Immediately following that Mia Farrow biopic that I wrote about a couple days ago was a movie starring Mia (post-Rosemary's Baby) and Dustin Hoffman (post-The Graduate & post-Midnight Cowboy). The description given by the "info" button on my Time Warner Cable remote said basically the same as IMDB's:
"Dustin Hoffman and Mia Farrow meet in a singles bar, sleep together, and spend the next day getting to know each other."
Sounded interesting enough, so I thought to record it. Yet I was still in no hurry to watch it. Only after my sixth day of coding, running out of all the Showtime/HBO/BBC series I have TiVo'ed, exhausting all existing Law & Orders, finding Neil Young's "Heart Of Gold" to pale in comparison to Tom Petty & The Heartbreaker's "Runnin' Down A Dream" ... it was time I followed through with my commitment to "John & Mary."
Directed by Roman Polanski (who also directed Rosemary's Baby) and released in 1969, it was very much reminiscent of "Breakfast At Tiffany's" in its pacing, coloring, and witty back-and-forth banter. Their interaction in J&M was to freshmen college romance, as "When Harry Met Sally" was to post-higher-education desperation. At first I found the pacing + story line pleasant enough but soon I was beginning to dismiss the film to be a little ho-hum. Then I heard Dustin Hoffman's character talking about "organic eggs," the effects of hormones placed in eggs on the male reproductive organs, and how she should seek out organics...
...& then I was amazed at how little post-one-night-stand/pre-relationship interaction has progressed in nearly 40 years. That is, assuming that the portrayal in this film was faithful to the interactions of its time. Then again if my love life & that of my peers (that I know of) was compared to any modern romantic comedies popular enough to be nominated for 3 Golden Globes, 2 Baftas, and a Writers Guild of America - well we might as well all hold off for Dr. McDreamy.
No spoilers here - since the film's charm is in the character's interaction and the way the story unfolds. The whole "story" is told simply by reading the synopsis, and there's no real resolve since they end up in the very same place that they were in in the first 20 minutes of the film.
But it's ridiculous how eerily true-to-life (as I know it) this 1969 film is. They meet at a bar, they discuss Godard's "Week End", they have sex (technically) before the first date, there's a voice over narrative by both characters the likes of which I have thought before or a friend has told me they've thought before, they vaguely reveal their past romantic failures, have and share mixed feelings, blah blah blah... It very well could pass for my very own IFC Films documentary with the opening scene located at Cha Cha Lounge (LAX) or Rainbo Club (CHI) or Boat (NYC).
It's not mind-blowing, but I hope this film is never remade. (Stay away from it, Hollywood scum!) Answers.com says that similar movies are Before Sunrise, Better Than Sex, and There's Always Vanilla. I *somewhat* agree with the Before Sunrise comparison, and I haven't seen the latter two. If you're going to try and seek it out at yr local video store, the cover likely looks like this. And if you're interested, though I don't know if it is any good, you can purchase the novel by Mervyn Jones here.
If you're a fan of Jeff Bridges... Wha-? Oh, you know, Jeff Bridges - he's the guy that plays "The Dude" in The Big Lebowski? Yeah! Yeah! That guy... Well he was 20 years old at the time, and sang his own song "Lost In Space" on soundtrack of this movie. It's uncredited but it's confirmed. This isn't the dude's song, but it kind of goes along with the sentiment:[mp3] Landon Pigg - "Falling In Love In A Coffee Shop"
+++
ps) Do you consider a film to be one of your favorite films because you relate to the story in the film (as opposed to relating to others who like the film)?
© 2009-2010 celeste tabora
1 comentario:
Do you consider a film to be one of your favorite films because you relate to the story in the film (as opposed to relating to others who like the film)?
I just recently had the pleasure of viewing the film at a late night TV showing, alone, in my room, in a post-break-up situation. And I fell hard for it. It is definitely a treasure for the reason you specified in your question above. I must admit, I understand some film criticism revolving around the idea that generally American romantic comedies tend to do two of the following: either aim too high, portraying characters too intellectually cold to represent how adolescent intimate relationships can be or degrading the characters to the point where one wonders if any of them every graduated from middle school emotionally and intellectually. Dr. McDreamy is a farce, everyone knows that, and as much as I adore Meg Ryan's taking on of Sally, I honestly couldn't relate to her in any sort of way as a woman. John and Mary are, in my experience, the most honest portrayals of college and post-graduate love I have seen in film since and I admire the vulnerability illustrated via Polanski's vision. These are far from perfect, smart, or even adorable. They have issues that have hindered them, but to make any sort of leap in the messy, passionate realm of intimacy takes a lot of courage and I feel the ending beautifully resolved that. I mean, honestly, did you not melt when Mia's Mary said: "I thought.. I though we could have the fish?" Perfection. The subjective biases of the viewers own personal relationship history play a huge part in the films success, and I agree, Hollywood remakes should steer clear. This one is a classic in regards to the matters of sex and the heart.
Publicar un comentario