I missed last week's screening and thanks to me, nobody could check out movies from Ellen's library this week, so first off, I want to apologize if you didn't hear me in class. I'll give my checked out DVDs to Ying at the screening tomorrow. Anyway, I'm also trying to make up for my absence at the screening last week by blogging on the two movies I have checked out. The first one I watched was American Splendor, which we started in class last week (or the week before). One of the reasons I was interested in watching this movie was because of my project with Huda this semester. I thought this movie was a good example of how films can branch away from this old school idea that Documentary = Real and Fiction = Fake. To me, the idea that documentary is "better" than fiction film because it tells "real stories" is, frankly, bullshit. If documentary is supposed to be a representation of real life, then there should be no editing. There should be no sound except for the sound that comes out of the subjects' mouths. There should be no cuts, no edits, no transitions, nothing added by the filmmakers. In other words, nothing exciting or interesting. How many of you would be interested in documentary if every two-hour doc was one incredibly long shot focusing on one action being done by one person? I'm not sure how long that medium would last...
And fiction films tend to get flack from documentarians, I think, because they tend to believe that fiction is somehow "less real." To me, some of the most important things about human life are the things we dream up. Filmmakers who create fiction films splice together images and sounds to create a story as they wish it was told to create characters as they wish they looked, sounded and lived. In other words, fiction is the world as we wish we knew it. So, for me, American Splendor feels natural. The cuts between interviews with Harvey Pekar and Paul Giamatti's awesome portrayal are almost seamless, and I can't help but love any movie with such a fantastic cast. Giamatti is wonderful, and I've always loved his work. James Urbaniak, of Henry Fool and Fay Grim fame (two incredibly hilarious films by Hal Hartley that you have to see), is as bland and wonderful as ever.
I would rather not talk too much about the "plot" of this film because I think that anyone interested in film - documentary, fiction, whatever - should see this movie, and I'd rather not spoil it. American Splendor has some great lessons for documentarians and even more for people interested in directing, acting, screenwriting, or editing. The film has some interesting tricks up its sleeves, including some great animation and sound editing. For those of you who have seen American Teen, a documentary that came out last year and caused some interesting debates in the film world, the blend of "fact" and "fiction", so to speak, is also present in American Splendor. Of course, this film is more intentionally fictional, but take a look. I think you'll like it.
Ben, your thoughtful and insightful comments redeem your late return of the library DVDs! Thanks for posting. ES
ReplyDeleteI also checked out this film and really enjoyed it. The first cut to the real Harvey Pekar is very unexpected but it is great because at that point you understand that Giammati's portrayel of this oddball character is not outlandish at all. Instead, it is pretty accurate. It is very unusual that you get to check an actor's performance of a real person almost simultaneously as you watch him or her perform. The majority of the film does not consist of the real Pekar but I was excited and pleased everytime he appeared. There was a nice balance between the two Harveys.
ReplyDeleteI also thought it was very appropriate because in the film you learn that Harvey's comic, about his own life, was illustrated by many different illustrators. Therefore, his image to his select readers was constantly changing as his image changes to the viewers of this film.
Another big surprise in this film was the real David Letterman interviews with Harvey Pekar from the past. This footage was gold for the story because it told you so much about Harvey's slight success. It showed how he was willing to be made into a joke in order to gain more readers, how he slightly enjoyed his small amount of fame, how he refused to play the role of a well-behaved guest, how he felt about big corporations and television, how he was still a regular guy through it all. The look of this older footage didn't seem to disrupt the feel of the movie at all. However, the fake Letterman scene with Giammati did seem a bit odd and it was the only point where I felt I had to stretch a bit to go along with it.
All in all, a quality flick that was inspiring to me. I hope I didn't spoil too much.