Taxi Driver

First of all, Travis Bickle might be one of the best names of a character in movie history.

The movie was my selection but I don't watch movies the same way many of you do so I'm sure I won't do the initial review justice as I don't watch with an analytical lens too often, replies are more my forte.  I shall do my best.

The movie begins and ends with De Niro, masterful doesn't do his performance justice.  He is especially strong in the first half of the movie when he is awkward and uncomfortable.  He is incredibly believable as the awkward quiet loner who as the viewer you always know is going to explode.  The degree of difficulty in playing the 6 out of 10 crazy person is so much more than when he goes full tilt.  He's great full tilt too but the whole first half he really pulls you in knowing he will inevitably snap.

Two great scenes in his breakdown- 1st the phone call after the date to the porno theater- I personally found it strange that the camera pans over into an empty hallway during the conversation but knew it had to mean something so I looked it up.  Apparently Scorcese has called this shot the most important of the film as he says it's as if we can't bear to watch Travis' pain of rejection.

Second scene that made me think instantly was when he asked advice of veteran cabbie the Wizard.  Travis knew he was on the verge and was beginning to worry about himself.  Wizard's advice was to basically get out of his own head and accept that everyone is fucked up.  Travis of course did the opposite and dove deeper into his own shit.  This is also the first time I noticed the other cabbies began to call him Killer.  Was this representative of the feelings toward Vietnam during the era or foreshadowing that the other guys knew he was kinda fucked up.  Probably both.

This was my second viewing the first being about 2 years ago and I completely forgot that Travis survived and was hailed as a hero.  His "cleansing" attack and survival certainly had an impact on his confidence and well being, though he still seemed like he was only marginally better than his awkwardness from the beginning but happier.  I'm guessing Travis probably discovered some purpose in his attack and began making vigilante style attacks to clease his filthy city.

My only complaint is it felt like it was slow to get going-alot of quiet driving and introspection, then again I make similar complaints for movies that don't take the time to build on characters.

I didn't even mention Albert Brooks or Cybil Shepherd who were both great in their parts- Cybil used to be pretty hot.  I'll give it an A-

Drinking Buddies

Review: Drinking Buddies
Participants: Drew, Sean, Bobby, Joe, Shane, Phil, Bryan, Jon
Initiator: Drew

My biggest reason for choosing this film is due to Olivia Wilde.  She is gorgeous and I have been a fan of hers since "House."  I figured it would be, at the very least, somewhat entertaining.  Somewhat it was.

Its theme is clear - the gray line between male and female friendships.  Having been in this for most of my life, I quickly spotted and related to the situation.  For those of you who never been in this situation, you may not have caught on as fast or at all.

Having been in the situation, the movie was predictable.  The dude (Luke) and girl (Kate) have feelings for each other but both in relationships.  They hangout and constantly flirt with each other to the point where it is obvious but no one wants to admit it.  Everything comes to a head when Luke helps Kate move out of her apartment.  They make formal plans but it all goes to hell when Luke cuts his hand and cannot really help Kate anymore.  She calls Dave, the douche who she slept with after Chris called things off with her, and he casually invites her to go out.  When she would rather do that instead of something formal with Luke, he loses it.  That is when their friendship is called into question but is settled in the end.

The acting was OK at best.  There were some funny parts but they were subtle.  Was anyone else wanting Sudeikis to do a Mitt Romney impersonation?  He was really good at that.  Jake Johnson (Luke) plays in "The New Girl," which isn't completely out of Drinking Buddies' theme, and essentially played the same character.  Olivia Wilde (Kate) was above average too.  She got naked so that was cool but played the everyday girl who has the bartender's charisma and seemed like the cool chick with whom people want to hangout.  Ron Livingston (Chris) is the prick cool chicks like.  Why?  No clue.  Anna Kendrick (Jill) is the girl who wants a commitment.  Luke was unsure of the commitment because of his feelings for Kate and Kate probably liked him romantically but was not ready for what Luke had to offer.

This leaves the question about male and female friendships hanging.  Is it possible?  Well no, actually.  Huffington Post and other media reported of a study published two years ago on this subject. The research suggested men think more of women than vice - versa when they attempt to be "just friends."  Perhaps Luke should have read this.

While I understood the theme, the story, however, was unappealing.  I was not drawn in by the film.  I found myself checking fantasy baseball stats, social media, texts, the fridge while the movie played.  Those are not exactly the best ingredients for a good film.

