Weekly Movie Update May 23- June 3: Depp, Paprika and Miike

As I sit here consciously avoiding any and all dairy so I can finally get over this infernal morphing sinus cold that I’ve had for a month, I’m taking the time to ruminate on the three most effective films I’ve seen this past week. And as different as they are they all tread on similar creative ground, that of the abstract and absurd.

I’ll begin with the experience that I look forward to most throughout the year. Those films that when you walk out of the theatre the world seems just a little more alive than it was when you stepped in. Colors are more vibrant, sounds more distinct and scents more aromatic. The world around you becomes almost hyper realistic. The film is Satoshi Kon’s “Paprika.” I show you this trailer (on the next page) safely knowing that the experience is saved for seeing the film itself.

Over the years I’ve been affected by his anime in various ways. In high school “Ghost in the Shell’s” abstract methods had my best friend and I beating our heads and making monkey noises as it came to it’s conclusion. “Perfect Blue” gave me some frenzied chills. “Millennium Actress” I honestly don’t remember that well and “Tokyo Godfathers” was touching in a strange sort of way. The only one to really stick with me until now though has been “Perfect Blue” and I say until now because the frenetic visual storytelling in “Paprika” finally meshes Kon’s love of abstract and bizarre giddiness with a mature understanding of what makes us human. True these elements have been a motif in his other films, but not quite so eloquently devised. Part of the reason why I think it works more potently in this film is that he has decided to deal with his story in the realm of dreams. What better way to explore the inner world of characters and their desires within an abstract frame or better yet, without a frame. Kon’s imagination runs rampant and it’s all the better for the viewer. There are sequences of such grandiose and nightmarish beauty that you can only stare stunned at the screen. And all of it is tied nicely together with Susumu Hirasawa inspiring score. There were moments in this dream world where Kon and Hiraswa’s vision melded so perfectly I wanted to stand up and dance down the street with the parade, or fly through the air with the title character “Paprika” or stand and cheer when one of the main characters side plot comes to a literal cinematic conclusion. This film is worth the price of admission.

Another film that by what I’ve been hearing from friends and reading in reviews makes me wonder if I’ve completely missed the bill on (trying to avoid lame puns) is “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”. Everyone seems to be sorely disappointed by the third installment of this eccentric and borderline abstract series. Me? I loved it. In replacing the rambunctious action driven story of “Dead Man’s Chest” with a far more serious character driven third the filmmakers were scrutinized for making the story too convoluted and hard to follow. There wasn’t a moment in this film in which I felt lost, unless the filmmakers wanted me to. And isn’t that the point? Not knowing who was fighting with who. And did it matter since you knew why each character was fighting? The problem I had with the first was that it was far too standard an action film. Things blew up, they swung swords and an unlikely romance was in the air – yawn! Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush gave the Hollywood safe film it’s only thump-thump of a heart beat. The brilliance of the second film was that it let go of the safety net of typical storytelling and gave it’s viewers a clever and vibrant romp through a darker world, one in which good and evil began to bleed together. Allegiances weren’t what they seemed. The excitement of not knowing what a character would do next returned. By the end everyone was in it essentially for themselves, be it motivated by something selfless or selfish, they were all coming into their own, finding life on the screen that few people find even in reality – chasing after their desires no matter what the cost. And now the third film takes those split alliances, tosses them into the air and lets the wind scatter them about again. With everyone fighting for what they want how can they overcome their adversaries? That is the true conflict in the third film, for each character. And as in the second film the talented writers (Rossio, Elliott) and director (Verbinski) brings everyone together fluidly and logically by the end, tying up all the story lines and thankfully not in the way we exactly hope for. It’s hard for me these days to talk about a great movie without mentioning the score and composer. And Hans Zimmer has finally found an adequate stomping ground for his riffs and thunderings in this post modern action epic, creating memorable themes that equal the strains and melodies of John Williams’ greatest compositions. When I hear the theme for the Kracken in “Dead Man’s Chest” my skin crawls. And finally Rossio, Elliott, Verbinski and Depp have created a character in Jack Sparrow with the complexities of Kurosawa’s yojimbo, Sanjuro, and also in the great Japanese character “Zatoichi” played almost exclusively by Shintaro Katsu. If Katsu was able to breathe life into Zatoichi for so long a time, chances are that Depp could do the same for Sparrow. I honestly hope he chooses to. (A quick side note, I finally got around to watching “Zatoichi meets Yojimbo” last week, and was blown away by the moral complexity of it’s two lead characters brought to life by Katsu and the great Toshiro Mifune. It’s definitely worth checking out, but you might want to watch “Yojimbo”, “Sanjuro” and a couple of the “Zatoichi” films so you know who you’re dealing with when you get to this one. Me, I’ve seen almost 20 Zatoichi films and I haven’t gotten tired of them.) For your pleasure since you’ve probably seen the Pirates trailer a million times…

