Carpenter Craft

Originally published at the BAM (Brooklyn Academy of Music) blog on February 5, 2015

By R. Emmet Sweeney

He came of age in film school at the same time as the Steven Spielberg/George Lucas “movie brats,” but John Carpenter is generally excluded from triumphal histories of 1970s New Hollywood cinema. Yet Carpenter’s genre reinventions have become as equally influential as those of his cinéaste brethren. While Lucas and Spielberg tried to supersize the 1930s adventure serial, Carpenter took the professionals-on-a-mission films of Howard Hawks and fractured them for the Reagan era. He developed a style of slow-burn—precisely choreographed widescreen features that were irresistible tension-and-release machines. But while Jaws and Star Wars appealed to all audiences, Carpenter’s subversive streak led to films deeply suspicious of the American dream, creating entertainments that stick in your throat.

John Carpenter was born into an artistic family on January 16, 1948 in Carthage, NY. His father Warren was a musician and teacher who moved the family to Bowling Green in 1953 after accepting a position teaching music history and theory at Western Kentucky University. After a few years of college at Western Kentucky, John transferred to USC to study filmmaking, where he co-wrote the Oscar-winning short The Resurrection of Broncho Billy (1970).

Carpenter would drop out of USC to complete production of his first feature, the absurdist space-madness comedy Dark Star (1974), written with future Alien scribe Dan O’Bannon. Shot on a shoestring with blinking cardboard sets and an alien made out of a beach ball, it skewers self-important space opera three years before Star Wars. His first fully-funded production was Assault on Precinct 13 (1976), a siege film loosely based on Hawks’ Rio Bravo in which a black cop, a white convict, and a no bullshit secretary hole up in an isolated prison to fight off a gang attack. Carpenter shows a mastery of the wide Panavision frame, making it a film of constricting horizontals: of shotgun barrels and gang members strung along a street like holes in a belt.

Then came the depth charge of Halloween (1978), conceived with Assault’s assistant editor Debra Hill (a producer through Escape From New York), which was well funded enough for Carpenter and DP Dean Cundey to play with a Panaglide Steadicam rig, which patiently tours the well-appointed bourgeois interiors soon to be sullied by Michael Myers.

Carpenter and Cundey then made a string of creeping-dread classics dependent on groups dissolving from within—collapsing the Hawksian ideal of creating a family out of the professional unit. The Fog (1980) pitted a collection of outcasts against leprous ghost pirates, out for vengeance for past colonialist sins. Escape from New York (1981) forces apolitical nihilist Snake Plisskin (Kurt Russell) to play nice with the authoritarian US government as well as the crazies on Manhattan island prison. (In the jokey, underrated 1996 sequel Escape from L.A., Plisskin turns into something of an accidental revolutionary). In Carpenter’s The Thing (1982, adapted from the same novella as the Hawks classic), an Arctic research team discovers a shape-shifting alien, and paranoia destroys them. It’s the first part of a loose “Apocalypse” trilogy that also includes Prince of Darkness (1987; Satan will end the world) and In the Mouth of Madness (1994; HP Lovecraft-inspired bestsellers will end the world).

The box office failure of The Thing led Carpenter to take assignment jobs, including the efficient if impersonal Stephen King killer car movie Christine (1983), and the beautiful alien road movie romance Starman (1984), in which the NSA is the villain. They Live (1988) provides his most explicit political statement, with aliens turning the Me Generation populace into literal consumerist zombies. It is urgent, blunt force pulp commentary that has Rowdy Roddy Piper slugging complacency in the face.

A narrative of decline has emerged around his post-1980s work, but that is why retrospectives like this are so necessary. The gonzo super-natural Western Vampires (1998) and Ghosts of Mars (2001) are gloriously scuzzy throwbacks to his Assault days, while The Ward (2010) is an elegantly composed haunted psych ward movie that entraps its inmates inside low-angle tracking shots.

Carpenter has retained his subversive vitality, taking archetypally American weird tales and investing them with a destabilizing dread.

Colgate Comedy Hour, September 18, 1955

Originally Published in La Furia Umana (Spring 2012)

On September 18th, 1955, Jerry Lewis and Dean Martin hosted the Colgate Comedy Hour for the 27th time. It would be six months before they began shooting Hollywood or Bust, after which their preposterously successful union dissolved. But from 8 – 9PM on a studio set at NBC, they continued to work their alchemical comic magic, two perfectly poised bodies wreaking ingratiating destruction.

These Colgate Hours are the closest approximation we can get of their fabled live performances, which were filled with unrehearsed pranks and ebullient anarchy.  At the 21 minute and 35 second mark, a sketch begins that captures my imagined vision of their stage shows – a tongue-in-cheek tour-de-force of tightly sprung tension and a series of controlled manic releases. The camera descends on a stock shot of a pool room “just off Broadway”, where Dean is trying to win his money back in a game of nine ball. Told to hurry up and shoot, he raises his right hand and twists his wrist in an implied flip of the bird. His mates quiet down, and Martin will vainly attempt to conduct silence the rest of the sketch, mainly with his hands. It’s his rhythm and control that spurs and sustains the whole 20 minute piece.

Jerry enters wearing an oversized rain slicker and hat, visually already a man-child, and fumbles with the umbrella in a bit of business by the door.  Then Jerry’s alien presence stoops right beside Dean with a slack jawed stare, cowed only by a returned glance of disgust. Jerry steps back in this duet of mutual humiliation, and starts whistling. Dean calmly raises his right index finger and stops it in Jerry’s mouth, as if to staunch a spring in a dike. Dean is suave civilization, Jerry a particularly uninhibited embodiment of nature.

With Dean still trying to line up his shot, though, nature finds a way. Jerry bends over the table to eye it himself, and rainwater gathered in his peaked cap spills onto the felt. The dike has been loosed. Jerry directs the water into a corner pocket, which then blasts out of the opposite corner, spraying Dean in the face.

Jerry, his head bowed like a chastised puppy, becomes eager for instruction. Dean waves his hand left, and Jerry swivels his head in that direction, a bobble head of pure need. Hypnotized by Dean’s hand movements, he follows them wherever they point in a brilliant bit of pantomime. Maneuvered in front of a chair, Jerry robotically plops down after Dean’s quick wrist flip.

Order never lasts long in the Martin and Lewis altiverse, so Jerry wriggles out from Dean’s control by throwing over the elements for modern technology. Dean again tries to set up his Sisyphean shot, but Jerry’s order at the soda machine causes the clanking noises of a faulty Victorian-era furnace. Jerry’s bottle-opening screeches while his straw-sucking blasts as if over a loudspeaker. This is the repetition of the whistling bit, only amplified. Again Dean attempts to orchestrate silence (but not before an improv that almost makes Jerry break – passive aggressively dropping some soda in his mouth), twisting the straw into a knot and shoving it back into the bottle. Jerry, acknowledging his defeat, then repeats the earlier pantomime to himself, tracing those steps until he once again plops into the chair.

Martin & Lewis engage in a constant push-pull, but never manage to create any space between themselves, the gags inexorably bringing them closer together. Dean’s hands are sticky from the soda, so Jerry tries to help, covering them both in a penumbra of baby powder.  Now they are even visually connected, with a dusting of white covering their shoulders. The jokes increasingly become more hysterical and self-reflexive, with Jerry suddenly pretending to be a standup comic (he bombs) and then a songwriter (he kills). Dean is now the one left confused and adrift, his jerky reactions to hearing Jerry’s song on the radio (“Yetta I Can’t Forget Her”) nearly as spastic as his partner’s. As their identities shift and merge, by the end of the sketch they accept their contradictory unity and sing a song, called, aptly enough, “Side By Side”.

