1.25.2011
Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
So, did Chuck Barris really kill people in Eastern Europe as a CIA operative? Well, no... of course not. (He hasn't admitted to making it all up, but come on....) As it slowly dawns on you that he is lying to you, that's what makes the story in "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" all the more enjoyable.
While not a perfect movie, "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" is certainly an interesting one. George Clooney manages to combine an aura of middle-age discontent and a bouncy, happy Cold War nostalgia. Clooney uses theatrical stage craft and live television camera tricks, instead of digital wizardry to achieve his special effects, which gives the movie an organic feel.
Interestingly, people on the Internet Movie Database have taken to criticizing the film for not being "meta" enough. According to those posters, the original screenplay by Charlie Kaufman played more overt tricks with the audience. This, supposedly, is a drawback of the Clooney movie, which supposedly removed many of the meta tricks and played it more "straight."
If that's so, then why is there doubt at the end the movie that what you have just seen is true? How did Clooney open the possibility that what you have been told is an elaborate lie? I think that there isn't enough credit given to a story told straight, with a narrator who is realistically unreliable. It's more common to be told a tall tale that you are meant to believe, but which leaves you with doubt, than to be given a wacky story that which you are never meant to believe. The latter is just entertainment. The former has more subtlety -- what would make a person hate his life so much that he is willing to lead you to believe that he killed dozens of people? The answer: creating "The Dating Game."
(0) comments for "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"
While not a perfect movie, "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" is certainly an interesting one. George Clooney manages to combine an aura of middle-age discontent and a bouncy, happy Cold War nostalgia. Clooney uses theatrical stage craft and live television camera tricks, instead of digital wizardry to achieve his special effects, which gives the movie an organic feel.
Interestingly, people on the Internet Movie Database have taken to criticizing the film for not being "meta" enough. According to those posters, the original screenplay by Charlie Kaufman played more overt tricks with the audience. This, supposedly, is a drawback of the Clooney movie, which supposedly removed many of the meta tricks and played it more "straight."
If that's so, then why is there doubt at the end the movie that what you have just seen is true? How did Clooney open the possibility that what you have been told is an elaborate lie? I think that there isn't enough credit given to a story told straight, with a narrator who is realistically unreliable. It's more common to be told a tall tale that you are meant to believe, but which leaves you with doubt, than to be given a wacky story that which you are never meant to believe. The latter is just entertainment. The former has more subtlety -- what would make a person hate his life so much that he is willing to lead you to believe that he killed dozens of people? The answer: creating "The Dating Game."
Labels: C
Going through my digital closets....
You know... the idea behind this blog wasn't half bad. Maybe I'll come back to it.
(0) comments for "Going through my digital closets...."
Labels: broken promises, weird resolutions
