5/30/20
I haven't re-read that review yet, basically since I wrote it. At that time I anticipated Anomalisa for years before it arrived, then even for a while after it arrived. I partly struggled to get a hold of it, and partly was afraid. I watched it twice that weekend, I believe. I haven't seen it since. So I believe I've seen it twice, around 8/13/16. I forgot about that review, watching it now, until I heard the parallel fifths/fourths during the romantic climax; then I remembered mentioning those. I'll read that review once I write some on this.
I'm not sure about Anomalisa -- is it a masterpiece (Kaufman's ideal actualization) or tragically flawed (Kaufman's real actualization)? Either way it's Kaufman, but is it his noblest expression, or his real? I don't know. I think the difficulty arises from the fractured timeline -- presumably the meat of it existed a while before Synecdoche, but was retrofitted to this film many years later. Many years and career developments lie between conception (for stage?) and execution (on film).... check my facts. I think this explains its dance between mature masterpiece and immature indulgence. So it's hard for me to evaluate -- of course I love it, I can't but, but how much do I really like it? I don't really feel any affection for any of the characters or actors, which makes a difference. It's tough, finding the whole thing sort of ugly. Usually a person likes movies that feel beautiful. But Anomalisa feels painfully unattractive. Of course I love it. It's almost perfect, almost uniformly subtle and mature, relative to his earlier movies. He almost creates a whole movie without his literary rendition of lonely masturbation -- and literal -- but ultimately he couldn't pull it off. For instance, in such a short movie, why do the dream and the speech take so much time? It feels like Kaufman losing control and flailing, like he does -- forgetting his purpose. It's stamina -- like he's almost finished reading The Trial but can't resist the prospect of setting the book down and opening his pants. He's brilliant -- but ever he falters. He's always been gluttonous, and otherwise would create perfect movies. Anomalisa could be perfect, but the timeline is fractured, and he can't quite hold such noble vision for the duration. Maybe someday! I hope he's polishing up, all these years since. Maybe in his 80s he'll create some of the finest films ever. But he still has a little growing up to do. Fortunately his vision is keen, hand deft, heart true. I love this filmmaker. This film is almost a masterpiece.
Synecdoche feels like he's throwing everything at the wall, but it's so true to himself that the vision is consistent. Birdman feels like the most perfect interesting movie (I know, different director). Anomalisa is sort of a smattering, and almost perfect, and it is interesting, so it dances between the peaks of passion and perfection.
I'm not sure about Anomalisa -- is it a masterpiece (Kaufman's ideal actualization) or tragically flawed (Kaufman's real actualization)? Either way it's Kaufman, but is it his noblest expression, or his real? I don't know. I think the difficulty arises from the fractured timeline -- presumably the meat of it existed a while before Synecdoche, but was retrofitted to this film many years later. Many years and career developments lie between conception (for stage?) and execution (on film).... check my facts. I think this explains its dance between mature masterpiece and immature indulgence. So it's hard for me to evaluate -- of course I love it, I can't but, but how much do I really like it? I don't really feel any affection for any of the characters or actors, which makes a difference. It's tough, finding the whole thing sort of ugly. Usually a person likes movies that feel beautiful. But Anomalisa feels painfully unattractive. Of course I love it. It's almost perfect, almost uniformly subtle and mature, relative to his earlier movies. He almost creates a whole movie without his literary rendition of lonely masturbation -- and literal -- but ultimately he couldn't pull it off. For instance, in such a short movie, why do the dream and the speech take so much time? It feels like Kaufman losing control and flailing, like he does -- forgetting his purpose. It's stamina -- like he's almost finished reading The Trial but can't resist the prospect of setting the book down and opening his pants. He's brilliant -- but ever he falters. He's always been gluttonous, and otherwise would create perfect movies. Anomalisa could be perfect, but the timeline is fractured, and he can't quite hold such noble vision for the duration. Maybe someday! I hope he's polishing up, all these years since. Maybe in his 80s he'll create some of the finest films ever. But he still has a little growing up to do. Fortunately his vision is keen, hand deft, heart true. I love this filmmaker. This film is almost a masterpiece.
Synecdoche feels like he's throwing everything at the wall, but it's so true to himself that the vision is consistent. Birdman feels like the most perfect interesting movie (I know, different director). Anomalisa is sort of a smattering, and almost perfect, and it is interesting, so it dances between the peaks of passion and perfection.
