A decade isn’t a long time, but it’s apparently enough to trigger some heavy nostalgia among movie critics. Not only did Popmatters run a gushing feature earlier in the year about all the brilliant films of 1999, now the Guardian is declaring 1999 “a cinematic goldmine“. I’m tempted to agree. I contributed to the Popmatters series and it made me realise how well some late century movies are standing the test of time. But it’s hard for me to assess how good it really was, when it was also the year that I turned 18, moved to the big city, and spent every moment not in class or the pub in a darkened movie theatre. I lived and breathed movies that year and maybe - just maybe - I’m a bit nostalgic about it.
But what’s going on with the rest of the people writing these articles? We can’t have all reached adulthood and embraced film-nerdery at the same time. Have 28 year olds taken over the internet?
Most Sunday nights, recently, it’s been movie night over at Andy and Emma’s. I’m hard pressed to think of a better way to spend a quiet night.
Out of the films we’ve seen recently, the stand-out has to be King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters, possibly the best documentary I’ve seen in years. On paper, it should be rubbish. Nerd holds Donkey Kong record for a few decades. Other nerd breaks record. First nerd doesn’t like his crown being taken, so pulls out all the stops to discredit the new record and maintain his status.
The thing is, it’s actually amazing. The human drama is astonishing and the characters are so cinematic and epic in their way. As I said to Andy, playing video games and watching science fiction gives people a tendency to self-mythologise. These guys take themselves very seriously.
I was delighted to read Jordan Green’s review over at Burnside Writers’ Collective, which summed up my feelings better than I can:
If this was fiction, it’d be too perfect. Billy Mitchell’s precise half-mullet and glinting, swarthy eyes would be cliche. Steve Wiebe’s baby face and soft voice would be too obvious…he resembles a pudgy Luke Skywalker, for pete’s sake. That these two remarkably cookie cutter characters would battle so passionately for a prize only one of them could hold would be an unfathomable coincidence. If this was fiction, critics would mock it mercilessly for being simple and contrived.
But it’s real.
Andy and I have already cast the fictional remake with Ben Stiller, Will Ferrell and Steve Carrell. Judd Apatow, you know where to find me.
This year I’ve bettered my Sydney Film Festival attendance in one night. Last year all I managed was Hong Sang-Soo’s Woman On A Beach, which was pretty good but a bit too detached to get any real affection from me. Tonight, I saw Roy Andersson’s You, The Living (Du Levande) and Pang Ho-Cheung’s Trivial Matters. Both were classic film festival fare - off-beat, random and kind of sweet.
You, The Living is the one that will probably stick with me. It’s not going to be a lovable film for a lot of people - it’s deeply pessimistic (even for a Swedish film), it’s shot inside some of the ugliest buildings ever, and most of the cast are obese, middle-aged losers. But it’s so funny and true to life in a lot of ways. The characters are constantly experiencing the little humiliations and frustrations and conflicts that we all do - and yet remain completely oblivious to the similar experiences of those around them, exclaiming “No one understands me!”
There’s actually a beautiful moral to the film, or at least there seems to be to me, and that’s be nice to people, because they’ve probably had a shitty day too.
I finally got around to seeing Be Kind Rewind last night and it warmed by heart more than I expected. For some reason it’s not getting a lot of critical love, but I know several people who are fans. Maybe it has the makings of a cult hit? Who knows.
Honestly, it’s not a very well constructed or written film. Bits of it feel clunky and, for such a good cast, the acting felt a bit off in places. But how can you not love a film about hopeless losers revitalising a community through home-made remakes? It’s got everything a good crowd-pleasing movie needs.
Tuesday’s outing was to see the movie Amazing Grace, about William Wilberforce. It’s a cut above the usual hagiographies we get served up these days - the dialogue and cast are pretty top-notch - but it’s not a masterpiece.
Still, it got me thinking a lot about Christianity and social justice and the kind of response we should have to the equivalent injustices of today. Yes, light viewing indeed. I should have gone to The Simpsons.
The bit that troubled me most was the driven nature of people like Wilberforce - the almost complete absence of peace and tranquility. Except for an early scene in which Wilberforce is chilling out with God’s creation, he’s mostly driving himself into the ground.
I know that it’s often the single-minded, driven people who get things done, but I’m increasingly doubtful that it’s something to aspire to. Maybe I’ve been reading too much Rob Bell. It strikes me that a God powerful enough to create life and resurrect people and who cares about the poor and disadvantaged is more than capable of changing the world without our help. So when we do his work, I figure we should be able to do it out of a peace and assurance that we’re getting some serious help. And we can rest sometimes, even.
Listening to Steve Chalke speak last night at a World Vision seminar, I was hit by the fact that he is a guy with that peace. I mean, entirely committed to action and teaching and community and all the good things. But with a sense of humour, a smile and an assurance that it doesn’t all depend on him.
Why do we ennoble people’s shortcomings because they achieve things? I don’t think God is so utilitarian.
I caught a preview screening of Knocked Up last night - the new comedy about a man and woman whose one-night-stand results in something a little bit more enduring (i.e. a baby). It’s absolutely filthy, completely irreverent and very true to life. I haven’t laughed so hard in ages.
Of course, something like this also gets you thinking about fatherhood and what it takes. Ben, our hero, smokes a lot of pot and lives off an insurance payout from ten years earlier (and not a big one at that). He doesn’t seem to have any particular skills except a generally easy-going nature. I guess fatherhood for me at the moment is completely speculative - as Alison says in the movie, “You have to have sex to get pregnant” - but it makes me wonder whether most of us are more ready than we realise.
I have to come clean: tonight I did what several female friends have been egging me on to do for ages. I borrowed out The Notebook. And I have to say, it was pretty good.
Now, I once developed plans for the destruction of Hollywood purely based on the existence of this film. Here was a flick based on a book by Nicholas Sparks - the man responsible for that pus-burst on the surface of cinema, A Walk to Remember - and seemingly focus-grouped within an inch of its life to suck in young female viewers. Was I going to watch it? Hell, no.
Of course, I subsequently discovered Rachel McAdams in other things and she is now the closest thing a Hollywood celebrity whom I have never met will ever be to my perfect woman. So in recent years, I’ve at least been tempted to see the thing.
And the verdict? Well, it sure worked for me. At its core, it’s really just porn of the emotional kind - selling a kind of idealised romance to people desperate to believe in that kind of love. And I’ve got to admit, it’s a weakness of mine for all my cynicism. So yes - I am a sap.
But objectively, it’s well-written, well-shot, goes light on the saccharin for the most part and is brilliantly acted. I’ll defend it to anyone who wants to challenge that.
Anyway, the ladies love a guy who’s not ashamed of his sensitive side…
