HYDE PARK ON HUDSON: FDR MEETS ROYALS, BAGS DISTANT COUSIN

Roger Michell's Hyde Park on Hudson suffers from being a single film that operates as if it were three separate stories built around a single historical event.  Or rather, the audience is made to slog through having their affinities for the characters in Michell's movie abused as the narrative unpredictably flits from one character's perspective to another and then back again in a messy and incoherent fashion, abandoning Daisy (Laura Linney), the film's established protagonist, for so long that it's easy to forget that it's her story that's being relayed.  Daisy's modeled after Margaret Suckley, a distant relation of President Franklin Roosevelt, who had a love affair with FDR that went undiscovered until after her death.

The historical event in question is the 1939 private summit between King George VI (Samuel West) and Queen Elizabeth (the always great Olivia Colman) with FDR (Bill Murray) and Eleanor Roosevelt (Olivia Williams) at President Roosevelt's mother's (Elizabeth Wilson) estate in Hyde Park, New York.  The royals are there to ask for Roosevelt's support against the axis powers in war effort.  Each side knows the purpose of their assembly and, yet, the dictates of etiquette force a calculated dance around the issue.  The meeting presents many interesting possibilities and, on its own, may have made for a fine enough film; the obvious, but accentuated differences between American and English cultural mores constitute most of the better observations that the film has to offer.

Were this the only ambition of Hyde Park on Hudson, to move back and forth between each parties ruffled sensibilities as each endures the other for a higher purpose, it just might have worked as a picture.  Instead, the filmmakers seem to think that they can have its cake and eat it, too, attempting to have the film filtered through Daisy's recollections before jumping into sections that not only don't involve her, but also depict events that she couldn't possibly have witnessed.  The effect of these departures is that, when the story does finally slam back to acknowledging Daisy as its teller, the viewer no longer identifies enough with her to care about the major conflict that develops when she learns an uneasy truth about her president/lover.

Hyde Park on Hudson is an undeniably weirdly structured film.  Everything about it suggests that Bill Murray as FDR is meant to be the focal point of the story, but there's little access to that character, even when the script forces the film to embrace what feels like Roosevelt's objective viewpoint.  It operates as a love story, but with little apparent spark between Murray and Linney, not that it's their fault; the problems are all present in the script, not the performances. Beyond that, the pacing is unhurried to the degree that, although it's barely over 90 minutes, it's a movie that ends up feeling like it has an overly padded running time.  Even though there are several sequences that do work (the interactions between King George and Queen Elizabeth, in particular), it's hard to imagine anyone becoming too enthusiastic over this clumsily told, flat, and unromantic film.

Hyde Park on Hudson opens at the Regal Fox Tower on Friday, December 14th.  More info available here.

Remember to find and "like" us on our Facebook page.
Subscribe to the blog's feed here. 

HITCHCOCK: NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE GENUINE ARTICLE

What happens when one of the most compelling figures in film history receives the ol' biopic treatment?  Well, there's no hard and fast rules guiding the results, but in the case of Hitchcock, the outcome is a decidedly toothless affair, something that no one bothered to tell director Sacha Gervasi (Anvil: The Story of Anvil) and his cast, who seem to believe that they're pulling back the veil on a Hollywood master when, in fact, the plodding and all-too cautious plotting of Hitchcock undermines any chance of viewers being hooked into what little scandal (seriously, Hitch ate and drank too much and he liked blondes, is that all you got?) the film offers up.

Anchoring the more gossipy aspects of the narrative, we're given a supposedly inside look into Hitch's (Anthony Hopkins) marriage to his wife Alma (Helen Mirren).  The film proposes that she inhabited a sizable role in sculpting his art, picking up at a moment when Alma is beginning to feel neglected leading to private strain within their relationship.  At the same time, Hitch is struggling to get Psycho made, bristling against studio execs and censors who won't finance or clear the production for release.

The problem is that neither of these plot arcs are particularly well orchestrated.  The romantic angle falls flat, as the characterization of Hitch and Alma's relationship is far too sketched out, and there's never a sense of danger in Alma's flirtations with writer Whitfield Cook (Danny Huston).  As for the making of Psycho, the weight of history; the glaring fact being that Psycho was completed and became a massive success, significantly reduces the pressure within Hitch's situation, since it's impossible to simply forget or set aside knowledge of the film's eventual triumph and sustained influence.

Hitchcock ends up being less a disappointment than an unnecessary bit of nonsense.  It's entertaining enough, all of the actors (with the glaring exception of the poorly cast Scarlett Johansson as Janet Leigh) offering up serviceable performances.  Hopkins disappears the most into his role, although I found myself being hopelessly distracted at times by trying to figure out where the prosthetic chins ended and the real Anthony Hopkins began.  And maybe that's the best way to characterize the film, it works as a reasonable distraction while falling considerably short as a worthy substitute for the genuine article. 

Hitchcock opens at the Regal Fox Tower on Friday, December 7th.  More info available here.

Remember to find and "like" us on our Facebook page.
Subscribe to the blog's feed here. 

