REVIEW: The Fall Guy

Someone show me another business as enthusiastic for its own self-deprecation as Hollywood.

From affectionate self-parodies like Singin' in the Rain to darker reflections of the movie business like Sunset Boulevard, Hollywood has kind of built its empire on ridicule of itself. And why wouldn't it? Who wouldn't want to pay admission to feel like they're in on the secret: that movie magic is just smoke and mirrors? That silver screen titans actually have the most fragile egos?

But these are not revelations, and I don't think they are intended to be. Hollywood doesn't really care about displaying its own pettiness and internal rot because it knows that all just makes for good entertainment. At some point, this all stops feeling like a joke that we, the audience, are in on. At some point, it all stops feeling less like a confession and more like gloating. At what point, then, does the joke turn on us, the enablers of this cesspool whose claim to ignorance dwindles with every ticket sold?

Anyways ... if I start my review of this Friday night action-comedy with a raincloud over my keyboard, it is because this film's subject matter is admittedly playing with some live ammunition. Ryan Gosling grumbling about how all you have to do to act like a star is to pretend "my actions have no consequences" is played like a joke, but it doesn't feel at all like a joke to an audience that is seeing so many movie stars and producers break free of the #MeToo cage that we were so sure was finally going to hold abusers to accountability. It's just twisting a knife.

But I also realize that it is not all on one movie to snuff out all of Hollywood's snake holes. Moreover, I want to give the movie its due credit as a vehicle for people who maintain some reverence for film as a source of communal renewal, both for the people making it and the people receiving it.

This film peels back the curtain of film business by following a recovering stunt man, Colt Seavers (Ryan Gosling), whose first job back sees him setting himself on fire in his ex-girlfriend's (Emily Blunt) directorial debut. Colt's used to taking the fall for the A-lister, and even for his ex, but his order gets a lot taller when the film's star disappears and he is the only one who can keep this project from falling apart. But as Colt finds out, he's not the only one who'll go any lengths to see that this film doesn't tank.

Without ruining the surprise, what follows is an elaborate exposé on the power economy of Hollywood padded by even more elaborate action displays which themselves are padded by a lot of flirtation between Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt. None of the film's revelations will come as a surprise to anyone who cares enough about the conversation to pay attention to it, but that's beside the point. And it's not like the politics of the film are entirely out of synch with the business' present needs. It is not lost on me that the story rests on a first-time woman director trying to plant her feet in this field, and I can see how that's a useful picture.

As a vessel of entertainment, this film really works. The plot elements congeal. The onscreen stars are all shining (special shoutout to Hannah Waddingham who sparkles even behind her character's seedy smirk). The spectacle is tethered to sound story elements. This feels like a crew of people behind and in front of the screen who love what they do tracing out the manpower required to get this engine running.

At the end of the day, it is that deference to entertainment that keeps this film shackled. This could have pushed some boundaries. Said the quiet part a little louder, that far from having bad-faith players forced on the system, Hollywood is actually merrily complicit in roping in these folks even after their transgressions have been known. Some will say that's not the business of blockbusters, and who knows? Maybe they're right. But I also think it's fair of us as audiences to ask who it is that's supplying that line of thinking in the first place.

--The Professor

Comments

Finding Nemo: The Thing About Film Criticism ...

Film is a mysterious thing. It triggers emotional responses in the audience that are as surprising as they are all-encompassing. As a medium, film is capable of painting stunning vistas that feel like they could only come to life behind the silver screen, but many of the most arresting displays on film arise from scenes that are familiar, perhaps even mundanely so. It’s an artform built on rules and guidelines–young film students are probably familiar with principles like the rule of thirds or the Kuleshov effect–but someone tell me the rule that explains why a line like “We’ll always have Paris,” just levels you. There are parts of the film discussion that cannot be anticipated by a formula or a rulebook, and for that we should be grateful. Arrival (2016) But the thing about film–and especially film criticism–is that film critics are not soothsayers. Their means of divining the artistic merit of a movie are not unknowable. There are patterns and touchstones that

REVIEW: All Together Now

The unceasing search for new acting talent to mine continues with Netflix's new film, All Together Now, which premiered this week on the service. This film features Moana alum Auli'i Cravalho as Amber Appleton, a bright but underprivileged high schooler with high aspirations. Netflix's new film plays like a trial run for Cravalho to see if this Disney starlet can lead a live-action film outside the Disney umbrella. Cravalho would need to play against a slightly stronger narrative backbone for us to know for sure, but early signs are promising. All Together Now follows Amber Appleton, a musically talented teen overflowing with love for her classmates, her coworkers, and her community. Amber reads like George Bailey reincarnated as a high school girl, throwing herself into any opportunity to better the world around her, like hosting her high school's annual for benefit Variety Show. But Amber's boundless optimism conceals an impoverished home life. She and her moth

REVIEW: Belfast

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: the world needs more black and white movies. The latest to answer the call is Kenneth Branagh with his semi-autobiographical film, Belfast . The film follows Buddy, the audience-insert character, as he grows up in the streets of Belfast, Ireland in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Though Buddy and his family thrive on these familiar streets, communal turmoil leads to organized violence that throws Buddy's life into disarray. What's a family to do? On the one hand, the father recognizes that a warzone is no place for a family. But to the mother, even the turmoil of her community's civil war feels safer than the world out there. Memory feels safer than maturation. As these films often go, the plot is drifting and episodic yet always manages to hold one's focus. Unbrushed authenticity is a hard thing to put to film, and a film aiming for just that always walks a fine line between avant-garde and just plain

