pi"
Directed by: Darren Aronofsky

This is perhaps one of the most riveting directorial debuts. This is the film that birthed one of the most creative and stunningly original film directors career. It's the beginning of Aronofsky's visionary approach to filmmaking. Look at his filmography:

Pi- 1998
Requiem for a Dream- 2000
The Fountain- 2006
The Wrestler- 2008
Black Swan- 2010
Noah- coming 2014

"Pi" is a film about the madness that can often accompany genius. Max (played by Sean Gullette) is a math whiz who believes: 1) math is the language of the universe 2) nature can be expressed in numbers- there's a great discussion of the Fibonacci sequence at either a diner or a bar with a rabbi, and going along with that 3) there are patterns everywhere in nature. He spends most of his time searching for these patterns as his way of understanding the chaos. And he thinks that he can predict anything if he can understand it. All of this, of course drives him crazy. Max lives in an otherwise (to us) chaotic and claustrophobic studio apartment (or maybe just a single room, we never get an expanded look of the barricade). His door has three locks and he cannot stand visitors or interruptions. He has a high-powered (for the time, 1998)  and customized computer which he utilizes at any cost. He writes computer programs, then tests them, then looks for patterns. When he writes one program he discovers a 216 digit bug within it. He has a conversation with a rabbi, who informs him that there is a theory among some Jewish scholars that the name of God contain 216 letters. It's interesting that Aronofsky brings a God-element into a film about genius, chaos and math. Does God have relevance in this argument? So, Max sets out to find the pattern in the 216 digit bug. He wants to find the mathematical key to everything and anything, including God, the stock market, weather patterns, history, the future, even sports' scores and chess moves. Max is a character driven by the assumption that there is a key to be found. It's almost as if he needs there to be a key. But, when you are looking for something that doesn't exist, it makes you crazier the closer you get to it. I guess, in that respect I can understand why Aronofsky would choose to include the God-element, because one could argue that many religious people spend their lives under the assumption that God exists and with Him, a Heaven (when you die). This is the key to many people's lives. Maybe that makes you crazier the closer you get to it. But, what if that doesn't exist?
The assumption of numbers and patterns existing in eerything is what drives Max crazier than he already was. It pushes him over the edge, so to speak. Not to mention the fact that he is riddled with painful headaches and nosebleeds. His hair is always a mess, too. He just constantly looks disheveled.

He doesn't trust anyone, except his old math professor, Sol (played by Mark Margolis). There is a Wall Street analysis firm that has been head-hunting him because of his skills and genius, too, which is driving him crazy. There's an interesting, yet bizarre scene where Max is confronted by these Wall Street giants, as well as the Hasidic Jew that told him about the 216 lettered name for God.

The fact that Max is driven crazy trying to find something that might not exist, but that several people connected to him have put their entire faith in makes "Pi" a film set in the thriller genre.

His headaches drive him crazier and there are some great cuts throughout the film to reiterate the fact that Max is in physical pain as well as mental pain. These quick, harsh cuts have become a technique that Aronofsky uses in all his films and never more well done than in "Requiem for a Dream."

I love this film and see it as a stepping stone in Darren Aronosky's development as a director.
.......................................................
Film 122
"Welcome to the Rileys"
Starring: Kristen Stewart, James Gandolfini and Melissa Leo

Hold the phone! Kristen Stewart might be able to act outside her pouty comfort zone. When given a decent script that involves a deeper character, she can pull herself together, although she definitely has moments of showing good ol' Kristen Stewart habits.

This is film with familiar plots, but it is done in such a way that you don't feel cheated. There's a middle-aged man (plumber supplies salesman from Indianapolis) named Doug Riley (played with a touch of softness not really ever seen before by James Gandolfini) and his wife, a recluse who hasn't been able to garner the courage or strength to leave their house since their 15 year old daughter died in a car accident, Lois (played wonderfully by Melissa Leo, every bit deserving of any and all acting accolades she gets these days, in my opinion). They seem frozen in their marriage. Yes, they love each other and will seemingly never leave each other. But they are frozen in that they don't know where to go next, now that their daughter is dead. We get the sense that he will not leave Lois because without him, she'd die (literally) because she is just racked/wrecked with guilt over their daughter's death. Doug has been having an affair with a black waitress at a diner he frequents every Wednesday for the past 4 years.