That they broke up less than a year later changes nothing. At that moment in time, they were an inseparable, insuperable comic force, a combustible union that would explode, reassemble and repeat ad infinitum; a glorious chaos that seemed it might never end. Until, impossibly, it did.

Where the Action Was: In an Age Decried for both CGI and Festival Pandering, R. Emmet Sweeney Presents the Best in Fight Scenes

Originally published in the January-February 2020 issue of Film Comment

By R. Emmet Sweeney

2010

Robot (Enthiran)

Androids Assemble

Proof that South Indian cinema could compete on the same level as Bollywood, this mind-bending sci-fi spectacular directed by S. Shankar, with stunt choreography by Yuen Woo-ping (!), is a robot-gone-bad Tamil blockbuster starring ageless Superstar Rajinikanth and Aishwarya Rai. The centerpiece is a cops vs evil robot battle in which the android, now replicated into hundreds of clones, arranges itself into different murderous shapes, including a ball of guns, a bullet-spitting snake, a drill, and in its final form, a skyscraper-sized giant who flips off the scientist who created him. It is a sequence of joyful, surreally mischievous destruction.

2011

Fast Five

Vault Heist

After Fast & Furious, Justin Lin wanted to ease back on CGI and put the emphasis on more practical car stunts. Wily veteran choreographer Jack Gill obliged with the most memorable sequence in the franchise, a daredevil heist in which Vin Diesel and Paul Walker drag a bank vault out of a building and onto the highway, connected to their souped-up Dodge Chargers with a length of cable. The vault model used weighed 10,000 pounds, and the stunt drivers make it swing into oncoming corrupt cop cars with jaw dropping precision.

2012

The Raid: Redemption

Hallway Machete Fight

The most influential action film of the decade is a relentlessly bloody low-budget fight film from Indonesia, directed by Welsh filmmaker Gareth Evans. It introduced Iko Uwais as both star and fight choreographer, along with the Silat style of martial arts (which necessitates close range to utilize the sharp edges of knees and elbows). Its structure of one never-ending fight was a model for John Wick, Timo Tjahjanto’s The Night Comes For Us, and endless knockoffs like Jailbreak. It’s hard to pick just one fight out of the endless flow, but I’ll go with the machete fight in a hallway, in which Iko is outnumbered 4 to 1, and out machete’d by the same amount. After a establishing shot of the bleak setup, Uwais swiftly closes the gap and delivers a blisteringly fast array of high knees and elbows to various faces, ending with an exclamation point as he slams the final opponents head into the ground like he is cracking a coconut.

2013

Drug War

Final Shootout

Drug War is an exacting and pitiless mapping of cops, informants, and drug dealers, all triangulating to a deadly fate. It is another of Johnnie To’s rigorously composed gangster films, but the first made with Mainland money. This one feels more mechanical than the Elections or Exiled, as if they are playing out predetermined fates. Timmy (Louis Koo) is the snitch, who forces a collision between the undercover cops who are controlling him and the drug gangs he has been attempting to infiltrate. To orchestrates the final shootout in near silence, punctuated by short staccato bursts of bullets as Timmy tries to orient the cops and gangs against each other in a mutually assured destruction of crossfire. But the geometry fails Timmy as well, who ends up handcuffed to his own deadly design.

2014

John Wick

Red Circle Club

For Hollywood action films the 2010s were defined by the ascendance of 87eleven Action Design. Founded by ex-stuntmen Chad Stahelski and David Leitch, their innovation was being a one stop shop, selling complete action sequences to films still in preproduction, providing the choreography, the stunt performers, and the 2nd unit direction. They would even train your star. Previously these were all separately staffed jobs, changing how blockbusters did business.

Stalhelski and Leitch, of course, went on to start the ongoing John Wick franchise, which was heavily influenced by Hong Kong choreographer Yuen Woo-ping, who they saw at work on The Matrix as members of the stunt team. The standout sequence in the first John Wick is the Red Circle nightclub shootout, an homage to Jean Pierre-Melville’s Le Cercle Rouge. Keanu Reeves is a model-like figure, like Alain Delon in the Melville film, who cuts through the Russian mob hangout with frictionless “gun-fu” and Brazilian jiu-jitsu takedowns. The muzzle flashes of the gunfight nearly matches the rhythm of the flickering disco ball lighting, and when Reeves emerges onto the nightclub floor, with undulating patterns projected behind him as the throbbing EDM fills the soundtrack, it momentarily embraces its destiny as a musical.

2015

Mad Max: Fury Road

Final Chase Back to The Citadel

Like The Raid, this is one long action sequence, though a chase film rather than a fight, a rolling revue of malformed steampunk freaks, pole jumping maniacs, and one demented power chord-playing mascot, all driving armored muscle cars trying to take down a one-armed Charlize Theron and a mute Tom Hardy. An overwhelming work orchestrated by George Miller and his longtime stunt choreographer Guy Norris, it is a testament to the remarkable stunt performers who labored for five months to get their vision up on the screen. It all comes together with overwhelming force in the final chase, a gonzo act of action filmmaking in which there are spectacular car crashes, blooming explosions, obscenely risky stunts (especially on those bendy poles that dip into moving vehicles), and hand-to-hand combat atop speeding wrecks that is pure piston-pumping poetry.

2016

The Final Master

Series of Duels

Chinese director Xu Haofeng is also a martial arts historian, and his films reflect his studies. He believes that “A real kung fu battle lasts only seconds. And the results of a competition between top practitioners are decided even before opponents begin combat.” The Final Master is another of his intensely ritualized takes on the genre, and it ends with a hypnotic succession of duels as Liao Fan, who trained for two months before shooting, consecutively defeats the masters from nineteen schools of kung fu in Tianjin. Fighters are doomed by their choice of weapon, stance, or target before the bouts have even begun, giving these fights an abstracted quality, as if they had already taken place and these are re-enactments or, perhaps more accurately, how-to manuals. Liao Fan often pauses at the end of each encounter, holding the winning thrust in place for examination by willing students.

2017

Baahubali 2: The Conclusion

Pindari attack on Kuntal Desh

The biggest Indian movie of 2017 was this mythological action melodrama directed by SS Rajamouli and starring the dashingly shirtless Prabhas. A complex tale of a warring royal family and the titular Baahubali’s (and son’s) thwarted path to the throne, its action scenes have an inventive pulp sensibility that recently went viral on Twitter (people love soldiers getting slingshotted onto a castle). I found the most joy in the Pindari attack on Kuntal Desh, when Baahubali Jr first meets his great love Princess Devasena (Anushka Shetty). Their meet cute occurs as they turn a bloody archery fight against Pindari warriors into a giddy dance, spinning each other around into position to kill dozens of unlucky soldiers. It’s love at first archery bow sight.

2018

Mission: Impossible – Fallout

Bathroom Fight

The Mission: Impossible franchise has become a reliable source of insane Tom Cruise stunts for years now, and Fallout is no slouch with its 25,000 foot HALO jump out of a jet. But my favorite of the Wade Eastwood designed set pieces is the bathroom fight between Tom Cruise, Henry Cavill, and Liang Yang (an expressively intense stuntman getting his first extended acting job here) which is brutal, funny, and effortlessly conveys the personality of the characters. Cruise is mostly out of breath and a step behind, buying time to think his way out of it, while Cavill is a meathead monster who smashes Yang through a mirror and raises his fists as if he was in a golden gloves bout and not a black ops mission. Yang is the superior fighter to them both, and his face exhibits an intimidating sense of calm that will be pierced only when an unexpected fourth person enters the fray, rearranging the power dynamics for the last time in the fight.

