I Have No Funk. I Am Totally Funkless: Safety Not Guaranteed (2012)

When I make note of famous indie time travel movies, minds will undoubtedly jump first to Primer a stellar low-budget deeply perplexing film from the genre that made huge waves upon its release in 2004.  However, I would never have imagined that an indie film would navigate again into such waters, let alone find itself financed by the Duplass Brothers, the certifiable power houses of the indie scene who appear to have their hands within anything and everything released in the world of independent cinema in the past year or so.  Yet, in Safety Not Guaranteed one is provided with a very much indie film, including one of the Duplass' in a leading role, not to mention a narrative that finds itself heavily invested in the idea of time travel, although, to be fair, very little of it actually has to do with actual time travel, instead, focusing on events leading up to a planned tripped by one individual.  Colin Trevorrow's fictional feature debut is a film that is ostensibly about time travel and at times this seems to be everything but the case for the film, yet as the narrative manages to show the idea of time travel is something shared by quite a few people and only actually attempted by a handful.  A narratively mature film, aside from a handful of unfortunate uses of the word friggin, Safety Not Guaranteed is exactly what should be expected out of an indie film, a standard very much set by the Duplass Brothers and a lesson that could still use of teaching to some indie filmmakers who find themselves embracing sloppy and misguided filmmaking and cool or indie, when in fact it is just bad and ill conceived.   Nothing about Safety Not Gauranteed reflects such misdirection and, in fact, beautifully stands its own compared to some heftier films claiming to be indie films, specifically, Silver Linings Playbook, which while good, certainly had a larger budget allowing for an all out marketing campaign and a means to accrue Oscar buzz.  I am more than willing to say that Aubrey Plaza puts on a better performance in this film than Jennifer Lawrence does in Silver Linings Playbook, but the way the  dice land results in one being relegated to her identity on Parks and Recreation, while the other is receiving far too much credit for what was essentially a run of the mill role.

Safety Not Guaranteed focuses on the somewhat disillusioned Darius (Aubrey Plaza) who is attempting to find income while dealing with her dead end internship at a magazine in Seattle.  She seems destined for monotony until she is afforded an opportunity to engage in a piece with head writer Kenneth (Jake Johnson) and fellow intern Arnau (Karen Soni).  The piece they plan to pursue focuses on a classified ad placed in a local newspaper requesting a partner for a time travel trip which threatens to be quite dangerous and the individual will receive compensation upon return.  The crew of course assumes that they will invariably meet an insane individual and have a piece solely in that right.  Darius seems to take a keen interest in it and her vested interest is likely a result of still reeling from the loss of her mother, for which she takes ungrounded fault.  When Darius meets Jeff (Mark Duplass) the man responsible for the ad she instantly realizes that there is much more to him than an insane individual, and becomes intrigued by the passion for which he pursues his desire to travel back in time, even finding herself opening up to him about her own loss.  Meanwhile Kenneth deals with his own past ties to the area, attempting to rekindle a high school romance with former girlfriend Bridget (Mary Lynn Rajskub) who brushes him of when he suggests that she come back to Seattle with him to take up within his life.  Enraged by his disappointment, Kenneth then goes on an drunken quest to assure that Arnau gets laid, something he believes Arnau should be doing at his young age.  Meanwhile, as the intensity of Jeff's plans grow, Darius becomes more emotionally invested in the outcome, only to realize that his past is far more complex and not quite as true as he may have claimed.  The confrontations of all the characters come to the forefront moments before the time travel is to take place and Darius decides to commit to Jeff and the two seem to successfully travel into the past, although on a metaphorical level they are far from the only characters to do so.