There were some aspects of Drinking Buddies I omitted.  When Chris and Jill took the hike and kissed and how Jill felt guilty about it.  Another one was the amount of beer in the movie.  Yeah, they work in a brewery and it's the name of the movie but damn, that was a lot of beer.  

All in all, not bad but not good.  Liked the theme and Olivia Wilde.  OK acting mixed with an uninviting story makes for a decent grade.  Grade: C+

Sean, on to you.

Glengarry Glen Ross

Much like Killer Joe, this one is all about the writing.  The directing, workmanlike and unobtrusive, but goddamn, this is a great script.  David Mamet might be a hardcore Fox News-style conservative these days, but here, he delivers a sterling anti-capitalist screed; the New Mexico real-estate market in the small frame and entire economies in the big picture.

Alec Baldwin, who I don’t think is named by the movie (?), kicks things off with his iconic speech.  What’s my name?  Fuck you, that’s my name.  He sets the stakes with a system that only values first place, condescends to anything only good enough, and heartily discards what lands below the line.  His value is only established by the cost of his car or his watch.  The men in the room don’t challenge him because they want what he has, and what he really has is clichéd corporate anagrams that don’t add up to anything.  He establishes a state of nature, where the man with the most resources is the only winner.  All the rest are scraps.

The way this contest, and the pursuit of the good leads, pits the four salesmen against each other plays right into Baldwin’s worldview.  During senior seminar, we read a paper that was about three different sexual morphologies of a species of lizard.  One kind overpowered competitors, another was sneaky, and the other tricked the strong by luring it out of its nest.  Ricky Roma (Pacino) crushes the competition with his superior sales numbers, while Moss (Ed Harris) plays mind games with the two weaker salesmen.  Aaronow (Alan Arkin) correctly decides not to play while Shelley (Levine) tries to be sneaky, but fails.  Moss places his faith in the wrong man and will likely be prosecuted.  Aaronow might win second by default, but the next time a hard sales target shows up, he’ll be gone.  Roma wins, because in this world, he with the most toys wins.

I appreciated the smaller Pacino performance, after he went huge with Scent of a Woman the year before, but Jack Lemmon is the winner here.  I’d call him the main character.  We’re meant to sympathize with him based on his conversations with his wife and his daughter in the hospital, but he reveals himself to be a greedy, mean sack of shit.  The dressing-down he gives Kevin Spacey’s character is brutal.  He’s a man who is given an inch, with his supposed big sale from the Nyborgs, but takes a mile.  Spacey takes it all away from him, and he’s so pathetic at this point, that he’s basically beyond sympathy.  He struck me as a guy who once was successful at his job, but he hasn’t adjusted his technique in years.  It’s the same hectoring, condescending voice with nothing behind it.  Mamet’s script makes sure to never give him an umbrella, so he’s always soaking wet with rain and/or flop sweat.  Lemmon sells all of this well.  The Machine needs this money for his family and his daughter, but he’s just not good at this anymore.

The other three salesmen are all pretty pathetic in their own ways.  Roma is the most charismatic, which is likely why he’s the most successful, but he’s utterly heartless with his mark in the restaurant.  He’s going to possibly cause the dissolution of that poor schmo’s marriage, but what he’s most upset about is Spacey blowing the sale.  It’s noticeable that he’s not in the room for Baldwin’s speech, as he could be the kind of guy giving that speech at a different time, and he likely wouldn’t have taken it.  Aaronow just sucks at everything, and is a charmless black hole.  Roma calls him a good man, but this is after we’ve been told by Baldwin how little that matters.  Moss is an incompetent Machiavelli, placing big bets on two old men with a high chance of failure. His whining gets old fast, and was possibly all an act to get Levine or Aaronow on his side. 

The main thing that I’ll take away from Glengarry Glen Ross is how brutally capitalist systems reduce their subjects to numbers.  What you’ve done in the past doesn’t matter, how you live your life doesn’t matter, the caliber of your character doesn’t matter.  All that matters is what have you done lately.  The only thing that carries currency is hard numbers.  Spacey is resistant to Levine’s pleas, begging out on the data being all-important, and if he doesn’t bend to them, someone else will.  I really enjoyed this film, landing on an A-.  Due to its density, I would likely have a completely different take on a rewatch.  It loses points on the directing, but very few of them.  Framing a conversation well is a no small skill, and the director is able to do that, but the rest is unremarkable.  Only a few points though.