2019

Avengement

Pub Brawl

The latest collaboration between British DTV kings Scott Adkins and director Jesse V. Johnson (their fifth in two years) is a bare knuckle brawler of a film. Adkins plays a small time London crook hardened by his time in the pen – someone put a price on his head so he is constantly getting into ugly, tooth shattering fights. The film tracks his revenge against the gang who put him into jail, holding them hostage at a grimy pub until his brother (Craig Fairbrass) shows up – and then all hell breaks loose. Adkins and fight coordinator Dan Styles opt for sloppy, inebriated violence, finding creative blood-spurting uses for 2x4s, crowbars, and conveniently placed pickled egg jars.

True South: Vetri Maaran

Originally published in the November-December 2019 issue of Film Comment

By R. Emmet Sweeney

Vetri Maaran’s sprawling action dramas make for a bloody–and bloody good–panorama of Tamil Nadu’s subcultures and underclasses

The most revelatory moviegoing experience I had last year was seeing Vetri Maaran’s Vada Chennai in a parking garage movie theater in North Bergen, New Jersey. It is an intricately plotted, stabbingly violent gangster saga that is so richly detailed that I could almost feel the texture of the leather hilts on the machetes thrusting this Shakespearean tale of deception into action. Intended to be part one of a trilogy, it is the third collaboration between the Tamil writer-director Vetri Maaran and star Dhanush. Their films together are deeply researched dives into Tamil subcultures, from the aimless unemployed youth of the director’s raucous debut Polladhavan (Ruthless Man, 2007) to the cockfighters in the National Film Award-winning Aadukalam (Arena, 2011). Vetri Maaran’s one film without Dhanush as the leading man is the art-house-aimed Visaranai (Interrogation, 2015), a harrowing story of migrant laborers sucked into the torturous hell of the prison system; premiered in Venice, it was India’s submission for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film.

Vetri Maaran and Dhanush rolled out their fourth collaboration with Asuran (Tamil for “demon”), a bloody revenge drama that opened worldwide in October. The new film furthers their exploration of modern Indian history as one of unethical land grabs: the hero is a rural farmer seeking vengeance against a capitalist elite. Asuran is the latest in Vetri Maaran and Dhanush’s formidable catalogue of underclass action melodramas that should be much better known outside of India.

In the West, Indian cinema has become synonymous with Hindi-language Bollywood productions, despite the existence of thriving regional film industries outside of Mumbai, whose products are becoming more and more popular at the national level. The top-grossing Indian films of the last two years were the Tamil-language 2.0 (2018, made in Chennai, aka the home of Kollywood) and the Telugu-and Tamil-language Baahubali 2: The Conclusion (2017, shot in Hyderabad, aka the home of Tollywood). In the introduction to the essay collection Beyond Bollywood: The Cinemas of South India, M.K. Raghavendra argues that Bollywood’s publicity advantage is due to the fact that “Hindi mainstream cinema has been a national cinema in a way that regional language cinemas have not.” Speaking directly to their populace, regional cinemas revel in specificity, which explains some of the appeal of a Tamil director like Vetri Maaran, who spends years researching neighborhoods before shooting his films.

Vetri Maaran was born in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu, about 120 miles from state capital Chennai, in 1975. His mother is noted novelist Megala Chitravel and his father is a veterinary scientist. Vetri Maaran’s old friend and assistant Manimaran recalled that the director would skip classes and go to the movies, “each three or four times. Then he would come to the school ground…and would retell the whole story to us.” His films have a tumbling narrative flow, with stories branching into stories, that suggests something similar to these early oral recaps. He went on to pursue a master’s degree in English literature but dropped out after attending a seminar by director Balu Mahendra, who hired him to be his assistant. Mahendra was a adaptable filmmaker who could shift from a blockbuster film (Un Kannil Neer Vazhindal, 1985) to a small-scale drama about a woman’s struggles to build a house (Veedu, 1988). It’s a strategy that Vetri Maaran seems to have emulated early in his career.

One of his first jobs for Mahendra was on the television series Kadhai Neram (1999), which adapt 52 short stories into just as many episodes. Vetri Maaran had to read 50 to 60 short stories each week, highlight a couple, and present condensed versions to Mahendra. This crucible of concision taught him how to edit as well as find the essential kernal of a story. Later, on the set of Mahendra’s drama Adhu Oru Kana Kaalam (2005), he first met and became friends with Dhanush. In Tamil Nadu, movies are a way of life, with fandom so obsessive that its biggest contemporary star, the 68-year-old Rajinikanth (aka Super Star Rajini), is worshipped with fervent intensity (the documentary For the Love of a Man captures this phenomenon) and others have been elected to state office. Accordingly, the way Vetri Maaran has been able to get his films funded and produced is through his collaborations with Dhanush, a younger (36-year-old) multiplatform star who also happens to be Rajinikanth’s son-in-law.

The rail-thin Dhanush emits a distanced cool that he can shape into a variety of packages, including the outrageous gangster of the enormously successful Maari films (2015 and 2018) and the more down-at-heel protagonists of his Vetri Maaran projects, where he hardens that coldness into an icy reserve. Their first film together was Polladhavan (Ruthless Man), in which Dhanush–tousle-haired, wiry, and aloof–plays an aimless lower-middle-class Chennai youth named Prabhu who borrows his father’s savings to buy a prized Pulsar motorbike. When it is stolen, something snaps inside of him, and he tracks its location through a series of chop shops and gang hideouts presided over by Selvam (Kishore, a vulpine Vetri Maaran regular), until Prabhu retrieves it via a kinetic, bloody brawl.

When asked if Polladhavan was inspired by Bicycle Thieves, Vetri Maaran modestly described the comparison as a “disgrace” to Bicycle Thieves, stating that his film was based on a true story told to him by one of his friends. In any case, it was a surprise hit and became something of a touchstone for rebellious youth at the time (it even caused a spike in Pulsar sales). Polladhavan establishes Vetri Maaran’s street-level view of Chennai, which is present in all of his features. He focuses on a neighborhood and then builds it block-by-block as the story sends Dhanush on a descent into the most dangerous parts of the city. Vetri Maaran dismisses his debut as a “mediocre masala film,” and it certainly feels more simplistic than his later work, with his most linear narrative and clumsy (though catchy) musical sequences that interrupt the narrative flow. But it is already identifiably a Vetri Maaran film, with its attentiveness to outsider communities and sinuous location photography, shot by his regular DP R. Velraj.

In preparation to shoot his next film, Aadukalam (Arena), which reteamed him with Dhanush and music director G.V. Prakash Kumar, Vetri Maaran dedicated two years to research the Tamil city of Madurai, learning its lifestyle and dialect. The result is a kaleidoscopic portrait of the ritualized nature of cockfighting in Madurai. It circles two life-long foes: police Inspector Rathnasamy (Naren) and poverty-stricken Pettaikaran (V.I.S. Jayaplana, a Sri Lankan poet making his film debut). It is a film about masculine pride and its endless spiraling insecurities. Both Rathnasamy and Pettaikaran have devoted their lives to cockfighting. Though Rathnasamy has a prestigious job and Pettaikaran looks the part of saintly self-sacrifice, both have been corrupted by the barbaric intensity of the sport. Rathnasamy is a bribe-taking dirty cop, and Pettaikaran a huckster spiritualist. They have battled each other for a lifetime, and now have to entrust their feud to the next generation. This includes rooster trainers Durai (Kishore) and Karuppu (Dhanush), who are starting to rebel against Pettaikaran’s old-fashioned attitudes. Jealousies and resentments build until Karuppu’s whole world comes crashing down, including his romance with the English-speaking girl next door, whose family bristles at their daughter dating such a low-class specimen.

These are lives built on rigid tradition, and Vetri Maaran details every step of the cockfighting process, from training to battle strategy. He and Velraj utilize low-angle tracking shots to give a sense of scale to the proceedings, making these illegal backyard cockfights feel like the Super Bowl. The birds themselves battle in CGI, and while they won’t earn the film any VFX awards, Vetri Maaran wrings tension out of the reaction shots, which register each talon blow as a personal affront. He also incorporates the musical elements as more organic components of the story instead of cutting to a set. Here the songs naturally emerge from the action.

Vetri Maaran fills the 156-minute running time with an uncountable cast of indelible characters who provide a thumbnail portrait of the Madurai cockfighting underworld, while utilizing a time-shifting structure as a means of controlling the tempo, often toggling back a few days to fill in a random detail. His stories have the ability to flow out in every direction in space and time without getting lost in the flood. Aadukalam and Vada Chennai both reminded me of Mariano Llinas’s 14-hour La Flor at different points, in that I thought they could go on forever and I would not complain.

Aadukalam would become another box office success and garner even more critical praise–winning six times at the National Film Awards (including Best Director). At this point Vetri Maaran founded his production house Grass Root Film Company, which funds films on subjects close to his heart, including M. Manikandan’s Kaaka Muttai (2014), the bittersweet fable of two slum kids trying to earn enough money to buy a slice of pizza for the first time. It’s a story of gentrification, with developers tearing down the kids’ old playground to feed the emerging middle class. Bureaucratic corruption is a theme that emerges again and again in Vetri Maaran’s work, from the films he has produced–like Poriyaalan (2014), a thriller about fraudulent construction paperwork–to his more recent directorial efforts, Visaranai and Vada Chennai.

Visaranai, co-produced by (though not starring) Dhanush, is about three Tamil workers who are forced to leave home and seek employment in the neighboring state of Andhra Pradesh. They sleep in a public park and work odd jobs as daily-wage laborers, sending money home when they can spare it. Then one day, they are arrested for a theft they did not commit and beaten and tortured until they confess to the crime. With pressure from above, the cops just want to close the case, and these laborers, who don’t speak the local language, are easy targets for a forced confession.

The film was adapted from the novel Lock Up (2006) by auto rickshaw driver M. Chandrakumar, who based it on his own real-life experiences. It is Vetri Maaran’s most politically outspoken film (although the police are portrayed as thuggish and corrupt in all of his work) in its depiction of a dehumanizing descent into a justice system that seems to run solely on bribery and influence. Lacking the same narrative motility as his other features, the film instead focuses, almost to the point of repetition, on the absurd brutality of the workers’ plight. In other words, it is effective as a polemic but not so much as cinema. Likely due to its thematic import, Visaranai won India’s National Film Award for best feature. Vetri Maaran was now thrust into the forefront of Indian cinema alongside personal heroes like Mani Ratnam , director of the iconic Dil Se (1998), whose praise of Visaranai was used in its promotional videos. Vetri Maaran told Film Companion South that, “Tamil cinema has only had two people we can really call filmmakers. Only they have had the command and control over the film language. One is Balu Mahendra and the other is Mani Ratnam. I don’t even call myself a filmmaker.”

A director closer to his generation, and one who was a heavy influence on Vada Chennai, is Hindi-language filmmaker Anurag Kashyap. Also in his forties, Kashyap overcame battles with censorship early in his career and went on to create the epic, two-part crime saga Gangs of Wasseypur (2012), one of the models for Vada Chennai. Kashyap reportedly was the one who urged Vetri Maaran to expand the film beyond one feature. Heaving had three critical and box-office successes by then, Vetri Maaran followed suit and undertook his most ambitious project yet, one he started writing in 2003 and that endured endless production delays.

Vada Chennai depicts the origin and influence of one self-interested gang on a North Chennai slum over two decades. Vetri Maaran’s initial cut was five and a half hours, which he cut down to 164 minutes before release. It is the densest film he’s every made, with the story threading outward form each scene, as it takes in the cultural and political earthquakes that shook Chennai between 1987 and 2003, from the death of M.G. Ramachandran and the assassination of Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to the screening of a Rajinikanth film in prison. It has as intricate a flashback structure as any film I’ve seen, jumping through the intervening years to fill in backstories and delay pivotal revelations. The editing by G.B. Venkatesh is whiplash-tight and the plot is beautifully complicated and full of shocking betrayals (led most memorably by its Lady Macbeth, a cunning widow named Chandra, played by Andrea Jeremiah).

Dhanush produced the film and stars as Anbu, a promising carrom player (a tabletop game, like billiards with checkers) who gets drawn into a gang war between Guna (Samuthirakani, the only good cop in Visaranai) and Senthil (Kishore, calmly malevolent). Criminality had been a way of life in the slum since its inception, when Rajan (Ameer Sultan) brought in pirated goods to sell in the city. But Guna is the new man in charge, and he has joined up with local developers in a plan to build a road through the slum, whose people would be relocated to public housing further inland. Seeing this as a siege on his ancestral home, Anbu starts to organize a resistance. There are no full-blown song-and-dance sequences, though the brilliantly propulsive theme by Santhosh Narayanan, which uses a cappella voices as choral instruments like Ennio Morricone did, conveys enough foreboding without the need for words.

Vada Chennai balances a growing multiplicity of storylines, and there is a thrill in their telling, especially in Vetri Maaran’s most elaborate setpieces: an assassination underneath a slowly collapsing awning and a nighttime brawl in the slum where Anbu uses his knowledge of the geography to his violent advantage. And I haven’t even mentioned Anbu’s tempestuous courting of Padma (Aishwarya Rajesh), whom he meets when she steals his (stolen) sewing machine during a riot. Much of Tamil cinema, including Vetri Maaran’s, has a woman problem: they are always shunted into girlfriend or wife roles and rarely have more to do than be romanced (there is also a dearth of female filmmakers). It is a problem in Vada Chennai as well, though the character of Chandra, with her white-hot coal of hatred that burns through the last third of the film, is a fine first step toward more dynamic female characters in Vetri Maaran’s work.

Vetri Maaran has only made five movies in 12 years due to his exhasutive research process, so the shooting and release of Asuran in under a year was surprising. In interviews he has admitted to the immense stress caused by the time frame (the release date was announced with 15 days left to shoot, and only 40 days to complete post-production). He was unable to supervise the dubbing and color timing as on previous projects, having to focus entirely on the edit. Though it’s not as complexly sturctured as Vada Chennai, it’s remarkable that Asuran is as cohesive as it turned out to be.Adapted from Poomani’s novel Vekkai, translated into English this year, it depicts the violent family feud between alcoholic farmer Sivasamy (Dhanush) and yet another evil land developer, Narasimhan (Aadukalam Naren, nicknamed after the film, which gave him his star-making turn). While the book takes place over seven days, Asuran expands it to span generations. Vetri Maaran again uses a flashback structure, which fills in Sivasamy’s brutal youth as a lower-caste liquor brewer: the wounds he suffered back then turning him against violence–until personal tragedy pulls him back to wielding a blade. It is Dhanush’s most moving performance to date, as he adds gravel to his voice and a hitch in his step to embody a broken old man, barely keeping his family together as Narasimhan schemes to acquire their small farm. But, like a Tamil Rambo, Sivasamy can only be pushed so far; his last act is one of limb-severing vengeance.

This time, I watched Vetri Maaran’s latest in Times Square among the Jokers and the Abominables, though the director’s older features remain hard to come by with English subtitling on U.S. streaming services. But with each film, Vetri Maaran and his collaborators have refined and condensed their style to the point where they can pack in limitless narrative possibilities, creating local hits that deserve worldwide recognition. There are a million stories in Tamil Nadu, and Vetri Maaran and company will try to tell them all before they disappear via a developer’s wrecking ball.

