I wonder if I may be having a very quiet nervous breakdown.

The Private Lives of Pippa Lee

(2009)

Not to be uncharitable, but one wonders how much of a free-pass Rebecca Miller gets on account of her family credentials (Arthur Miller as a father, Daniel Day Lewis as a husband). It’s not that there’s anything particularly bad about her work, but there’s nothing hugely compelling about it either. She assembles a fine cast for Pippa Lee, but it’s never clear what gripped her about the story, which she adapted from her own novel. One might argue that this reflects the dreamy dissonance of the titular character, but I’m less convinced; as many of Miller’s choices seem missteps as they do successes.

Pippa Lee (Robin Wright), dutiful wife of much older publisher Herb (Alan Arkin), finds herself undergoing a restrained nervous breakdown when they move from Manhattan to a Connecticut retirement community. Flashbacks to Pippa’s early life show her struggle with her amphetamine-addicted mother (Maria Bello), her brief stay with an aunt (Deadwood’s Robin Weigert) and her girlfriend (Julianne Moore) before her first encounter with Herb (at which point she’s a bit of a space case). In the present, she finds her relationship with Herb increasingly strained, and learns that she is having somnambulant episodes. She also forms a tentative friendship with a younger neighbour Chris (Keanu Reeves).

This is one of those low-budget melodramas where you’re unsure if it retained your interest because of the starry supporting turns, rather than any distinctive qualities it possesses in its own right. Wright is superb; she underplays and does great work suggesting an interior world that is gradually becoming less and less familiar. Arkin is a consummate scene-stealer, so it’s a compliment to say she holds her own. He makes this patriarch figure likeable in spite of his flaws. Winona Ryder’s supporting turn as a hugely self-involved friend of the couple is hilarious (and a good remind of the actress’ comic chops) while Keanu is in “decent Keanu supporting turn” mode (see Thumbsucker) than his variable leading man duties (also of note, he’s playing a decade younger than he is, and thus significantly junior to Wright, whom he is two years older than). Some of the most affecting scenes are between the two of them. Monica Bellucci has highly memorable cameo.

Most surprising is Blake Lively as the young Pippa, since she my impression of her from the likes of Green Lantern and Savages wasn’t a positive one. She convincingly portrays Pippa’s vulnerability, and the ingénue quality that attracted Herb to her in the first place. Maria Bello’s performance as her deranged mother is intense enough as it is, so Miller’s choices of jump cuts to underline her fractured state is unnecessary and obvious. That’s not to say some of her stylistic choices are strong ones; she shoots the scenes of Pippa’s altered state of consciousness with appropriate subjectivity, which makes (for example) the scene where she visits the convenience store carry all-the-more impact. But she doesn’t seem to know when restraint would be advisable, perhaps as a consequence of having originated the material. Many of the transitions between time frames are overly self-conscious and seem to be shouting “Look at me!” as much as the star casting. Particularly ill-advised is an animated sequence that very nearly pushes the film into the territory of a clueless director trying anything that comes to mind.

In the end, Pippa Lee feels similar to many a mildly-diverting-but-quickly-forgettable indie flick. Any impact relates to the memorable casting rather than resonance held by the material.

***

Comments

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

I don't like the way Teddy Roosevelt is looking at me.

North by Northwest (1959) (SPOILERS) North by Northwest gets a lot of attention as a progenitor of the Bond formula, but that’s giving it far too little credit. Really, it’s the first modern blockbuster, paving the way for hundreds of slipshod, loosely plotted action movies built around set pieces rather than expertly devised narratives. That it delivers, and delivers so effortlessly, is a testament to Hitchcock, to writer Ernest Lehmann, and to a cast who make the entire implausible exercise such a delight.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

Now In Full Color, with a Happier Ending

Search This Blog