Many philosophical treatises, particularly those with a bit of Eastern Asian influence seem to adhere to the idea that living in the present is truly the only way to make it through life with any degree of success, and Safety Not Guaranteed is very much a film that considers such notions.  No character in the film, for the majority of the film manages to exist in the present, both Darius, Kenneth and Jeff live in their respective pasts, hoping to return to a time in which they could obtain lost loved ones, whether it be parental figures or hopeless crushes.  Even Arnau whose careful logic and hesitance is criticized not because it makes him uncool, but because it is a sign of him living in the future and completely missing out on enjoying his present.  In fact, it is not until any of these characters manage to absolutely free themselves from their concerns of any other moment but the now that they are able to embrace life, this occurs when Jeff and Darius spend an evening together before the morning of the planned travel, or when Arnau and Kenneth take to a fair in a wild and carefree manner, ultimately, the film makes sure to remind viewers that not all moments can exist in such transcendence, and that often times the pressures of future realities will rear their ugly head as in the case of Kenneth's incessant boss.  At other times unfortunate facts about the past will damage the opinions one may formulate about an individual, as occurs when Belinda (Kristen Bell) paints a picture for Darius about the psychologically troubled Jeff for whom she has grown to care for deeply, and if one is honest about it, is this not the basic premise for most time travel films.  The closing moments, like some of the classics in time travel, reminds viewers that at moments a perfect unity of occurrences can allow for a truly transcendent and shared experience to occur, even if said experience is something as physically impossible as traveling through time on a decked out hoover craft.

Key Scene:  There is a scene in which Darius explains her past to Jeff, in which Aubrey Plaza delivers a performance I saw coming out of nowhere that absolutely makes the movie much more than a sentimental comedy revolving around time travel.

An excellent little film that has been made recently available on Netflix Watch Instantly and is well worth investing a few moments towards.

Bad Dreams Make You Think You're Seeing Things: Triangle (2009)

The second stop on my voyage through horror films this October comes the way of a psychological thriller by director Christopher Smith.  The film, Triangle, is a psychological time travel narrative with just enough jumps and moments of suspense to deem it within the horror drama, but with enough moments of uniqueness to help it supplant the traditions of the horror film.  Triangle is an incredibly complex film and certainly does not treat its viewers as idiots, often requiring them to make connections and glean ideas from within the film narrative that do not necessarily pop out, while I have only viewed the film once for this blog, I could imagine it benefitting immensely from repeated viewings and listening to various commentaries and charts of what events occur throughout the film, perhaps similar to what many have done with the cult time travel film Primer.  However, what helps Triangle to stand apart from its contemporaries, and exist as a pretty decent genre film is the absolutely intense psychological turmoil of one character that perpetuates a majority of the movie.  Sure it lacks in the CGI department and a lot of the technological after effects are a bit forced, but this can be excused since the film is a bit of an indie horror work and as such is not afforded the cinematic tricks and treasures of bigger budget films, one must simply applaud the directors for their earnest efforts in making such a piece of horror cinema, one that is nearly perfect, save for ending a few scenes too late.

Triangle focuses on a day in the life of Jess (Melissa George) a somewhat spastic woman who is stuck dealing with the burden of having an autistic son and seeks refuge in a day trip on water with some friends.  The group includes the captain of the vessel, aptly named Triangle, Greg (Michael Dorman) who clearly has feelings towards Jess, as well as Greg's mutual friends Downey (Henry Nixon) and Sally (Rachel Carpani) a attached at the hip married couple and their single friend Heather (Emma Lung) who they hope to hook up with Greg.  Finally the group is rounded off by a young man named Victor (Liam Hemsworth) who is taken on as an aid for Greg after he finds sleeping behind a convenience store.  This group attempts to enjoy a day on the water only to become stalled at sea after the wind lets down, an anomaly that is quickly followed by a fierce storm that destroys the ship and leaves the group stranded on the capsized boat, minus Heather.  Believing themselves lost the group spots an abandoned ocean liner in the horizon, on which they quickly board.  Without giving too many of the details away, as the reveals in this film are excellent, it becomes clear that the group is unwelcome on the ship and begin to be attacked by a force, one that is both unexpected by the attacked as well as the attacker, culminating in a suggestion that the nightmarish course of events is inevitably going to continue on without resolve.