Bruce Lee: A Life (Review)

Originally published in the July-August 2018 issue of Film Comment

By R. Emmet Sweeney

Fast and Furious: The martial-arts star was a force unto himself and a pioneer of flexible fighting styles

Bruce Lee: A Life (By Matthew Polly, Simon & Schuster, $35)

A transcendent figure in the history of martial-arts and action movies, Bruce Lee was long overdue for a door-stopping biography. Matthew Polly has filled the void admirably with Bruce Lee: A Life, a meticulously researched tome that follows Lee’s days as a delinquent youth through his long climb to icon-hood and tragic, controversial death. With his feline athleticism and nerve-popping intensity, Lee was a transfixing presence who developed a polyglot type of screen fighting that remains the norm today (and was a major influence on MMA). Dismissive of traditional forms of kung fu, Lee instead borrowed from everyone, incorporating Wing Chun, fencing, and boxing–whatever looked good on film.

American-born but raised in Hong Kong, he spent his life pulling from (and oscillating between) Eastern and Western cultures. His dad was a star in the knockabout Chinese opera, but spent more time in opium dens than at home. Lee acted out in response, a kid brawler who pulled a knife on one of his teachers, proving more proficient at street fights (and cha-cha dancing–he was an HK champion) than homework. Eager to improve his fighting skills, he trained in Wing Chun, an obscure form of kung fu that emphasizes close-quarters combat. He was taught by Ip Man (currently being immortalized in an ongoing series of films starring Donnie Yen). Lee’s good looks and rebellious streak landed him roles in teen movies, but this nascent career was cut short when his parents, fed up with his near-criminal behavior, shipped him to stay with friends in San Francisco and Seattle.

Polly depicts Lee as fanatically determined to become a star and outshine his father. He was a health-food nut who trained nonstop, his body freakishly chiseled in an era when the John Wayne barrel-chested physique was considered the peak of masculinity. It was his quick-twitch physicality that attracted the attention of his kung fu students as well as studio executives. There are some fascinating tick-tock accounts of how Lee finally got his breakthrough role of Kato in The Green Hornet TV show (1966-67), and how impossible it was for Asians to get cast as anything other than manservants–eventually forcing him back East to make his breakthrough film The Big Boss (1971).

Through his many failures and late spectacular success, Lee continued to hone his martial art Jeet Kune Do, which rejects a totalizing system for a changeable one that adjusts to the fighter’s particular skills. He called it “the style of no style,” and it’s what made a Bruce Lee fight so unpredictable and thrilling. His sudden passing at age 32 spawned wild conspiracy theories that Polly studiously debunks, allowing Lee to emerge back from myth and into the reality of his extraordinary life.

Muscle Memory: Heidi Moneymaker of 87Eleven Action Design Traces the Moves Behind the Stunts

Originally Published in the January-February 2018 issue of Film Comment

By R. Emmet Sweeney

The stunt studio 87Eleven has transformed the way action is produced in Hollywood. Formed in 2004 by future John Wick filmmakers and former stuntmen Chad Stahelski and David Leitch, it has become a one-stop shop that combines choreography, physical training, stuntwork, and second-unit filming. For them stunts are storytelling by other means, so they emphasize learning cinematography along with jiujitsu (they are now also a production company). It is something they took from working for choreographer Yuen Woo-ping on The Matrix, bringing the Hong Kong style to Hollywood in a more systematic way–an influence made clear in their celebrated gun-fu nightclub shootout in the first John Wick. Heidi Moneymaker is the only female member of the 87Eleven team, a gymnast who parlayed her athleticism–and some study of Tony Jaa movies–into a career as a stuntwoman. She has been Scarlett Johansson’s stunt double since Iron Man 2, and she spoke to Film Comment about her life of haymakers, lucha libre, and car crashes.

Can you take us through the process for working on an action sequence in a film?

Generally you come in early on with the fight coordinators. Sometimes we spend months designing a sequence [only] to have it changed last minute. It is hard to throw two months of work out the window and create something just as good on the fly, unless you are already prepared. Luckily, a lot of times I’ve worked with people for a long time, and they give me a lot of leeway to give my input and to help with the character, because I have a background and set of talents that fight coordinators who aren’t gymnasts don’t have.

With the Marvel movies I’m usually brought in months in advance, and we read the script and go over the fights and collaborate for weeks and weeks and weeks until they’re perfect. With John Wick 2, I originally came in earlier in the movie for a different squence, and then that sequence got cut, and we moved to reshoots to do that whole sequence at the end with the violin fight. I was there for a week, worked with Keanu a bit, running the choreography back and forth. Pretty straightforward stuff. Keanu is so trained and well-prepared that he can pick things up really fast.

How much do you have to study the actor you are performing stunts for?

You definitely adapt to the way that the actor moves. I’ve been working with Scarlett Johannson since 2009, so I have had a lot of chances to be with her and watch how she talks and how she moves, walks, and runs, and how she stands. With Ruby Rose [in John Wick: Chapter 2] I didn’t have much time, only a few weeks, and luckily she had a pretty good boxing background, so she had strong movements which were easier for me to copy. Every time we’re on set standing around, or you see the actor moving around inside a scene, you really do want to pay attention and become one with their character too.

For Iron Man 2, I was hired by Tom Harper, the stunt coordinator, to come in and double Scarlett. He brought in me and another really good stuntwoman and gave Scarlett the choice: “Who do you think would be a better double? They’re both great, they both can handle it.” She decided I would work for her. We had a great relationship on that film, and we moved onto The Avengers. Now it’s just seamless.

What skills have you learned specifically for a film?

When I first started doubling Scarlett, the style of fighting we were doing there was definitely new. Some of it was based off of Mexican wrestling, lucha libre stuff, and after that, I got into judo and jiujitsu, something very similar to what we were doing with Black Widow. There are a lot of moves where she is running and swinging around people and throwing them down on the ground. Like a jungle gym basically, if you go on YouTube and type in “lucha libre” and you watch Mexican wrestling, they’re doing a lot of those moves. We’d go take a look at them and then alter them for the fight, and do stuff that’s inspired by some of those moves. They became the “Widow moves.” Usually we have at least one or two perfight or per movie. On Captain America: Civil War I have a couple of those moves at the beginning of the opening sequence in Lagos. I jump onto one guy and squeeze him with my legs and I swing around upside down and grab the other guy and throw them both.

If there’s a different style of martial arts or fighting, it’s something you should be working on. When a film comes up like The Hunger Games, for example, which 87Eleven did, Katniss has a bow and arrow so we all got bows and arrows and started shooting with them. For The Lone Ranger I did a sequence in a hoop, like an acro hoop that’s hanging from the ceiling.

Have any stunts made you nervous?

You get a little adrenaline. Mostly I want to make sure I make the stunt look amazing and I don’t want to ruin the shot. And not all directors do a lot of takes on things, so you might only get one or two tries. I definitely had nerves in the days building up to the stunt where I flipped a car with a cannon in it, for The Host with Saoirse Ronan. It was the first time I’d ever done it. It was a big deal. There was the potential for myself and for others to get hurt seriously. Luckily we had a lot of rehearsal time, and I felt confident in the roll cage and the cannon.

I am really proud of the car flip. One of my favorite stunts I’ve ever done. Basically she’s driving down the road in the middle of the desert. In the movie it’s like she’s schizophrenic–whoever is talking to her inside her head is telling her to turn around. She’s pulling the steering wheel back and forth and back and forth, and at the end she veers off the road and flips the car four times in the desert. That’s the actual storyline. I basically drove down the road and I threw a 45 [-degree turn] at my mark and hit a button, and there’s a cannon down at my back and it flipped my car up in the air. I flipped four times. And I came out of it OK and we got the shot and no one got hurt.

What about working with CGI? Is it hard to fight something that’s not there in front of you?

It’s fine. If you’re fighting somebody that’s not there, it’s like doing a martial arts kata [movement practice], so it’s not the worst thing in the world. Usually when you have someone in front of you, you’re feeding off their energy. Sometimes when I’m jumping on people and swinging around them, the things I do in the Marvel stuff, it’s harder, because you really do need someone physically there.