And the final film in my trifecta is Takashi Miike’s depravity ridden “experimental” film “Visitor Q”. I am for some reason continually drawn to watch every film in Miike’s oeuvre. Though I should know better and skip the ones that proclaim themselves to be “taboo-bending” or that can’t show anything from the film in the trailer. I show you this trailer hoping that it will be enough to cause you to avoid ever seeing it (though by bringing it up I introduce the temptation to do so.)

My first problem with a film like this is the ease with which people try to place the label “experimental” upon it. Because it treads into depths that most people have the decency not to go it’s given a category to make it feel far more important than it is. That aside I’m always challenged by what Miike puts on the screen and maybe that’s the point of his more “taboo-breaking” (another pathetic label) films. I’m challenged to think about the worth of the images on the screen; can a subject be braved without putting the audience through such a despicable showing? I think so. Ingmar Bergman dealt with incest in “Through a Glass Darkly” in a much more subtle but just as disturbing, haunting and meaningful way than Miike has chosen to do it. But Miike has his mind set on a vision far more absurd than Bergman did. Considering this film in such terms one could call it a dark comedy, though anyone that would laugh at such a depiction of a family’s falling apart I would arrest on the spot. Since I haven’t said so I will say so now, “Q” is about the disintegrating family structure in the realm of reality television (the first part is easy enough to tell, the second I read on the Netflix cover, and it makes sense in retrospect). And by the point of view Miike takes you can see he must loathe reality television (I won’t argue with him there!) It’s in his desire to exaggerate everything to the limits of absurdity that this film comes crashing down. Does incest, beating ones mother, drug abuse, rape, prostitution, murder, necrophilia, etc. need to be treated with such absurdity and with such an in your face ambivalence? And with a train ride that merely starts with incest you can imagine how far he pushes the boundaries in acknowledging the depravity of the other individual acts. That isn’t to say there isn’t something going on in Miike’s head. One thing I will give him is that, unlike Kubrick’s similarly touchy “Clockwork Orange”, there is no mistaking the tragic deprivations in this film as “cool.” He shows all of it for what it is…sickening and corrupting, a disease that can tear a family apart. To Devil’s Advocate myself maybe this absurdity is the reason why it’s watchable at all. In showing us how he handles these issues perhaps he’s actually telling us how he thinks reality television handles such issues. While there could be some truth in this observation, I’m probably over thinking and giving too much credit where credit is not due. Is it really difficult to disgust someone into thinking a certain way? In the end a balance is found in these character’s lives, a “thank you” is given to the strange visitor but the cost it takes to get there leaves you numbed and hopeless, asking yourself is that as good as it can get (if you get it at all)? One thing Miike does remember is how to be a brilliant director. He shows you the action just long enough so that it burns an image onto your retina and leaves it imprinted in your head, at times after leaving the camera utterly still for a long period, he’ll cut to a shot that shows little or nothing so that the more potent image and action remains in your head, allowing you to think or feel disturbed, I suppose that depends on your stamina. I’ve been moved by Miike before, intellectually provoked and thrilled. The only thing I can take out of a film like this is to be brave when finding my own voice in the world of film making and storytelling, and that if this can make it to a screen out there, my words and images certainly have a fighting chance. For more of my thoughts on Miike and the films of his I’ve seen click this: https://philzine.wordpress.com/2006/08/10/the-japanese-noir-of-takashi-miike/.