Triangle is particularly keen on the notion that correcting one's actions does not in turn change the past. In the film's philosophy no amount of intervention can even begin to prove fruitful when things are preordained and one's knowingly bad actions will be reprimanded and guilt will not result in redemption.  We see this constantly throughout the move, as it is, spoiler alert, essentially a time travel movie.  One character finds themselves attempting to return to a moment prior to disaster within the day, an act that by default requires them to repeatedly engage in less than acceptable behavior, ranging from simple acts of lying to incredibly grave acts like murder.  The greater issue emerges when it becomes clear that even a perfect execution of events leads to a new series of problems and past injustices.  As it becomes clear in the latter part of the narrative, even if the group is to escape the evil of the ship, another group of nightmares, or realities, await them upon shore, ones that may or may not result in very cataclysmic events.  Finally the film further posits that often our incessant concern with controlling our destiny is futile in that what usually changes the course of events may indeed be simple and uncontrollable interference by nature.  Sorry to be terribly vague with the descriptions, but I do not care to spoil such an enjoyable film, particularly since it is of the horror persuasion.

Key Scene:  Let's just say there is a reveal involving Jess and Sally that is as grotesque as it is cinematically stunning.

Triangle was a pleasant surprise in that it was far more reflective than I had imagined.  The movie poster and DVD cover do it no justice, although they may indeed suggest more upon deeper examination.  Regardless, it is well worth renting and certainly worth buying if one enjoys horror films.

It's Still Just Once A Year Isn't It?: Groundhog Day (1993)

Defining Bill Murray as an actor can prove to be an incredibly difficult thing, as his performances range from the incredibly absurd in something like Coffee and Cigarettes to disturbingly dreary and honest like in Lost in Translation, however, it seems agreed upon that his best performance exists within Groundhog Day.  I must admit when I would read this it baffled me because having only now revisited the film for the first time since childhood, I seemed to remembered it being a highly comedic film with no social value.  However, this revisitation afforded me the ability to see how contemplative Groundhog Day is, as well as providing a clear argument as to why Bill Murray's best performance does indeed exist within this film.  The range of emotions played out throughout the films plot and Murray's ability to offer a keen and focused performance is truly a spectacle to behold.  Sure the film is endearingly stuck in the nineties and much of the humor is formulaic, but Groundhog Day has enough unusual moments, sweet encounters and a honest questions about how one would spend their days were they to repeat them.  This combination, along with the watchability of Groundhog Day helps to explain why it has cemented itself as a cult classic and as one of the best films of the nineties, so much so that it was chosen as one of the films to be saved by the National Film Archive.

Defining Bill Murray as an actor can prove to be an incredibly difficult thing, as his performances range from the incredibly absurd in something like Coffee and Cigarettes to disturbingly dreary and honest like in Lost in Translation, however, it seems agreed upon that his best performance exists within Groundhog Day.  I must admit when I would read this it baffled me because having only now revisited the film for the first time since childhood, I seemed to remembered it being a highly comedic film with no social value.  However, this revisitation afforded me the ability to see how contemplative Groundhog Day is, as well as provi....err, wait a second.

Groundhog Day follows disillusioned reporter Phil (Bill Murray) who is begrudgingly taking up his fourth trip to report on the famous Punxsutawney groundhog known for his predilections for weather reporting.  Along with Phil are his two co-workers who see Phil as a blowhard with serious delusions of grandeur, his cameraman Larry (Christopher Elliot) and his producer Rita (Andie McDowell) whom Phil finds attractive.  Awaking with much disinterest in performing his role as reporter, Phil goes through the motions as he drinks coffee, runs into a high school alumni and reads his lines as though it were just another day.  However, a severe blizzard traps Phil and his crew in Punxsutawney for the night.  This is when things begin to get weird, as Phil wakes up to realize that he is living the same day over and over again, stuck in a seemingly infinite loop, in what is to him the worst town on earth.  At first Phil reacts by enjoying excesses, once he realizes that even if he kills himself, he will still wake up at six each morning to the tunes of Sonny and Cher.  Eventually, Phil makes it a goal to win over Rita an effort that proves nearly successful, but not, perfect, particularly considering that any efforts he may make will be thwarted by having to start over the next day.  Phil, ultimately, realizes that he must act out positively in order to make Rita take notice, something that is made exceptionally easy by the fact that he has each moment and action down to a science.  His final winning over of Rita proves to be the means to break his curse, something he is careful to accept, but embraces warmly upon verification.

It is easy to see Groundhog Day as a run of the mill Bill Murray comedy, in which he rambles with near absurdity as the characters around him attempt to play the straight man to his funny.  However, there is clearly a philosophical pondering that exists on the layer below the comedic narrative.  For Phil each day becomes an ethical dilemma in that he is essentially engaging in actions that have no moral consequence.  It is perfectly valid that he drive head on into trains, smoke and consume like a glutton or go to bed with a variety of women, because the fact is that he will wake up to live the next day, as though nothing ever happened.  What becomes interesting is when he chooses to make positive actions, because they will go unacknowledged, particularly considering that Phil goes out of his way to learn and exact his help in a meaningful manner.  It truly ponder the age old question of: if you do a good act in the woods, will anybody be there to acknowledge it being done.  Of course the answer is no, but one should do it, nonetheless, because on some metaphysical karmic level it will be returned.  Finally, the film also posits the ethical issues of exploiting individuals with whom you have an intellectual and experiential advantage over, particularly for one's own devices.  Phil exploits his knowledge of the day to sleep with women and steal from banks, however, the narrative suggests that such actions will lead to disillusionment and despair, condemning them in the end.  I am sure there are other lays to Phil and his philosophy, but I am not versed on the matter enough to expand further.

Key Scene: The initial winning over of Rita on Phil's part is quite sweet.

As a classic American comedy, Groundhog Day is a must-watch movie and it is currently watch instantly on Netflix giving you no reason to miss the opportunity.

J. Alfred Prufrock Is Like My Mantra: Midnight In Paris (2011)

Prior to viewing Midnight In Paris I was on the verge of discrediting the contemporary works of Woody Allen.  While he is certainly a comedic master and a fine filmmaker, I was beginning to believe that his films post 2000 were nothing more than increasingly senile diatribes that egregiously missed their mark.  This belief stood fast until I was about twenty or so minutes into Midnight In Paris and realized that Woody Allen was offering up something very intimate and sentimental that was artistically poignant while still adhering to the personal existentialism so key to classic Woody Allen films.  What this film offers is a bittersweet reflection by the aging director on both the beauty and tragedy of nostalgia and how such longing for the past only causes individuals to ignore their own present.  This ignorance towards the present is precisely what Allen's film focuses on, particularly as it relates to a person who finds himself becoming increasingly distant from his fiance and her peers.  Instead of focusing on the woes of aging, Allen creates an all-encompassing study of a often asked question.  That question being "Do I Belong Here?," and as Allen shows, through his film, the answer is rarely ever a simple one.