HELLO I MUST BE GOING: KEEP IT LIKE A SECRET

It seems like nowadays there's no end of films about folks unable to make it in the adult world.  A good deal of these narratives are aimed directly at a male experience (y'know, like most films produced) of arrested development.  Refreshingly, Hello I Must Be Going, like last year's Young Adult, has its eye on unpacking the life crisis of a woman in her thirties dealing with a post-divorce depressive spiral.

Amy (Melanie Lynskey) has landed back at her parent's home after being jilted by her ex-husband.  There's little indication that she's ready to move on with things anytime soon.  She constantly wears a ratty old t-shirt around the house and has developed sleeping patterns more akin to a teenager on summer break.  Her mother (Blythe Danner) is reaching the end of her rope with Amy, while Amy's father (John Rubinstein), perhaps due to his own economic worries, appears distracted, willing to allow Amy to figure it out in her own time.

Things begin to shift as Amy encounters Jeremy (Christopher Abbot from Lena Dunham's Girls), a significantly younger man, at a dinner held at her parent's home.  The social engagement is meant to lubricate a possible business arrangement between Amy and Jeremy's fathers, one that would allow Amy's dad to recover enough financially to be able to retire.  There's a instantaneous spark between Amy and Jeremy.  Despite Amy's sense that the relationship is inappropriate, she quickly gives in to their mutual attraction and begins sneaking around at night with Jeremy.

Directed by actor Todd Louiso (probably best known for playing Dick in High Fidelity), Hello I Must Be Going is an actor's piece.  The story doesn't stray too far outside the basic setup and viewers probably will guess how it will all work out fairly early on in the film.  The real attraction here is the performances, especially those of Rubinstein and Lynskey who create a believable, organic father/daughter relationship out of very little.  Watching them interact, one can easily draw a line between the way he deals with his failures and how she reacts to her own.  Whenever they share the screen, there's an intimacy between them that's breathtaking in its quiet, emotional depth.

Overall, Hello I Must Be Going is a modest piece, well-drawn, not too flashy, and peppered with fine, measured acting by its small ensemble.  It compares favorably with other unsung indie fare of the past like Tully.  It's a film waiting to be discovered by a small, enthusiastic few.  With a little luck, perhaps word of mouth will carry it far.  Maybe not.  Those who do stumble upon it will be pleased that they did.

Hello I Must Be Going begins its run at Regal Fox Tower 10 on Friday, September 21st.  More info available here.


Remember to find and "like" us on our Facebook page.
Subscribe to the blog's feed here.

RUBY SPARKS: WRITING AWAY THE ROUGH EDGES

Sometimes the problem is you.  It's not always a comfortable realization to arrive at but it's an observation that drives Ruby Sparks, the latest work by directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine).  The film peers into the life of Calvin (Paul Dano), a former wunderkind author whose single great novel still has him on the speaking circuit, labeled a genius by adoring fans and academics.  Fast forward about ten years and, other than a few short stories, Calvin's been unable to follow up on that initial success.  In fact, he's fallen into a long dry spell with no writing at all.  Adding insult to injury, his last girlfriend left him shortly after the death of his father.

Out of nowhere, Calvin begins dreaming of a mysterious and beautiful woman.  The vision triggers something in him, kicking him out of his rut and, after being pushed by his therapist (Elliott Gould), he begins to write about the woman of his dreams.  And then things get weird.  The girl, Ruby (Zoe Kazan, doing double duty here as screenwriter), appears in his apartment, seamlessly picking up the role that he's written for her; she's his girlfriend.  It's a bit of a shock at first (Calvin tells his brother that it's like Harvey, except "she's not an eight-foot rabbit").  Before long, though, he relaxes into the idea, quickly becoming comfortable living with and loving a woman who is essentially the product of a first draft.

Ruby's transformation from a simple fantasy into something far more complex--gasp, a real woman with actual emotional baggage--throws a wrench into Calvin's initial joy over her appearance.  But, since Calvin wrote Ruby into existence, he assumes (correctly) that he can change her behaviors via a few rewrites.  Whether or not he uses or abuses that power and what it says about his own ability to connect with others soon becomes the central conflict that haunts Ruby Sparks.  When we finally get the opportunity to meet Calvin's ex, her insight on their failed relationship, paired with Calvin's choices regarding Ruby, lay his flaws bare for us to see.

This impulse to tinker with the basic ingredients of others has been explored before in films like S1mOne, Stranger Than Fiction, and, even Vertigo.  Ruby Sparks is far better than those first two films but, of course, has nothing on Hitchcock's masterpiece (recently declared the best film of all-time by Sight & Sound).  Outside of such comparisons, it's a fine diversion with good performances all around, even if it often feels episodic and can't quite figure out how to effectively resolve the tension of its third act as it heads towards the still satisfying conclusion.

Ruby Sparks opens at the Regal Fox Tower on Friday, August 3rd.  More info available here.

Remember to find and "like" us on our Facebook page.
Subscribe to the blog's feed here.