Skip to main content

I was having a nervous breakdown, and then I heard your song.

Begin Again
(2013)

(SPOILERS) What better way for the director of the weightless Once to advance his stalled career (I had no idea he made two films – three if you include a TV movie – in between that and this, probably because neither did anyone else) than to make an equally weightless movie, but this time with movie stars? That’s pretty much Begin Again, another music business tale, revolving around dreams, love and impossibly good-natured calorie-free aspirational fluff. Mark Ruffalo tries his best, but even he is unable to add any added value in the face of the deluge that is the transformative power of music.


Once failed to work its spell on me – it was okay, I guess – so maybe I’m just in the minority of grouchy bastards. Its inconsequential affability, and the accolades of how naturalistic it was from every quarter, grated rather than soothed (Spielberg found it inspirational, which says a lot). Part of that picture’s draw was the diegetic soundtrack; this wasn’t a musical where the songs are set piece dance numbers. The performances are “live” and germane to the surroundings, as a guy and a girl make music in a humdrum environment. The “authenticity” that infused the film becomes the watchword of Begin Again, and seems to have won many over. Yet director John Carney has written such a contrived, make-believe screenplay that one wonders if any of this is supposed to be taken seriously.


Ruffalo’s Dan Mulligan is an honest indie music exec (he co-founded his label) who has fallen on emotional and career hard times. His wife Miriam (Catherine Keener, underused) has left him and he barely sees his daughter Violet (Hailee Steinfield). Dan spends most of his time in various states of inebriation, and then his partner Saul (Mos Def) gives him the push. It’s in a subsequent state of intoxication that he witnesses Gretta (Keira Knightley) reluctantly performing at an open mic night. He thinks her perfectly ordinary song is absolute dynamite, and, when wooing Saul to get on board fails, he opts to take the keeping-it-real approach, setting up a mobile recording studio and getting tracks down at public locations around New York. Yeah, Keira Knightley is what rock’n’roll is all about.


Along the way Gretta helps Dan to reconnect with his daughter. Gretta is dealing with her own relationship grief, having split up with boyfriend Dave Kohl (Maroon 5’s Adam Levine). Formerly they were a song-writing duo; when he found fame she became a spare wheel (fetching coffee) until she found he was having an affair. Gretta even has a loveable cheeky cheerful asexual sidekick who provides a shoulder to cry on, played by (un)lovable twat James Corden.


One might point to the attempts to make this more than just a saccharine sweet tale; there’s lots of swearing. Dan drinks and smokes, and makes a dick of himself. He’s a rebel, man. Ruffalo does pretty good drunk acting. Dan is annoyingly honourable. He hasn’t sold out in the cheesiest of ways, and there’s no seeing the likeable Mos Def as the bad guy. When it gets to the point that Dan is calling in favours to loyal artists (CeeLo Green) he got to where they are today, the sick bucket is constantly at hand.


“But the picture doesn’t go the traditional love story route!” you might cry. Well, neither did Once, which makes Begin Again look more vauntingly cynical than anything meritorious. Gretta’s album proves to be a roaring success, so all those calculatedly “legitimate” performances really sold the authenticity (authenticity, Carney doesn’t seem to realise, is something he has packed and sold and made every bit as glossy and fake as the biz upon which he passes judgement).


I don’t know quite where Carney got the idea of a musician who makes it big from writing a song that appears in a movie. I mean, not a guy who saw a song in a movie he directed get nominated and win Best Original Song Oscar. The Maroon 5 singer is utterly charmless, which he may be in real life, but I’m not sure that’s the intention. Shouldn’t we be able to see what Gretta once saw in him? Apparently Levine did the role for free, for the art. He should have paid them for the privilege. Keira is fine with the singing part; she can carry a note okay. But she’s so naturally reserved, the surrounding picture becomes ever more cosy and unassuming.


Carney’s natural response to any given soundtrack moment is a montage sequence, so his special brand of semi-musical clearly isn’t breaking any new ground. Indeed, Begin Again once went under the shockingly awful Can a Song Save Your Life? There are copious scenes here that are every bit as insincere as that title, from manufactured moments where Dan and Gretta wander Manhattan sharing songs (you know, you can tell a lot about someone by what’s on their playlist) to the fairy tale of Violet playing on Gretta’s album, to Dan’s sappy drunken visualisation of invisible musicians with visible instruments beefing up Gretta’s acoustic performance. 


This is a wishy-washy, banal picture, too feeble to be actively dislikeable, incapable of any of the uplifting emotions it wants to imbue. Once at least was authentically low budget. Begin Again is merely authentically calculated. A more honest version of this film would have Hugh Grant in the lead. And, while I surprise myself saying this, it would probably have been more entertaining for him.



Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the