Doug takes a sales trip to New Orleans, post-Katrina, in order to attend a convention. Whether he ever makes it to the convention remains unseen, because the next familiar plot we encounter is the age-old "good guy trying to save a stripper/prostitute." Doug goes to a strip club upon arriving in New Orleans, either before or after the convention and while there he encounters Mallory (played by Kristen Stewart), who is very pushy about getting him into the V.I.P. room where she tries to sell herself to him for any sexual favors he wants. The trouble is, he's not buying what she's selling (perhaps because she looks young enough to be his daughter). He feels sorry for her. She is so obviously wounded and already pretty worn. She's also very hostile to him (throughout the film, actually, and she makes it blatantly clear she's not looking for a father). But, at the same time, carrying all this baggage with her, she appears vulnerable to Doug, like she does sort of want someone to care about her, not necessarily care for her, but to just take some time to go out of their way for her, to show some compassion. Mallory is a 16 year old runaway who has lied in order to strip where she can also entice her clients to let her perform sexual favors for extra money. That's how she's gotten by, but even that hasn't sufficed. Her power has been shut off and she quite evidently doesn't know how to take care of herself. She doesn't do laundry or cook for herself. Doug does all that when he takes it upon himself to stay with her.

Doug is so obviously lonely and lost and distraught over the loss of his daughter (in a manly way of being quiet and reserved with his emotions) as well as the virtual loss of his wife, who seems to be in a functional catatonic state, where any mention of her daughter will shut her down. Until about halfway through the film, when she gets the sense that she's lost Doug to New Orleans and whomever he's spending his time with down there, that she gets in the car and drives down to New Orleans.

Bravo to Ken Hixon, screenwriter, for deliberately avoiding seemingly obligatory dialogue and the expected cliches of the entire situation. Gandolfini's character is a gentle giant, fatherly when he needs to be. Kristen Stewart's Mallory has obvious complexion problems and seemingly does not wear makeup and kudos to her for that and for also opting to wear baggy jeans when she's not dressing like a stripper. She seems more like a tomboy than a girly-girl. And Melissa Leo's Lois is physically worn and lost in her own mind. She looks beaten down by self-imposed guilt.

This is a great indie film for the fact that it makes the situations it presents plausible. The characters are as real as movie characters get, I suppose, so in that sense, you feel for them. Kristen Stewart casts aside her terrible "Twilight" series and character for a more earthly, real girl with real problems. It helps that New Orleans looks as desolate as the characters that inhabit it here.

........................................................
Film 123
"Growing Op"
Starring: Steven Yaffee, Wallace Langham, Rosanna Arquette, and Rachel Blanchard (remember her from Saved by the Bell: The New Class? Or maybe Flight of the Conchords...she was the most beautiful girl in the room, depending on the room).

I wanted to like this film, but it never really adds up or kick starts itself. It's about a teenage boy who's grown up in a free environment. I mean, his parents are pot-plant growers. They are very free-spirited in their values. The only value his father hopes to have instilled in his son, Quinn, is that institutions and government are awful injustices to our freedoms and liberties. Insert the conflict now. Quinn meets and instantly loves for the new next-door neighbor, Crystal. Quinn has been home-schooled, but now he wants to attend high school, just so he can see and be with Crystal more.

Quinn's family has a decent dynamic that the film doesn't really spend time developing. I think it would've worked a lot better if it spent more time on the differences within the dynamic instead of making an attempt to make it more about the high school drama, with a twist of marijuana growing and selling. I think the trouble here is that it tries to take itself seriously when really it needs to realize its not so serious.
Kind of a waste of time. A short time, at least.

............................................................
Film 124
"Not Since You"
Starring: Kathleen Robertson (I love her, she's gorgeous and a decent actress), Desmond Harrington, Christian Kane, Jon Abrahams, Will Estes, Sunny Mabrey and Sarah Rue (blonde here)

Apparently on the festival circuit "Not Since You" was getting buzz for its "The Big Chill" vibe (although on a much smaller scale). There's definitely some thirtysomething angst and regret throughout the film that drives the plot along, mostly centered around 9/11 and how that was around the last time this group of friends was together and a happy, functioning unit. Since then, couples had split and people had moved away. What is bringing them together again now is a wedding, down in Georgia. Another girl from the group, not seen very much until the end and briefly for the wedding scenes, is getting married.

Now, I haven't seen "The Big Chill" yet (I will) but apparently there's a lot of existential questioning in that. Here, though, it's a lot more shallow questioning: why am I still single? a virgin? an alcoholic? obsessing over my ex? But it works for me, perhaps because I, too, am shallow some of the time, or perhaps because this group of "beautiful" actors make the script work for them and they work for it. Yes, their situations are rather simplistic given the history that is behind all of them. I mean, it's not like they are recent college grads (re: Reality Bites) on the cusp of discovering themselves. The trouble here is that they should've already figured themselves out and they shouldn't be having this problems and regrets. When you're thirtysomething you're supposed to have your life together, or at least getting it together (for the most part).

Even given its flaws, I really enjoyed the film for its story and how it was focused on one particular event (the wedding) and the surroundings. It moves along briskly and it resolves itself nicely.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Two Great Films, and more to Pass the Time

Best Albums of 2022

Best Albums of 2020 (The Year that Almost Wasn't, if it Wasn't for Music Saving Us All)