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy of Clash of the Titans

Anyone else remember the year we spent wondering if we would ever again see a movie that wasn't coming out in 3D? T hat surge in 3D films in the early months of 2010 led to a number of questionable executive decisions. We saw a lot of films envisioned as standard film experiences refitted into the 3D format at the eleventh hour. In the ten years since, 3D stopped being profitable because audiences quickly learned the difference between a film that was designed with the 3D experience in mind and the brazen imitators . Perhaps the most notorious victim of this trend was the 2010 remake of Clash of the Titans . Why am I suddenly so obsessed with the fallout of a film gone from the public consciousness ten years now? Maybe it's me recently finishing the first season of Blood of Zeus on Netflix and seeing so clearly what Clash of the Titans very nearly was. Maybe it's my evolving thoughts on the Percy Jackson movies and the forthcoming Disney+ series inevit

Changing Film History With a Smile--and Perhaps, a Tear: Charlie Chaplin's The Kid

Film has this weird thing called “emotionality” that sees itself at the center of a lot of haranguing in the critical discourse. There is a sort of classism in dialogue that privileges film as a purely cerebral space, detached from all things base and emotional, and if your concerns in film tend to err on the side of sentiment or emotions, you have probably been on the receiving end of patronizing glances from those who consider themselves more discerning because their favorite movie is 2001: A Space Odyssey . Tyler Sage, another freelance film critic I follow, said it best when he described emotionality’s close cousin, “sentimentality " and the way it is generally discussed in the public sphere : The Godfather (1972) “These days, if you are one of these types who likes to opine knowingly in the public sphere – say, a highfalutin film critic – it's one of the most powerful aspersions there is. ‘I just found it so sentimental ,’ … [and] you can be certain no one will contrad

American Beauty is Bad for your Soul

The 1990s was a relatively stable period of time in American history. We weren’t scared of the communists or the nuclear bomb, and social unrest for the most part took the decade off. The white-picket fence ideal was as accessible as it had ever been for most Americans. Domesticity was commonplace, mundane even, and we had time to think about things like the superficiality of modern living. It's in an environment like this that a movie like Sam Mendes' 1999 film American Beauty can not only be made but also find overwhelming success. In 1999 this film was praised for its bold and honest insight into American suburban life. The Detroit News Film Critic called this film “a rare and felicitous movie that brings together a writer, director and company perfectly matched in intelligence and sense of purpose” and Variety hailed it as “a real American original.” The film premiered to only a select number of screens, but upon its smashing success was upgraded to

The Great Movie Conquest of 2022 - January

This fool's errand is the fruition of an idea I've wanted to try out for years now but have always talked myself out of. Watching a new movie a day for one full year is a bit of a challenge for a number of reasons, not in the least of which being that I'm the kind of guy who likes to revisit favorites. As a film lover, I'm prone to expanding my circle and watching films I haven't seen before, I've just never watched a new film every day for a year. So why am I going to attempt to pull that off at all, and why am I going to attempt it now? I've put off a yearlong commitment because it just felt like too much to bite off. One such time, actually, was right when I first premiered this blog. You know ... the start of 2020? The year where we had nothing to do but watch Netflix all day? Time makes fools of us all, I guess. I doubt it's ever going to be easier to pull off such a feat, so why not now? Mostly, though, I really just want to help enliven my

REVIEW: ONWARD

The Walt Disney Company as a whole seems to be in constant danger of being overtaken by its own cannibalistic tendency--cashing in on the successes of their past hits at the expense of creating the kinds of stories that merited these reimaginings to begin with. Pixar, coming fresh off a decade marked by a deluge of sequels, is certainly susceptible to this pattern as well. Though movies like Inside Out and Coco have helped breathe necessary life into the studio, audiences invested in the creative lifeblood of the studio should take note when an opportunity comes for either Disney or Pixar animation to flex their creative muscles. This year we'll have three such opportunities between the two studios. [EDIT: Okay, maybe not. Thanks, Corona.] The first of these, ONWARD directed by Dan Scanlon, opens this weekend and paints a hopeful picture of a future where Pixar allows empathetic and novel storytelling to guide its output. The film imagines a world where fantasy creatur

Nights of Cabiria: What IS Cinema?

So here’s some light table talk … what is cinema? What is it for ? On the one hand, film is the perfect medium to capture life as it really is. With the roll of the camera, you can do what painters and sculptors had been trying to do for centuries and record the sights and sounds of a place exactly as they are. On the other hand, film is the perfect medium for dreaming. Is there any other place besides the movies where the human heart is so unfettered, so open to fantasy? If you’ve studied film formally, this is probably one of the first discussions you had in your Intro to Film theory course, in a class that may have forced you to read about Dziga Vertov and his theory about film and the Kino-eye (another day, another day …) In some ways, we could use basically any of thousands of cinematic works to jumpstart this discussion, but I have a particular film in mind. The lens I want to explore this idea through today is not only a strong example of strong cinematic cra

Films and Feelings

Search This Blog