Skip to main content

I don’t need to be held together, I’m fine just floating through space like Andy.

Jim & Andy: The Great Beyond
(2017)

Or, to give it its full subtitle, Jim & Andy: The Great Beyond – The Story of Jim Carrey & Andy Kaufman Featuring a Very Special, Contractually Obligated Mention of Tony Clifton. Carrey’s in a contradictory place just now, on the one hand espousing his commitment to a spiritual path and enlightened/ing state, on the other being sued in respect of his ex-girlfriend’s suicide and accompanying allegations regarding his behaviour. That behaviour – in a professional context – and his place of consciousness are the focus of Jim & Andy, and an oft-repeated mantra (great for motivational speeches) that “I learned that you can fail at what you don’t love, so you may as well do what you love. There’s really no choice to be made”. The results are consequently necessarily contradictory, but always fascinating.


You can find much of the same proselytising in a speech Jim gave to the graduates of the Maharishi University of Management’s class of 2014, accompanied by just enough shtick to make the pill an easy swallow. Some have claimed Carrey’s been dabbling in DMT (to the extent that a fake movie with him playing Terence McKenna was announced), but it appears he’s merely a proponent of the Maharishi’s good old money-making Transcendental Meditation, a practice that mostly avoids a rocky ride thanks to some notable and vocal media advocates (the most famous being David Lynch). Andy Kaufman was also an ardent TM-er, having learned it at college in 1969, even training as a teacher a couple of years later. It’s a connection so loud and obvious, you wonder that the filmmakers didn’t at least mention it in passing…


Carrey’s clearly been on a very personal journey of questioning the status quo for a while, both internally and externally, in ways that have passed largely unnoticed (GM foods) or registered howls of media outrage (vaccinations), en route gradually disappearing off the map as a viable movie star. In Chris Smith’s documentary on the making of Man on the Moon, he comments “I have no ambition” (although not asked directly about his stalled career), but while his explanation for the transition is vague enough to be understood (It came “in the middle of confusion, disappointment, the fruition of all my dreams…. and being unhappy”), it’s evident his ambition is still there, and the need to be adored, if not to make money (look at it him talking about his painting during the MUM talk, essentially seeking the same audience approval he always has, and lapping up the rapturous responses). I don’t doubt his genuineness when he states (again to MUM) “I’ve often said, I wish people could receive all their dreams and wealth and fame so that they could see that it’s not going to be where you find your sense of completion” but the question is whether he’s an effective purveyor of that message; you’re in a dangerous and vulnerable place when you announce that you have answers, often setting yourself up to be torn down (as happened to Tom Cruise, who managed to weather the storm, ultimately by shutting the hell up).


With Carrey on a voyage of discovery – I’m assuming he doesn’t think he’s reached his destination – it’s valid to question the reasons for this documentary appearing now.  One might assume, given the rehearsed script he trots out, that it was a self-initiated platform, since he’s the guy with the footage, and that it merely confirms – one might offer in evidence his recent New York Fashion Week red carpet appearance – that he still feeds off and craves attention. Spike Jonze and Smith attest otherwise, that he made no stipulations, but there’s an inevitable sense that Carrey’s to-camera perspective moulds the doc, bringing in such areas as the trajectory of fame and life under the lens (The Truman Show is flashed up several times).


Carrey famously wrote himself a $10m cheque and gave himself five years to collect, and his creed on this, set out in both Jim & Andy and the MUM talk, is that when he was a kid – he cites how his father was a great comedian, eventually laid low by the need to forsake pursuing a talent for breadwinning in the sterile role of an accountant, and then even losing his that – he prayed for a bicycle and one turned up at the house (someone had entered his name in a raffle) and “From then, whenever I wanted something, I manifested it”. His technique (not detailed in the doc) is “letting the universe know what you want and are looking toward while letting go of how it comes to pass” (while throwing in such alluring aphorisms as hope being a beggar that walks through the fire while faith leaps over it).


And it’s this Noel Edmonds-like acumen for manifestation/ positive thinking/ cosmic ordering that led, by his account, to discovering the key to personal success, the realisation that the public want to be free from concern and “I’m gonna appear to be the guy that’s free from concern”. And behold, a star was born: “It’s as if I went into a fugue state, Hyde showed up… I have a Hyde inside me, that shows up when there are people watching”.