Growing up, did you admire certain action scenes, or was this something you came to later in life?

One of my favorite characters ever is the character Linda Hamilton played in Terminator 2. I remember watching that movie and just thinking, “Wow, this woman is a badass.” You felt it. I saw a woman doing pull-ups. I don’t know how old I was back then, I was young, but I did pull-ups, I was a gymnast, and I didn’t know any other women who could do pull-ups and were that physically strong. I just remember thinking, “She’s amazing, I want to be like her.” I liked action films for sure. When I was really little, I remember watching The Bionic Woman, Wonder Woman–I remember gravitating toward those women who were really strong physically.

How would you describe your style?

I like to think of it as grace meets strength.. I like the idea of women being strong but also graceful, like a ballerina, having that rhythm and flow. Not just the brute strength.

Wild at Heart: Jerry Lewis In Memoriam

Originally Published in the November-December 2017 issue of Film Comment

By R. Emmet Sweeney

Jerry Lewis’s comedy tapped the energy of nightclub improv and an anarchic urge to bring the house down at any cost

Jerry Lewis started out as a record act. He would throw on some vinyl and do rubber-faced pantomime to pop hits of the day in front of audiences–the kind of routine Andy Kaufman would adapt to his own absurdist ends decades later. It was one of the lower forms of comedy, employed by those performers without sufficient material to pad out a set. But then he met Dean Martin, and multiple Jerry Lewises emerged on contact: the kid, the spastic, the genius, the monkey, the ego, the depressive, the loner, the sexist, the artist. We lost all of those Jerry Lewises and more when he passed away in August at age 91.

What Martin and Lewis had was something alchemical, and it turned their audiences into screaming mobs, like Beatlemania before the fact. Dean was the eye candy who also happened to possess a rapier wit, while Jerry was the idiot with an innate sense of timing and structure. It was a deconstruction of the usual nightclub routine, as Martin’s suave crooner would be continually undermined and tested by Lewis’s nasal-voiced waiter smashing plates and causing chaos. Early on in their 1946 run at the Havana-Madrid club in New York, Jerry was constantly coming up with ideas to make Dean laugh, and one night he came up with a plan to switch off the house lights in the middle of “Pennies from Heaven.” Though the band stopped playing, Dean didn’t miss a beat, flicking on his Zippo close to his face and finishing the song in rhythm. They had an innate sense of timing, down to each inhale. According to Jerry, Dean “watched me breathe. He knew my breath…knew to lay back until just the right moment.”

The act was largely improvised, and audiences craved the energy and unpredictability they provided, as opposed to the more highly controlled Hope and Crosby team. Whether acknowledged or not, it’s hard to avoid drawing a line from the Martin and Lewis improvisational form to the one pioneered by Del Close for Second City in the 1970s and ’80s. Though Martin and Lewis never codified their method to same degree as Del Close’s “Harold” structure, the duo abided by a general movement in the moment to combine the threads of their improv. As Lewis put it, “the act might have looked like chaos, but we could always get back to where we needed to get on a moment’s notice. We had that down to a gnat’s ass.”

In 1948, Martin and Lewis brought their act to Hollywood, debuting at Slapsy Maxie’s nightclub. The trip was also an opportunity to hear pitches from the movie studios. They ended up signing with Hal Wallis and Paramount, but the best offer might have been the one made by Republic Pictures. In his 2006 book Dean & Me (A Love Story), Lewis wrote that Republic “basically wanted to shoot our act in a nightclub. (An interesting idea–in hindsight!!).” It’s astonishing to think we could have had a feature-length documentary of their legendarily madcap stage routine but instead ended up with My Friend Irma (1949) as their first film appearance.

Nothing against My Friend Irma, which is perfectly pleasant and introduced Lewis’s Barry Fitzgerald impersonation to the world, but it shunted Martin and Lewis into supporting roles, their bits contained in a couple of side sequences. The closest we have to their stage act are their hosting appearances on The Colgate Comedy Hour, which have a flavor of anarchy, things pushed to the point of breaking down. There’s a great bit in an episode from November 12, 1950, where Martin is a dancing instructor and Lewis a student. Lewis dances like a marionette with his strings cut, so to keep any partner from harm he’s given a mannequin to dance with. After the dummy gets flailed to the ground, Martin jibes, “Don’t you know how to pick up a girl?” Lewis cracks a smile, and the audience suffers convulsive laughter. The sheer noise is astonishing.

Martin and Lewis’s movies together provide their own kind of laughter, especially those with director Frank Tashlin that recontextualize their rapport in his Looney Tunes aesthetic (e.g., Artists and Models). They broke up acrimoniously in 1956 over issues of creative control, as both were jockeying to be solo stars. Their influence on the baby boom kids, however, was incalcuable, bringing antic long-form improv to the masses. Lewis provided the vaudeville heritgae (his parents played the circuit) and Martin brought the more modern ironic cool, always distancing himself from the chaos (“I copied Bing Crosby 100 percent,” he told reporter Pete Martin). It was a perfect combination of the old and the new, executed with a relentless, unpredictable rhythm that both stars would try to replicate with others over the rest of their careers. Dean found Frank Sinatra, while Jerry found his other selves.

Jerry Lewis, or what became the common image of Jerry Lewis, was established post-Dean. Martin anchored him to an identifiable reality, but now the spastic loner, the out-of-joint kid with the nasal whine and rubber body, no longer had any physical boundaries. It is this particular Lewis that spawned Jim Carrey, who presents an equally acrobatic take on the idiot, though with more violent tendencies (Carrey wrote a touching memorial to Lewis in Time magazine). Whether it’s Herbert H. Heebert in The Ladies Man or Julius Kelp in The Nutty Professor, the Lewis figure is in a natural state of apartness and is in a fraught, oft destructive battle to join to the main stem of society. Herbert says, “Being alone can be very lonely. But at least with people around, you can be lonely with noise.”

Lewis’s directorial debut, The Bellboy (1960), is a tour de force of being lonely with noise, as his titular character is ignored by the Hotel Fontainebleau customers, rendering him silent as he navigates the labyrinthine hotel space, which he expands and contracts through his imagination–turning an empty auditorium into a chiming orchestra through the force of his conductor’s wand. The Bellboy established Lewis’s disjunctive use of time and space. As Chris Fujiwara wrote in his Contemporary Film Directors book, Jerry Lewis, “in his films, the gag–or, more generally, the moment, scene, episode, event, or block–distracts from and disconnects the plot.”

The Bellboy’s orchestra is unrelated to the action of the hotel, just like the big dance number in The Ladies Man, of Hubert entering one “Miss Cartilage”‘s room only to find that a vast white set and an MGM-musical-inspired sequence await him. His world is a discontinuous one, and the fragmentation extends to his identity, like the Julius Kelp/Buddy Love split in The Nutty Professor, or his portrayal of six uncles in The Family Jewels.

The break with Martin caused a gap in Lewis’s artistic practice, which he filled by other means. Fujiwara wrote that Lewis translated “Martin’s absence into a purely cinematic figure to play against.” He splits personalities and plays off of himself, or fractures the space and time of the film so he can play off an invisible orchestra–or have a heart-to-heart with a Southern Belle puppet as in his improbably moving scene with “Magnolia” in The Errand Boy. The fact that Magnolia might be his most fully realized female characater doesn’t say much for his treatment of women (nor does his late-in-life statement that they aren’t funny), but it does speak to the impossible sexuality of the Jerry Lewis man-child, ancestor of the Sandler/Apatow man-children that audiences so so fervently embraced in the 1990s and 2000s. His fear of women essentially is the plot of The Ladies Man, in which he works as a houseboy in an all-girls rooming house. The narrative gets derailed by gags and digressions and tour-de-force crane shots of the multistory dollhouse set, but in the end he hasn’t changed at all, his masculinity as fragile as ever.

