In Contention

Tag: Paddy Chayefsky

  • Fincher/Sorkin = Lumet/Chayefsky?

    Steep, STEEP praise for David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin, director and writer of the upcoming “The Social Network.” The praise comes from New York Film Festival director Richard Pena in announcing the film as the opener of this year’s fest.

    From Thompson on Hollywood:

    [The film] powerfully captures the spirit of its time…David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin are a director/writer team, like Lumet and Chayefsky before them, that make this movie not only of the moment, but reflective of larger cultural issues as well, and confirm their position at forefront of contemporary cinema.

    Now, I’m not saying Fincher and Sorkin aren’t worthy of that.  I haven’t seen “The Social Network,” after all.  But I sure wouldn’t want to be in their shoes having to rise to the level of that compliment.  But then again, I consider “Network” to be the best screenplay ever written.  Hey, how about that?  “The Social NETWORK.”

    Anyway, the new trailer, also from Thompson, after the jump.

    (more…)

  • SHORT TAKE: “Two Lovers” (***)

    London Film Festival

    Bar the odd appearance of a text message or Ecstasy tablet, James Gray’s “Two Lovers,” a disarmingly modest tale of misdirected passion, could just as easily be set in 1958 as in the present day. This is both one of its charms and one of its failings.

    The premise is unfussy and somewhat familiar. Devastated after being left by his fiancee, shy Brooklynite Leonard (Joaquin Phoenix) moves back in with his concerned parents, who set him up with Sandra (Vinessa Shaw), the sweet, plain daughter of family friends. Leonard, however, is more attracted to his neighbor Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), a glamorous but deeply troubled young woman, hopelessly entangled with a married man. She initially adopts Leonard as a confidante, but with time, the relationship grows closer and more complicated.

    As has been noted by other critics, this is very much early Paddy Chayefsky territory, recalling works like “Marty” and “The Bachelor Party” in its low-fi drama and shabby middle-class milieu. This is still a New York where neighbors converse window-to-window across apartment block courtyards. The old-fashioned structure of this love triangle (boy finds himself caught between the homely good girl and the beautiful bad one) and the gentleness with which the relationships unfold are unusual in today’s cinematic landscape, where urban adult romance usually has to come packaged in the tropes of higher-concept romcom.

    However, amid the throwback trappings and finely etched sense of melancholy, the film doesn’t have all that much to say about contemporary relationships. Modern notions of gender and sexuality never really come into play; Michelle, in particular, seems remarkably limited in her outlook for a 21st century woman. The story is clearly intended to have a timeless quality — heartbreak never goes out of style, after all — but the downside of that is a complete inability to surprise, especially in the final act. (The tartly unhappy “happy ending,” however, is beautifully executed.)

    What “Two Lovers” does provide is a strong showcase for Phoenix in a rare everyman role. Paltrow’s Michelle, meanwhile, is equal parts goofy vulnerability and chilly allure. She hasn’t been this alert and unaffected on screen in quite some time.  But above all, the film represents a welcome change of pace for Gray. Despite its occasional obviousness, his storytelling here has more immediacy and conviction. Thanks in no small part to his actors, this is the first James Gray film that could be ascribed the adjective “moving,” even if you always know where it’s moving to.

  • 1976: a great year and Oscar blew it

    Continuing the conversation on great years for movies (1974 being my pick for the best), I thought I’d dig into a season rich with material that slipped through Oscar’s fingers.

    The American bicentennial year was loaded with wonderful films — ground-breaking works that stunned both audiences and critics with their mastery. Three of them were nominated for Best Picture, some of the others were not, yet the eventual winner was a low budget love story about a boxer that wanted to prove he wasn’t just another bum from the neighborhood.

    The true greats of 1976:

    “All the President’s Men”

    Alan J. Pakula’s superb adaptation of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book written by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein about their investigation of the Watergate burglary was born out of an astonishing script by William Goldman. Making sense of the politics within a dense book, incredibly detailed, Goldman’s work had the good sense to make the film a detective-like thriller with well-defined characters.

    This could have been a dull, political film made to exploit the happenings in the United States at the time, but Pakula instead made one of the great films about journalism in the days before the Internet and e-mail. Robert Redford bought the rights to the book and produced the film, starring as Woodward, with Dustin Hoffman as Bernstein, both giving exceptional performances, but it was Jason Robards who blew them off the screen with his excellent performance as the crusty, wise, and ultimately loyal Washing Post editor Ben Bradlee.

    (more…)