This ability was perfect for inhabiting the characters of Andy Kaufman, where the line between performance and reality was constantly blurred. Carrey has it that “Andy tapped me on the shoulder and said “Sit down, I’ll be doing my movie” with the consequence “And no one knew what was real and not real half the time. I didn’t know what was real and not real”. Individuals including Taxi co-stars Danny DeVito and Judd Hirsch, Paul Giamatti and beleaguered director Milos Forman, who called Carrey one night – the actor was in character most of the time, but I’m guessing not on the phone – complaining “I’m so exhausted you know” at having to deal with Kaufman and alter ego, boorish nightclub singer Tony Clifton, all day.


The latter’s antics included insulting Ron Meyer, showing up at Amblin (Spielberg was absent), and Kaufman’s long-time collaborator Bob Zmuda (Kaufman’s girlfriend Lynne Margulies was also present on the set of Man on the Moon, shooting the behind-the-scenes footage seen here) visiting the Playboy Mansion as Clifton and spending several hours there hoodwinking Heff before Carrey nonchalantly showed up.


Carrey’s both engaged and forthcoming as a talking head, but also vaguely aloof from the experience. Some have suggested he’s “totally obnoxious”, which I can’t say was my take (although he’d probably accept it if charged). He comments “On an anarchist level, it’s funny” of Clifton, who I can’t really get behind any more than Borat, but unlike, say Leto as the Joker, it seems to fit the bizarreness of Kaufman himself that Carrey should have been so disruptive, that, the performance aspect feels like a genuinely deserved comeuppance for the arrogance of thinking you could make a trouble-free Kaufman biopic (which no one was going to see anyway, even if it had received glowing reviews). You can accuse Carrey of going too far, but giving him the role was essentially an invitation. Wrestler Jerry Lawler’s protestations that he and Kaufman were good friends, which wasn’t how Carrey treated him, are really neither here nor there in terms of a mission statement to carry the anarchic baton (one of my favourite comments comes as “Tony” is told, that, when filming is finished, eight or nine people will sue for mental stress; “And that would be different than a regular production?” inquires Clifton, blasé).


There are odd moments, even in that take-no-prisoners context, though, such as Kaufman’s daughter, who never got to meet him before he passed away, spending an hour in conversation with Carrey as Andy on set, a recollection that brings a tear to his eye.  Kaufman’s family evidently felt Carrey was channelling something too, so you might understandably see the whole charade as a hugely inappropriate presumption on the comedian’s part, but from the footage it’s entirely plausible that, as he suggests, he and everyone else was caught up in something overwhelming and immersive. Carrey’s mantra was “How far would Andy take this?”, but he’s also clear that his being in situ for this doc and revealing the tricks of the trade is a sign that “I’m not the same personality as Andy. Andy would never tell you”.


You can entirely see that Carrey’s on to something when he says of the footage, “I often wish that had been part of the movie”; it would have better reflected the essence of what Kaufman was about, something Forman’s formal film could not hope to capture. Carrey had seized on recording footage as a reaction against electronic press kits, and reports how Universal didn’t want to allow any of it to surface “so that people wouldn’t think I was an asshole”: ‘We don’t want people to think that Jim’s an asshole’”. The doc still feels like a dare in that regard.


But, while the footage is fascinating, it’s Carrey’s current head space as refracted through its prism that is more so. Tremendous self-awareness doesn’t necessarily equate with being in an optimal place, and one wonders at a certain stagnancy that allows the same lines to be parroted describing his developed consciousness and mission three-to-four years apart. Is he really in a place, or is he clinging to the idea of it? Carrey comments that each of his roles has reflected an “absolute manifestation of my consciousness at that time” (the funniest account might be that of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, meeting with Michel Gondry at a point where he was heartbroken; Gondry told him “Oh my God, you’re so beautiful… right now. You’re so broken… I love this. Please don’t get well”. “That’s how fucked up this business is”, Carrey grins). Combine that with his belief that each of us is an avatar we create (“This isn’t real”), and his very TM statement “All we really yearn for is our own absence”, and it’s difficult not to see the “drug high” some recovering TM practisers have attested to before the come down. When he says, in closing, of his Kaufman transformation, “I wonder if I could do that with other people… what would happen if I decided just to be Jesus”, he’s only half being cheeky.