Tags: , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Weekly Movie Update May 23- June 3: Depp, Paprika and Miike”

  1. Josh Says:

    Hey, I remember Millennium Actress, it was about an actress that originally played someone cursed to love a person for 1,000 years, and then the curse was carried out in all the roles she played over time–each told like a different lifetime. I liked it.

    Everything I’ve heard about Pirates 3 has been very positive, but I haven’t seen it.
    I will say here though that–and I’m sure a hundred reviewers have already said this–Venom and the whole light/dark dichotomy was apropos for Spider-Man 3, because it was one of the best and worst movies I’ve seen in a while. MJ’s story was great, as was Peter’s decent (especially the dance scene), but the action portions? A villain literally just falls out of the sky next to them? Seriously? That’s Battlefield Earth bad – just like the nail-pulling convenience of the Sandman suddenly being the one to really kill Uncle Ben. Again, seriously? Did Raimi and … [who is that bad?] split the scenes and not talk to each other?

    Lastly, I seriously suggest you send your portfolio of reviews to an entertainment publication. This isn’t your mom talking, but a professional editor and writer who works in a publications department. You write these on a level that warrants payment as a professional.

  2. Phillip Says:

    Hey Josh,

    Maybe I will send some of these in to a publication. Guess it can’t hurt. not sure how to even begin that process…I’ll look into it.

    As per your wanting to discuss Spidey 3. I wasn’t so much perturbed by the villains safe landing in the vicinity of Parker, nor the way Sandman caused Ben Parker’s death, what really got under my skin was the third act’s way of safely solving everyone’s problems. Not only did Sandman kill Ben Parker, BUT IT WAS AN ACCIDENT?! Way to let off every character involved. Makes it way to easy for Peter to offer forgiveness and for us to like Sandman in the end. But why do we need to like Sandman in the end? Why can’t a villain be a villain in the Spideyverse. Oh, but wait, there’s Venom! Who finally shows up in the third act and has the creativity to do to Spidey what both villains did in the previous film, and that is to hang Marty Jane Watson from something and bait Spidey into rescuing her. Poor, poor third act. Even Peter’s epilogue as he goes in to see Mary Jane was territory they’ve already soiled upon. Come on guys, give us a good ending next time.

    I remember liking Millennium Actress a lot. Maybe I’ll pick it up again.

  3. Paul Martin Says:

    I was a bit of a Spider-man fan as a teenager and my 6yo son is right into him. I bought him a great colourful Spider-man guide book which describes all the characters and their histories. Many of them came about after my time of reading Spider-man. I was looking through this book and much of what is in Spider-man 3 is straight out of the comic book narrative. Sure, Venom landing behind Peter Parker and MJ is incredulous, but this is comic book hyper-reality. This is a different world.

    And Sandman? These are the type of twists that the episodic nature of comic books delivers. So, while I can understand these complaints in the context of cinematic ‘reality’, none of them caused me any problems as I interpreted them (correctly in my opinion) as being consistent with that comic book ‘reality’. Thus I found all three films highly enjoyable, and especially the first.

    I think MJ is the weak link in the franchise. I like Kirsten Dunst as an actress but there’s something about the writing of her character in Spider-man. To be blunt, she comes across as a whiney bitch somewhat and I’m left wandering why does Peter bother with her. And yeah, the whole damsel-in-distress thing gets a little repetitive. If I recollect correctly, the comics didn’t always end with saving the babe.

    As for the dance sequence and the whole dark-Peter scenario, I thought it was handled really well and didn’t have a problem with it. I found it very entertaining – there was this whole balance of humour, action and character development that I think Raimi has balanced quite well. As I said in my review, my only real complaint was the length of the film. But I can see why it was so long, because Raimi wanted to do the multi-character thing without it being all-action and no human drama. He paced it and tried to balance it but the mix draws the film out beyond what the average audience is capable of.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: