Friday, September 25, 2020

I'm Thinking of Ending Things

This is one of the greatest surprises of my moviegoing life -- and it's the writer I grew up with. This isn't Anomalisa -- this is Charlie Kaufman here and now. It's almost unrecognizable, and nearly inscrutable. I've never experienced a movie so tantalize my predictions and so ruthlessly defy them. Mulholland Drive is the obvious comparison for me, though that felt fantastically alien beside the ever-humble, ever-human writer who was always egocentric enough to penetrate my egocentrism. Mulholland Drive felt like someone else's nightmare, while this wormed itself in cozily. Trite to say I love the lead performance -- Bill could have said it for me, or anyone who ever shared my taste. Finally! a Kaufman character to love. Caden was too grotesque, Hazel too awkward, Joel too pitiful, Clementine too irritating, Michael too egotistic, Lisa too average,... this I love. I wonder whether the novel would grant me any interpretive purchase. I hope not. This is gorgeous, if incoherent. But I'm not sure. Eternal Sunshine and Mulholland Drive both rewarded chronology- or identity-tracing. I really don't have much here, and I hope there's nothing to miss in this sense. I don't like when movies require their companion works. I like when movies are self-contained. I hate adaptations.

As for "almost unrecognizable": Jake almost didn't look like Philip Seymour Hoffman, and the play-within-a-play scene could almost be mistaken as merely coincidental with Synecdoche. There were other small trips, especially in dialogue, plus lyrics I knew were Kaufman's -- he probably needs to stop touching the music.

Tough to say I love a movie I've seen one incomprehensible time, but I am impressed for the effect it had on me. Rarely do I anticipate events in a plot like this -- and fail to foresee the left hook. Nor can I call any of it a left hook, but shades of blows, a march of shadows, cuts to new dreams: no plot-twist; always shifting. This is one the most unexpected movie experiences in my memory.

When I recently reviewed Anomalisa, I asked whether Kaufman would grow up. Here is a massive step forward. I'm listening.

P.S. Can you imagine a more egocentric filmography? In Adaptation he put himself in the film, twice; in Eternal Sunshine he spent half the movie in his head; in Synecdoche he manifested through infinite microcosms; and finally, in Anomalisa, he was actually the only person. In this movie, I'm not sure, though much is along those lines. One would expect Kaufman's psychological horror to be entirely internal, and much of this is, but there's always the question which of the characters is messed up: none, one, or all.

P.P.S. It's also difficult to imagine a homelier career of characters. Think them all through. Even tropey Cameron Diaz is downgraded as much as possible. PSH is famously unfortunate; the whole idea of Lisa is zero remarkability. This movie certainly doesn't blaspheme the idea, but here we have a character who kind of works. There was certainly room to aim higher, but he's not reaching for the bottom of the barrel like he usually does. The barrel of cinema, that is, not the barrel of humanity. It's also really interesting I've never seen this act(or/ress). Anyway, Kaufman developed.


Second watch 10/2
Hannah suggests the following, as I understand:
Jake is certainly central/main/fundamental character. The janitor is older Jake, and most of the movie is his memory or imagined memory. He probably never spoke to the woman, but perhaps saw her once, perhaps at the trivia night. She's mostly imagined, from name to occupation to events. She suggests as much when speaking to the janitor in the school -- they never really met. Anyway, the janitor is mentally ill or severely lonely. He prodigiously fabricates memory and identity. The woman is still our rock, but sadly the movie's not about her.

3 comments:

  1. I envy your experience of this picture! I put it on, but threw the towel during the dinner w/ Collette and Thewlis. Maybe I'll give it another run (I didn't consider this idea until this moment).

    I don't think I can endure Antkind sadly. I lack trust in Kaufman as an artist. I think it would be painful and sad to continue through reading in hatred.

    Really the only connection I've had with Kaufman's work is Synecdoche. I mean is there any way to read this optimistically?! The value to me is how funny it is I guess...

    I saw Salò recently and have a deep resentment and annoyance toward those who find it funny. So I suppose anyone who views Synecdoche seriously could take offense!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why did you throw the towel at the dinner scene?

      I've read a few pages of Antkind so far. I was immediately surprised by his indulgence in his artistic flaws. I figured he'd be subtler and more mature in novel format, but the beginning felt overtly Kaufman, not in a good way. Nevertheless I sort of trust him to make something great. I think I still love Synecdoche. I'm Thinking of Ending Things had me really optimistic, hence the shock at the opening of Antkind. But I think I trust him to do something good.

      Delete
    2. The entire half-hour or however long was painful. Once it became clear Collette and Thewlis would be in those awful masks it felt like a foregone conclusion it wouldn't improve. I found Plemons an awful experience too; Jesse whatever her name was ok but I was hoping for more.

      The overriding feeling was cringe, which is tough to ride through.

      The indulgence in Antkind is what I'm afraid of. I don't even think I started the novel proper. It was some sort of tablesetting that forced my eyes away.

      Delete