Midnight in Paris places it primary focus on Gil (Owen Wilson) a successful, but jaded, Hollywood screenwriter who has decided to pursue penning his own novel about a person who owns a nostalgia shop.  Gil is joined by his disapproving fiance Inez (Rachel McAdams) who dismisses Gil's ponderings in favor of wooing over her friends husband Paul (Michael Sheen).  While attempting to find inclusion within his wife's group of friends Gil realizes he is unwanted and takes up a tipsy trip through the streets of Paris.  While stopping to take a breather and recalculate his route home, Gil is approached by a twenties era car whose occupants demand he join them.  Reluctantly, Gil gets into the car to find people matching the cars look in their 1920's wardrobe and speech.  Through passing conversation, Gil realizes that he is in a car with F. Scott Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston) and his wife Zelda (Alison Pill).  Bewildered Gil begins to verify whether or not he is truly residing in the world of 1920's Paris.  He eventually runs into Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll), Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates), Salvador Dali (Adrien Brody), Pablo Picasso (Marcial Di Fonzo Bo) and others, even taking a moment to suggest a plot for a film to Luis Bunuel (Adrien de Van), which film buffs will recognize as The Exterminating Angel.  Through all this, Gil meets a woman named Adriana (Marion Cotillard) who he falls for instantly.  However, each morning Gil awakes to his real world in the present day seeking only to return to the Paris of the 1920's, while ignoring his crumbling engagement and the rather blatant infidelity of his wife.  Spurred on by the music of Cole Porter and the discovery of Adriana's journal in the present day, which mentions his exact words from a conversation the two shared the night before, Gil sets out to understand his own attachment to this other world of the past.  On one particular night, Gil follows Adriana on her own trip to France at the turn of the 19th century in which Adriana insists they stay.  It is only now that Gil realizes the flaws of his own nostalgic and illogical attachments to a time gone by and upon explaining his realization to Adriana, Gil returns to his time to end things with his fiance and wander the streets of Paris.  This ability to disconnect from the seemingly inextricable ties of nostalgia allow for Gil to meet a woman on the streets of Paris thus ending the film with the two of them walking the streets of Paris in a poetic and sweet closing shot.

I mentioned the sentimentality of this film in the opening sentences of this review.  I find it rather notable coming from a director like Woody Allen whose staunch pessimism has always found its way into his movies in the past.  Whether it be Annie Hall or Bananas Allen's films remind viewers that reality usually lets us down, and that all does not end well.  However, Midnight In Paris does not do these things, in fact, it does the opposite.  In this film the guy gets the girl, all be it a girl who appears only momentarily throughout the film and is not the one viewers expect.   More importantly, however, the character matures.  In all of the other Allen films I can recall, Allen's characters, often played by the director himself, never advance and often stick to their old ways arguing that putting themselves on the line would only prove hazardous.  In Midnight In Paris this is not the case, Gil absolutely puts himself out in the open for change.  After desperate flailing and a rather harsh taste of reality, Gil accepts his own place in society and advances forward as opposed to staying stagnantly in the present, an absolutely mature approach to narrative from Woody Allen.  Perhaps it is Allen's late age or love for old school movies, but if it were not for the occasional Freud inspired joke I would have had trouble placing this as a Woody Allen film and thought it more of a film Wes Anderson might make twenty years from now.  Regardless, Midnight In Paris is a sobering look at aging and the past and is a promising reminder of how truly prolific of a filmmaker Woody Allen can be, hopefully, we will see many more films of this nature from the director in the years to come.

This is an absolutely gorgeous film and one of the best of the year.  It is still making its way through the smaller theaters and there is no reason that you should not make it a goal of yours to see it before the New Year.  More importantly, remember, when in doubt, it is all a rhinoceros.

They Said, We'll Come Back For You Paw-Paw: The Future (2011)

There are only two names in American Cinema that reflect truly unique and standalone filmmaking that reflects a director pouring their inner most insecurity into their work.  The first is Harmony Korine with his abrasive imagery and bizarrely accurate portrayals of the effects of those disillusioned by the American dream.  The second is the director/author/musician/performance artist Miranda July whose rapidly growing cult following is becoming more evident with each film and novel she releases.  Her most recent directorial offering The Future combines all the indie fueled art-house elements of her first work You, Me, And Everyone We Know (2005) along with a much heavier dose of what I can only describe as magical nihilism.  For those familiar with Miranda July it is easy to expect a sad movie that leaves the characters at the most debased, showing little advancement for themselves...and humanity in general.  At times, Miranda July's scathing criticism of our internet-laden society is hard to watch.  Yet, as is always the case with July's work, some heartbeat ticks deep below the film making the experience transcendental causing the viewer to realize that what they have watched is much grander than a social critique.  The Future is a self-reflective and fully realized poem about the tragedies of aging in a society where individuality is manufactured and intimate relationships are as much about cohabitation as they are about love.  However, the nihilist that is Miranda July reminds us that no amount of change will allow us to escape from this trap and that sometimes death is a far more rewarding alternative.

