Tuesday, April 2, 2019

pride, death, fame, and self-preservation


Zama (2018): Don Diego de Zama is a functionary of the Spanish empire in colonialized Paraguay, and he extremely desperate for a transfer back to his motherland because he feels above it. He may also miss his wife and kids, it’s possible. He’s a monster, sure, but he’s got feelings too. He was a magistrate not born in Spain, thus bound to the new world that he hates so much. The local governor uses his request for a transfer as a tool to bend his well, it is clear to us that he is just yanking his chain. The governor is a different breed of monster, I’m not sure he has feelings beyond those that tend to his needs. Zama’s happiness or lack thereof is a result of his pride and status, caught somewhere in between, a social purgatory that finds him with power but no respect. Of course, all this colonial pride deserves a villain if only to make it all worth something. He gets one. A native prisoner speaks of a fish fighting to remain in water that seeks to reject it. The finale basically literalizes the flopping fish losing air. Martel invites us to be voyeurs of his follies and it’s hard not to laugh, until the cold hard realities of death creep up and spoil the party.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018): “Uncertainty—that is appropriate for matters of this world. Only regarding the next can we vouchsafe certainty. I believe certainty regarding that which we can see and touch, it is seldom justified, if ever. Down the ages from our remote past, what certainties survive? And yet we hurry to fashion new ones, wanting their comfort.” I stopped taking comfort in false certainty, at least I tried. It’s not that I find it all so dismal and cruel that I’ll wind up like the characters in this, the Coen’s six-part western anthology of death, but you never know. Banking on certainties, those which aren’t tangible can get you in a lot of trouble. But where is the hope in that? I don’t know, and for once I take comfort in not knowing. If there is one bit of comfort that we can all take from death, it’s that none of us will make it out of this life alive. Buster Scruggs tells five tales of varying tones, complexities, cruelties, and ironies with death a consistent presence and certainty. The first story introduces the titular San Saba songbird who is quick to remind us that he is indeed no misanthrope right before sending at least seven men to the reapers. It’s a fully committed cartoon; replete with song numbers and animated angel wings. I think it’s glorious but as some have noted, it certainly plays as a greatest-hits of every bad inclination lobbed against the brothers as navel gazing assholes. Maybe they are, but I don’t care. It’s customary to remind all that anthologies vary in quality and this is no exception but while the highs are extremely high, the lows are merely not as tall. My personal favorite seems to be the consensus.

A Star is Born (2018): A story so nice they told it twice… twice. It’s built around the tragedy of love, addiction, and showbiz and all the evil compromises therein. One character’s ascension is predicated upon another’s ruin; in Bradley Cooper’s hands it’s rock martyrdom (the Pearl Jam kind) at the altar of pop superficiality. The songs weren’t my cup of tea, especially the rock ones, but I liked it. I’ve read a lot of bellyaching about Cooper’s self-infatuation here and how his overemphasis on his doomed drug/booze hound is just a conceited distraction from the titular star whom the film ought to celebrate and luxuriate. But the movie is about the tragedy of his addiction and thus needs to be a tragedy and what good is a tragedy if you don’t give a fuck about the person biting the dust? And this notion that Gaga is somehow upstaged here is ridiculous. The love story is the main attraction and while pop culture junkies with a binary view of love will speculate as to whether or not the stars fell into it IRL (tabloid fodder that rules the land) I would like to float the notion that even when one is pretending to “love” another, he/she/they might be susceptible to manifest feelings that can be redefined within the slender strictures of what we have deemed to be love itself. This hybrid is the main draw here and the movie benefits greatly from its complexity. I don’t know how this happened but somehow I’m on team Cooper.

US (2019): Jordan Peele loves the word tethered and so do I. It’s an evocative word that conjures weaving fabric or taking a thread and embedding it within a larger whole. In horror I imagine the 80s goop gore, a body horror travesty where a head grows out of a slimy torso, reeling in pain and torment, ready to spoil my lunch and dreams. Here we get tunnel dwelling clones who inexplicably mimic the motions of those above, the titular US? Peele, after winning over most critics as well as taking home a best original screenplay Oscar for his debut, nobly stuck with the genre that so many insist he elevated. I think it’s important to note that he gained his notoriety writing sketch comedy, not necessarily because he specialized in comedy but that he specialized in short form, which might explain why this screenplay fails to explain why or how the “tethered” are indeed tethered to their doppelganger. I’m not the kind of viewer who needs explanations, I prefer to be left with more to ponder but here we have just enough exposition dangled in front of us to wonder why certain details were left out of the final product. Specifically, how and why do these angry puppets mimic our every motion? I think the word tethered and all the connotations that this word induces drove the narrative here, and Peele could benefit from abridging his ideas. It’s not an uncommon notion in modern horror to tether a film to a superimposed allegory as we live in such politically boisterous times that declaring and identifying oneself 24/7 is a constant pressure and perceived civic duty. When the themes drive the narrative, all must fall in line with the message within and art winds up the victim. This, to me, is the what irks me about this notion of horror as a genre in desperate need of redemption. It’s a boring notion that boxes movies within their higher purpose. US thankfully isn’t sunk by this. Though built on a short form premise, it’s stretched out with much more grace and aptitude than its predecessor. My heart constantly went out to Winston Duke’s dad, stuck acting out the role of protector with little to no real-life experience to survive let alone keep your family alive. The Hands Across America gag continues Peele’s evisceration of shallow neo-liberal self-congratulatory lip service. Get Out succeeded in its succinctness, a great concept that maybe lacked the aesthetic goods. Here he remedies what I would say was a lackluster style but at the service of a convoluted story that probably would have benefited from a golden pair of scissors. I’m not saying that horror ought to lack ideas but that those ideas need not be the impetus and chauffeur to guide us through. And yet, somehow this movie still works which is a testament to Peele’s hype which is certainly now justified and we who love horror will be lucky to have him stick around and trust the genre that he’s now supposedly king of.

No comments:

Post a Comment