And there’s the problem too that, behind the wacky delivery, the Maharishi message is somewhat jaded currency (“Thought as an illusory thing”, his understanding “I was the universe, no longer a fragment of the universe” and that “I want to take as many people as I possibly can” along with him to that rapturous state). The key to a salesman for a system of self-awareness is whether you think you’d like to be where they are, and neither Carrey nor Lynch offer that kind of appeal (to me, at least). Jim mutters abstractly about “abstract structures” (the labels society and family attach to us), avowing “I don’t need to be held together, I’m fine just floating through space like Andy”. But is he? Since his next lines are, however self-effacingly (this is a guy who made a movie about the number 23, so part of him buys it), that he’s “ready for the end times to occur and whatever the hell is going to happen. I’m just great”. You wonder if he is. Great. Are you just great, Jim?


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

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.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

The Krishna died of a broken finger? I mean, is that a homicide?

Miami Blues (1990) (SPOILERS) If the ‘90s crime movie formally set out its stall in 1992 with Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs , another movie very quietly got in there first at the beginning of the decade. Miami Blues picked up admiring reviews but went otherwise unnoticed on release, and even now remains under-recognised. The tale of “blithe psychopath” Federick J. Frenger, Jr., the girl whose heart he breaks and the detetive sergeant on his trail, director George Armitage’s adaptation of Charles Willeford’s novel wears a pitch black sense of humour and manages the difficult juggling act of being genuinely touching with it. It’s a little gem of a movie, perfectly formed and concisely told, one that more than deserves to rub shoulders with the better-known entries in its genre. One of the defining characteristics of Willeford’s work, it has been suggested , is that it doesn’t really fit into the crime genre; he comes from an angle of character rather than plot or h

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

You think a monkey knows he’s sitting on top of a rocket that might explode?

The Right Stuff (1983) (SPOILERS) While it certainly more than fulfils the function of a NASA-propaganda picture – as in, it affirms the legitimacy of their activities – The Right Stuff escapes the designation of rote testament reserved for Ron Howard’s later Apollo 13 . Partly because it has such a distinctive personality and attitude. Partly too because of the way it has found its through line, which isn’t so much the “wow” of the Space Race and those picked to be a part of it as it is the personification of that titular quality in someone who wasn’t even in the Mercury programme: Chuck Yaeger (Sam Shephard). I was captivated by The Right Stuff when I first saw it, and even now, with the benefit of knowing-NASA-better – not that the movie is exactly extolling its virtues from the rooftops anyway – I consider it something of a masterpiece, an interrogation of legends that both builds them and tears them down. The latter aspect doubtless not NASA approved.

You tampered with the universe, my friend.

The Music of Chance (1993) (SPOILERS) You won’t find many adaptations of Paul Auster’s novels. Original screenplays, yes, a couple of which he has directed himself. Terry Gilliam has occasionally mentioned Mr. Vertigo as in development. It was in development in 1995 too, when Philip Haas and Auster intended to bring it to the screen. Which means Auster presumably approved of Haas’ work on The Music of Chance (he also cameos). That would be understandable, as it makes for a fine, ambiguous movie, pregnant with meaning yet offering no unequivocal answers, and one that makes several key departures from the book yet crucially maintains a mesmerising, slow-burn lure.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

People still talk about Pandapocalypse 2002.

Turning Red (2022) (SPOILERS) Those wags at Pixar, eh? Yes, the most – actually, the only – impressive thing about Turning Red is the four-tiered wordplay of its title. Thirteen-year-old Mei (Rosalie Chiang) finds herself turning into a large red panda at emotive moments. She is also, simultaneously, riding the crimson wave for the first time. Further, as a teenager, she characteristically suffers from acute embarrassment (mostly due to the actions of her domineering mother Ming Lee, voiced by Sandra Oh). And finally, of course, Turning Red can be seen diligently spreading communist doctrine left, right and centre. To any political sensibility tuning in to Disney+, basically (so ones with either considerable or zero resistance to woke). Take a guess which of these isn’t getting press in reference to the movie? And by a process of elimination is probably what it it’s really about (you know in the same way most Pixars, as far back as Toy Story and Monsters, Inc . can be given an insi