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.
Thank you, Jon.
ReplyDeleteI hated the Alec Baldwin - name is Blake btw - "pep talk." Reminded me of AJ Manion who made a mandatory meeting on the day of Pig Dinner and then complained about it. Pissed me off then and Baldwin's malaise speech pissed me off again.
The characters were compelling. The Machine and Roma were awesome. The limited role Pacino played was great. Like, Jon, I appreciated it. Roma's ability to sell and console were majestic.
Spacey plays a terrible character. He does a great job playing the boss but he is a stiff. He takes a lot of shit from his staffers - or colleagues - but eventually gets the last laugh.
The one I could not stand was Levinne. We all know that loudmouth jackass who constantly pleads and whines but when something good happens, it's the greatest thing in the world and they did it on their own. They annoy me. The reason Levinne annoyed me was that Lemmon did a great job portraying it. I don't know of another actor who could have done as good of a job as him in that role.
My take from it is not a macro theme of capitalism as Jon suggests but more on a micro level; more specifically, the profession of sales. Glengarry Glen Ross informs the viewer of how cut throat a career in sales is. The salesman's livelihood rests upon the next sale and the past matters very little. With that over their heads, salesmen must do what they can to survive, which includes lying, cheating, and stealing. Those aspects are apparent throughout the film.
On a side note, I enjoyed the pace of the film. Honestly could not tell it was one hundred minutes long. Fast paced and to the point and those are good movies. BTW, was there even a score?
Good story, great acting, good pace, and interesting ending. Grade: A-
I probably liked it better on my rewatch because I was able to focus more on the movies strongest elements- the performance of the cast without trying to figure out exactly where they were going.
DeleteI'm sure everyone knows this already or at least figured it out, this movie was adapted from a play. The pacing that's so far drawn positive reviews from Drew and the limited overall direction drawing Kissel's ire both I imagine draw from the director's desire to maintain some of the authenticity from the original play.
ReplyDeleteBaldwin's part was not in the play but was added specifically for Baldwin by Mahomet for inclusion in the movie in order to raise the stakes for the audience. I'd probably seen or heard the Baldwin speech a few dozen times before I actually saw the movie in full. I can't imagine being in a situation where I'm forced to listen to a ridiculous speech about how worthless my coworkers and I are from some asshole who talks about his BMW and watch. That would probably suck.
The most entertaining aspect to me was the relationship between the trio of Lemmon, Pacino, and Spacey. The three of them were each superb in their own ways and in many ways not only played their parts but they portrayed the evolution of cinematic acting styles. Lemmon was brilliant in his old fashioned- borrowed from the stage- performance with an occasional sticatto cadence in his speech and mannerisms. He really took off after he made that sale to the Nyborgs while he was telling the story with his whole body to Pacino's character. Spacey played the much more modern actor. More subtlety and a more natural style. I just loved when he paused in the car and waited for Shelly to pay up the 100 bucks for the two leads and then when he revealed to Shelly why the Nyborg sale was bogus. Had the roles been reversed it would have been a more like a villainous monologue but his toned down natural style made it much more personal and painful. Pacino, a famous overactor did a gorgeous job bridging the two eras and styles and was the glue that kept the other parts from feeling disconnected.
Overall, I felt like Harris and Arkin did good if not memorable jobs in supporting roles and the overall strength of the acting performances held the movie up.
I give it a B+. I don't really have a specific reason it doesn't make the A range I just didn't love it, I guess I just couldn't relate to the task of cold calling to sell shitty real estate. I can't think of a modern profession that would make more sense to me but maybe it would be the needed bump.
Drew's reason for hating Alec Baldwin's speech, I think, is reason to like it. That's exactly what it was designed to do. He was supposed to piss off the salesmen enough to motivate them into better sales. But we all know that's hardly the best motivation. He clearly wasn't necessary to the story, since he was a film addition... but it's entertaining and Baldwin delivers it well.
ReplyDeleteThe acting was suberb with each being cast well for their parts. Lmmon, Pacino, Spacey, Baldwin, Arkin and Harris make it an excellent ensemble. I think Jonathan Pryce deserves a nod for his role as Lingk. Also, I immediately noticed Jude Ciccolella as the cop because of his role in 24. He didn't have much do do here, but it's interesting seeing an actor in his first role after spending five years with him as a specific character. There wasn't a single female in the movie, was there? Wives and daughters were referred to often enough, but none of them ever appeared on screen.
The dialogue was the real star of the film and the reason my interest was held. As Sean pointed out, the trio in the office was always on point and entertaining. I don't think there is much to say that wasn't mentioned above, concerning the dialogue. It was well written, well paced and the main provider of entertainment here. So good that, mixed with the great cast, makes the movie worthwhile.
I didn't, however, have any interest in the story. The plot was merely background noise to the quick conversations. I didn't care about the sales, I didn't care about who was getting fired, and I didn't care about who ended up robbing the office. It didn't feel like any of it mattered. Sure, the cut throat nature in the world of sales will continue to roll on... great. Thanks for the entertainment, but I couldn't fully connect to the movie so it ends up with a solid, but not special, B-
Also, here's a lil song with some inspiration from the movie I guess.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puSBDVnrpdU
This was my first time watching Glengarry Glen Ross, and I didn’t totally know what to expect going in. Sure, I knew half the speech Alec Baldwin gives at the beginning, like anyone else would. I was happy to see Kissel pick it, as it’s a movie I’ve always wanted to see just to know what the big deal is. As I watched, I could see about a hundred ways this entire “house of cards” could collapse (see what I did there?), but what we get is a solid story with every actor absolutely nailing their performance and a great insight into the human character when faced with failure.