The Future is a non-linear narrative of sorts and borders on being a time travel film.  It begins with the introduction of a talking cat named Paw-Paw, voiced by the films director, who longingly awaits the return of her soon to be owners, a thirty something couple named Sophie (Miranda July) and Jason (Hamish Linklater).  The couple who was intent on adopting the cat discovers that they must wait an additional thirty days before they can take the cat, because it has suffered a rather serious fracture.  Upon returning to their apartment, the couple decides that their lives are terribly uninspired for pushing forty and vow to make serious life changes before adding Paw-Paw into their lives.  For Jason this means taking up environmental activism and meeting up with Joe (Joe Putterlik) an old man who sells severely used hair dryers in the penny savers and writes raunchy poetry for his wife.  Incidentally, the man who inspired July's entire narrative for the film plays Joe.  Sophie, on the other hand, finds herself attempting to reinvigorate a flailing dance career by performing "30 Dances for 30 Days" following the inspiration of other Youtube sensations.  Sophie also finds herself entering into a sexual relationship with a divorced man named Marshall (David Warshofsky), who, while obviously only concerned with sexual conquest, provides Sophie with attention that she finds lacking in her relationship with Jason.  Both Sophie and Jason continue to "find themselves" as a narrative from Paw-Paw reminds viewers that he too is awaiting a major change in his life.  Happiness, tragically is not the end result for the couple, as Jason discovers Sophie's infidelities and decides to end his relationship with her, while Sophie, similarly realizes that her own eccentricities and attachments to unusual things are bizarre to Marshall, yet endearing to Jason.  Sadly, the couples own turmoils cause them to forget abut Paw-Paw who was euthanized due to the couples failure to pick him up in time.  As the couple notes, they both went back for the cat, yet, as is often the case in life, it was simply too late.  The result leaves the viewers watching the couple return to their previous state of co-habitation as Jason literally turns the next page in their rather bleak life, implying that the future is indeed very unexciting.

As is the case with Miranda July, criticism is tricky.  Her films live in a world that dances wildly between purely artistic outpouring and finely crafted social critique.  However, the commentary in the film is rather apparent, given the film's title and subsequent narrative.  July's work is preoccupied with living in the future and assuming stupidly that positive change will simply happen to those who wait.  This is apparent in both Sophie and Jason's career choices.  Sophie, an aspiring dancer, works as a children's dance instructor and shows no pride in her work and actually realizes in a rather hilarious scene that if she were to stay at the dance academy she would inevitably teach the children of the children she currently instructs.  Jason's job is no more satisfying, given that he works as an at home tech-support agent.  He mocks his job and is completely blocked off from the natural word, yet when he takes up his job as an environmental activist, he realizes that the rest of the world is equally indifferent and chooses to ignore nature freely.  Even Paw-Paw waits illogically, he idealizes his future life with Jason and Sophie, only to realize that no matter what happens in the world only two things are for certain, darkness and light...a rather existential realization for a talking cat.  Finally, in one of the films most brilliant scenes Marshall's daughter Gabriella (Isabella Acres) attempts to bury herself neck deep in the ground to grow like a tree, only to realize in the dark and cold night that she is inextricably stuck in the present and no amount of change can stop the ebb and flow of these things, except of course the work of a talking moon and the tai chi moves of Jason, but even those are futile.

I have seen The Future and it was good. The film is still making its way through some indie theaters, and is well worth checking out if you get the chance.  I am certain it will make my top films of 2011 and will likely only be succeeded by Terrence Malick's Tree of Life.