All of which amounts to a fraction of the Jerry Lewises we could mourn. I’d like to think that Martin and Lewis have finally reunited and locked back into their old rhythms, cracking each other up to the roiling roar of a crowd. But just as in his movies, Lewis refuses such a tidy ending in Dean & Me: “I miss him every day I’m still here. I’ve considered the idea of our getting together again someday, but I believe when we die we are just put away and life goes on.”

List: The Five Greatest Pratfalls of 2008

By R. Emmet Sweeney

IFC News

December 30th, 2008

A pratfall can be a work of art, a study in disruptive motion, a klutz’s ballet. This choreography of humiliation is perhaps the least garlanded act in contemporary film, as no Oscars will ever be won for kicks to the groin or tumbles down the stairs, regardless of their originality. Only in retrospect have the golden slapstick silents gained credibility and the brilliant purveyors of today’s guffaws are suffering the same critical fate (although the hurt, it must be said, is not felt in their checkbooks). So here is my list of the top five pratfalls of 2008, some of the strongest and strangest feats from an otherwise lackluster year. Some are from masters of the form (Will Ferrell, Anna Faris), while others seamlessly blend the side-splitting spill into their respective and respectable narratives (Robert Downey Jr., Mathieu Amalric, Pixar). All show a clumsy physical grace (as do their stuntmen), a healthy respect for their audience and a blissful embrace of the stupid. (Click on the images below to see them full size.)

1. “WALL-E”
Directed by Andrew Stanton
Pratfall: Handholding Gone Wrong

“WALL-E” is packed with brilliantly conceived falls, but my favorite is perhaps the smallest, and its bittersweet tragedy is worthy of Chaplin. It occurs after our trash-compacting tramp’s beloved Eve begins hibernating, and he tries everything in his power to wake her up. After surviving lightning strikes and shopping cart attacks, he’s determined to get romantic with the fembot, conscious or not. He leashes her with Christmas lights and rows her through a river of sludge to a prime sunset viewing spot. With visions of “Hello Dolly”‘s handholding climax in his CPU, he pries open her arm slot and grabs for dear life. Then her arm snaps back, pinning his hand inside her body’s shell. As he tries to pull himself out, he tumbles off the bench and crashes into a neighboring garbage can. It’s a quick, painfully funny gag that effortlessly encapsulates WALL-E’s innocent, desperate loneliness.

2. “Step Brothers”
Directed by Adam McKay
Pratfall: Christmas Eve Sleepwalking

Sure to be the bane of sober-minded critics for decades to come, the works of Adam McKay and Will Ferrell are unabashed odes to anarchy that have consistently been dismissed for their immaturity and childishness. “Step Brothers” literalizes this complaint, presenting Ferrell and John C. Reilly as man-children joined by their parents’ remarriage, and it’s by far their most surreal and senseless (in the best sense) work. In one of the film’s many improvised sequences, these already regressive brothers are shown sleepwalking on Christmas Eve, shouting gibberish and piling presents in their parents’ bedroom, before finally hoisting the tree and shoving it onto the bed. By this point, their increasingly aggrieved father, played with manic glee by Richard Jenkins, vows to wake them up out of their hysteria. Bad move. The two sons turn barbaric, screaming and clawing at their father until they aggressively toss him down the stairs. André Breton would approve.

3. “A Christmas Tale”
Directed by Arnaud Desplechin
Pratfall: Henri’s Curbside Face-plant

Mathieu Amalric creates a strange kind of alchemy with director Arnaud Desplechin, turning despicable characters into adorable eccentrics — a coup achieved in “Kings & Queen” and now “A Christmas Tale.” Amalric’s Henri Vuillard is a loudmouth drunk who’s been banished from his family by an uptight sister. At his lowest ebb, walking tipsily down an abandoned sidewalk and softly muttering to himself, he pauses at the edge of the curb, staring into his own private abyss. He slowly tips forward, until, in a long shot, he falls face first into the pavement, his back ramrod straight all the way down. He later learns to unload his bile with a smile on his face, like the rest of the Vuillards, but this wonderfully depressing acrobatic feat is an apt representation of the psychological hole he’s fallen into and can’t escape, but which he later cleverly redecorates.

4. “The House Bunny”
Directed by Fred Wolf
Pratfall: Header in Outdoor Café

In an attempt to look smart for her nice guy crush, Anna Faris’ ex-Playboy Bunny hits the books, dresses conservatively and dons Coke bottle glasses that bug her eyes out to Tex Avery proportions. Working off notecards, she dishes on nuclear proliferation before knocking tea onto her date’s lap. A little woozy from her non-prescription specs, she gets up for napkins but then takes a header over the nearest table and smacks her crown again while standing up, unexpectedly finding a thick rope of gum affixed to her head in the process. As she races shamefacedly away after apologizing for “all that gravity,” the gum snaps as the chew flails to the ground. It’s another fearless, hilarious performance from Faris, whose breathy, wide-eyed and aging ingénue provokes pity, fear and admiration, usually at the same time.

5. “Iron Man”
Directed by Jon Favreau
Pratfall: Iron Man Armor Mishaps

Jon Favreau, emerging as an ace director-for-hire, wisely gave Robert Downey Jr. plenty of latitude to riff on his signature snarky motormouth persona in “Iron Man,” providing an oasis of comic invention in this otherwise rote superhero saga. The peak of this improvisation is a well-crafted, slow-burning series of pratfalls as Downey’s Tony Stark is testing his new and improved Iron Man armor. After instructing his robot-arm buddy to watch for a flameout, Stark’s first attempt at flight rockets him into the ceiling and then to the floor — and his robotic fire marshal is quick on the extinguisher trigger. After threatening his mechanical assistant with the prospect of community college, Stark’s second attempt is moderately successful aside from some light charring of his vintage car collection. With the final trial, he speeds outdoors in full regalia, a triumphant moment and a cue to expect an action extravaganza to begin. But upon returning home, he crash-lands in his spacious abode, destroying three floors, a grand piano, and a luxury car in his lab. And in the final humiliation, he’s pathetically blasted with the fire extinguisher by his downtrodden mechanical pal. With a tight structure (the callback of the cars and extinguisher), canny timing, and sneaky misdirection in the final section, the sequence could stand on its own as a slapstick sci-fi comedy short.

Jason Statham, Working Class (Action) Hero

By R. Emmet Sweeney

IFC News

November 26th, 2008

Jason Statham is a worker. He’s released three films in 2008 alone (“Transporter 3” hits theaters today), and his characters are defined by labor, whether he’s playing a driver, a thief or an assassin. They have names evocative of union workers and hockey players: Frank Martin, Terry Leather, Chev Chelios. These are single-minded anti-heroes out to complete a mission. Nothing concerns them but the job, whether it’s a “Bank Job,” an “Italian Job” or a “Transporter” gig. The thrills in a successful Statham film come from this focus — the hurtling narratives rarely pause for backstory, concerned only with bridging the gap between a plan and its execution.

Statham’s route to tough guy stardom was circuitous. For a decade, he toured the world as a member of Britain’s national diving squad, finishing 12th on the platform at the ’92 World Championships, but amateur sports weren’t paying the bills. So he’d set up shop outside of Harrods, and, as he told IGN, “I used to put money in my pocket while working on the street corners, selling perfume and jewelry, and other goods that were supposedly expensive.”

Then he scored a modeling gig and caught the attention of Guy Ritchie, who was intrigued by his black-market experience. Roles in “Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels” (1998) and “Snatch” (2000) followed, and this ex-diver/hustler/model would soon be shirtless on the big screen for years to come. “Lock, Stock” played on his working-class shyster past (Statham admits he plays a version of himself in the film), and that determined poor Cockney criminal has informed his performances since, from ruthless killers to small-time operators.