ReplyDeleteLet’s start with the performances, because that’s where this movie was going to live in die. Everyone involved was firing on all cylinders. In fact, you could make a strong case that the weakest performance was in fact the most iconic of the bunch, Alec Baldwin. He was nothing but a dead-eyed bully for his one scene, but damn did he nail it anyway. Despite how great everyone is, it isn’t tough to pick a favorite. Jack Lemmon was amazing, managing to pull off desperate, pathetic, indignant, sleazy, and everything else in between. I guess it was a tough year to crack best actor, as Lemmon wasn’t even nominated.
As for the story, yes it was window dressing, but it was necessary to drive what was almost a character study for the first 45 minutes. The movie doesn’t exactly get made by the plot, but it doesn’t retract from anything. If you didn’t care about Lemmon after the first half, you weren’t going to care once the plot truly unfolded.
While Kissel discussed the over-arching world lessons of capitalism and others touched on the cutthroat sales world, I tended to focus more on the response to failure each man had. Most everyone seemed to have the same response – blame the leads. Ed Harris and Alan Arkin probably spent more time complaining about leads then they did actually attempting to sell. Seeing Lemmon lay the same tired bigwig routine on every mark while routinely striking out was both sad and revealing. Yes, this was a guy who used to do well… Probably with that stupid routine. But when the game changed, he couldn’t. It became obvious why Pacino was the king. He understood people. He also planted in Arkin’s head that the leads sucked. And then, most importantly, he wanted to hear Lemmon’s story of how he closed the sale. He didn’t want to hear him just brag – he was hoping to learn something. This was a guy who didn’t seem to have a pattern… Until his mark showed up to balk. Pacino did not have much of a gameplan then. What we ended up finding were a group of men not willing to admit their own failures, but instead pass the blame to Spacey and the leads they were given… which was clearly enough to lead nearly the entire office to a place of desperation.
Last thing – I watched this movie on Amazon with X-ray enabled. Highly recommend it. Some fun facts about the movie that came out of that:
• As noted, Baldwin’s character, Blake, was not in the original play the movie is based on. Baldwin actually was going to play Ricky Roma is Pacino could not.
• The movie was largely shot in order and using only a single take per scene to allow the emotion of the play to stay intact. Much of the pre-production was rehearsal for the actors.
• Many of the actors would come to the filming on their days off to watch the others perform.
• Mamet actually had the actors perform scenes for events we did not see on screen. For instance, there was a full scene where Ed Harris convinces Jack Lemmon to break into the office after Alan Arkin refuses.
• One more, added by me: was there a single word uttered by a woman in this entire movie?
+ Amazing performances across the board
+ Great insight into dealings with failure
+ Amazon X-ray was awesome
+ Jack Lemmon
Grade: A
I might have well spent the last 95 minutes listening Colin Cowherd and Glen Beck. Let’s bring up one subject and talk about it repeatedly for 30 minutes before slowly transition to an equally unexciting topic.
ReplyDeleteThis was a movie about sad men, with sad jobs, saying sad things. I’m just not into watching people talk, talk, talk for 95 minutes.
The only redeeming quality of this movie is that I once didn’t get a sales job with UPS and I was pissed. If my life would have been like this, thank God they didn’t call me back.
I’m going C- because it held my attention about as well as Killer Joe.
I cannot figure out your movie taste.
DeleteI'm not sure either, haha.
DeleteI think I need a touch of humor, something that makes me think, or something where I have a desire to know what happens next. This movie contained none of those things.
And this movie lost me in the first 45 minutes listening to them talk about the leads. Might as well have been Benghazi or Jonny Manzel (sp)
DeleteBryan's got 6 or 7 A's on the spreadsheet and one A+ for Hoosiers. The A's run the gamut from Saving Private Ryan to Little Miss Sunshine. He is a riddle wrapped in an enigma crammed in a puzzle's butthole.
DeleteDo I need to watch Little Miss Sunshine? Looks like a chore.
DeleteI haven't seen it in a few years, but it's quite eccentric.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do not remember any musical score in the film. Did anyone catch any sort of music?
ReplyDeleteSo I went back and watched Glen Gary Glenross. I mean, looking at who was in it, I had to. I'm very glad I did as well.
ReplyDeleteYou all really touched on most things I wanted to talk about. The acting and casting etc etc. All excellent. Like you all, I think Lemmon really took over the movie. No need to rehash all of that.
With the plot, I don't even see this as a one-time thing. To me, this seems just like how the characters live on a day-to-day basis. If it's not Baldwin getting them worked up, it's something else. I'm guessing that yelling happens every day.
Also, I believe this is the second film we've reviewed that adapted a play. This one seemed to flow a bit better than Killer Joe. Maybe it was the director's decision to add in Baldwin that made it more cohesive. Made it fit to film a bit better. Not sure, but it certainly felt like more of a movie as opposed to a play.
I'm trying to remember a negative and if anything I was a bit bored at one point, but I think that says something more about me than the film. It also makes me wonder if this movie would even ever be made today as it isn't broken down enough for most audiences. They need shorter scenes and more moving around. I'm not going to hold my short-comings against the movie.
A