The plots in his best work abound with questions of geography, how to get from here to there. “The Transporter,” “Cellular” and “Crank” are all premised on a race against time, whether he’s tasked with breaking up a human trafficking ring, handling a kidnapping or finding a cure for an exotic poison. The action in all three is based on navigating urban spaces and improvising ways to keep moving at all costs. Such improvisation leads to some of the most imaginative action scenes in recent years — think of the oil slick brawl in the first “Transporter,” where Frank Martin douses himself in crude to slide away from his pursuers, or the mall chase in “Crank,” where Chelios wedges his car into an escalator and surfs it to the next floor. Statham isn’t the protagonist in “Cellular,” but he still manages to wheel through Santa Monica, snatching kids along the way. When asked how he’d describe “Crank,” Statham said, “”Run, run, fucking run. I do not stop. Well, that’s what the movie’s about.” It’s also a concise description of his entire output.

These ingenious set pieces were conceived by different directors, but the characters’ improvisatory spirit is similar. Whether it’s the balletic, over-the-top combat of fight choreographer/director Cory Yuen (“The Transporter”), or the straight-ahead brawling lensed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor (“Crank”), Statham is great at conveying a fighter’s thought process. In “The Transporter,” Frank is a calm surveyor, so Statham plays him ramrod straight and narrow-eyed, exhibiting mulish determination in the most absurd of fight scenes, turning coconuts into boxing gloves and deploying a fire hose as a kick to the crotch. He walks with a tightly wound spring in his step, every sinew straining to be provoked. Obsessed with order and the principles of his job, his gestures are precise, his fights mathematical problems to be solved.

“Crank”‘s Chelios is Frank’s inverse: a frantic, dissolute jokester assassin, his face plastered with a dour smirk. Injected with a poisonous “Beijing cocktail,” the only thing that can delay its deadly business is a constant flow of adrenaline, an ingenious bit of self-reflexive plotting where action is an end in itself — the perfect expression of the Statham persona. In a cannonball of a performance, he blasts through Los Angeles, snorting nasal spray, injecting epinephrine and slamming his hand in a waffle iron, always on the edge of cracking up.

It’s a brilliant piece of slapstick, epitomized when he asks his cabbie to jack up the radio when “Achy Breaky Heart” hits the airwaves, and fruitlessly shudders to the music, trying to mosh in the backseat to release those precious endorphins. Whimpering the lyrics to stay alive, he cuts a pathetic figure, and along with exhibiting his sly, self-deprecating sense of humor, Statham introduces an unexpected note of melancholy. In the midst of a madcap hospital break-in, his face ashes upon entering an aged man’s deathbed, recognizing the decay in himself, echoed later in the exquisitely surreal final shot, calling his girlfriend one last time as he falls, incredibly slowly, to his death (although he’ll revive in time for the sequel, due next year).

With this year’s “The Bank Job” and “Death Race,” Statham continues to explore the melancholic and anti-heroic contours of his persona. He’s a blue-collar guy in both films (shady car dealer and factory worker), inadvertently roped into a criminal conspiracy that he must stubbornly unravel, through heists and (of course) murderous demolition derbies. His Terry Leather in “The Bank Job” is a low-life striver who engages in a subtle minuet of longing and retreat with the local femme fatale, consisting of a few passing glances in the midst of the post-heist intrigues. It’s a resourceful, solid turn, and another example of the remarkable continuity and elasticity of Statham’s performances, which are slowly testing his typecast boundaries by introducing mortal thoughts and flickers of romance into his overarching professional obsessions.

An Appreciation of Anna Faris

By R. Emmet Sweeney

IFC News

August 21st, 2008

Anna Faris may finally be getting her due. After years of fearless and sparkling work in lowbrow spoofs and indie doodles, she’s starring in and executive producing a big Hollywood comedy, “The House Bunny.” Whether it’s worthy of her talents is yet to be seen, but it definitely heralds a new stage in her circuitous career, one in which she can start calling her own shots. If given the chance, she’s capable of out-dumbing Judy Holliday and out-ditzing Carole Lombard, or at least give them a run for their heiress money.

With the Apatow boys dominating the comedy circuit, there’s been little room for feisty female comediennes. Apatow’s art is based on absurdist riffs on macho man-children, the women serving as sullen straight gals. There are some exceptions, of course (Kathryn Hahn’s sex-starved wife in “Step Brothers,” Molly Shannon’s boozehound in “Talledega Nights”), but they simply serve to prove the rule. And that’s why Faris is such a bracing talent, with her brash physicality, slow-burn timing and endlessly expressive eyes that promise the kind of screwball pluck that David Denby is constantly mourning as lost in his New Yorker columns. While I’m much fonder of Apatow and the severely underrated Adam McKay than Denby, he’s right about the disappearance of the comic actress. Performers like Faris, Amy Adams and Isla Fisher are enormous talents, but there’s no room for female clowns when teenage males are the targeted customer.

Plucked from relative obscurity in Washington state to star in Keenan Ivory Wayans’s “Scary Movie,” Faris started her career in the raunchiest way possible. As a parody of the virginal scream queens that came before her, Faris’ Cindy Campbell was so pure that she shaved her tongue — though not the massive tuft of pubic hair beneath her electrified chastity belt — and she was funny because Faris played the insanity straight. Faris never oversells a joke, but lets it build around her until her incredulous puppy dog eyes expand to capacity and await the rapidly approaching punchline. With such comic instincts, she’s been compared to everybody from Lombard to Goldie Hawn. David Zucker, the director of the third and fourth “Scary Movies,” told Sara Corbett of the New York Times that “to do good comedy, you have to be smart, and Anna is smart. You could have an actual dumb blonde playing the dumb blonde role, but she wouldn’t have nearly the range.”

Faris was a brunette for the first two “Scary Movies,” and kept the dark hair for 2002’s indie “May,” where she plays the vamp, though a dotty one at that. Her Polly is a lesbian lothario with a thing for the title character, the mousy May (Angela Bettis), and her overeager come-ons are hilarious bits of bravado. She’s the devilish highlight in an otherwise uneven Carrie take-off.

It was with 2003’s small role in “Lost in Translation” that Faris established herself as the dumb blonde for the oughts. Stealing every scene she’s in with bubbly small talk banality, her shallow actress seems like a lot more fun than ScarJo’s morose misanthrope. The film has aged poorly, steeped in condescension towards modern Japan as well as Faris’ character Kelly. Kelly shows kooky vivacity in her few scenes on screen, pimping a power cleanse and belting out “Nobody Does it Better” as the main couple sneak on by. But watching it now, I’d much rather linger with Kelly’s screwy antics than bathe in the anomie of the rest of the film’s curdled hipsterism.

After this star-making performance… she didn’t become a star. Her small role in “Brokeback Mountain” aside, she soldiered through some middling fare in supporting roles, dishing an emasculating monologue in “Waiting…” (2005), nabbing a recurring role on “Friends” during the sitcom’s final season, and suffering through “My Super Ex-Girlfriend” (2006) as the doting third of a love triangle between Luke Wilson and Uma Thurman. It wasn’t until 2007, with Gregg Araki’s barely seen “Smiley Face,” that Faris displayed the full range of her talents. On screen for the whole film as stoner/slacker extraordinaire Jane, she manages a true comedic tour-de-force. Slouching through the film’s shaggy dog tale with slack-jawed grace, Faris hoods her eyes and slows down her delivery as she makes her way from Los Angeles to Venice, CA. There are a series of stunning sequences here, including an acting audition turned pot bust and an incoherent Marxist call to action, where every intonation is pregnant with humor as she shifts her patter from a slow murmur to a guttural shout. Every scene carries a surprise. It’s the kind of high-wire act that wouldn’t feel out of place in a screwball classic like “Twentieth Century,” only if the weed was replaced with champagne.