Making Mr. Right.

Review #2517: Making Mr. Right.

Cast: 

John Malkovich (Dr. Jeff Peters/Ulysses), Ann Magnuson (Frankie Stone), Glenne Headly (Trish), Ben Masters (Steve Marcus), Laurie Metcalf (Sandra "Sandy" McCleary), Polly Bergen (Estelle Stone), Harsh Nayyar (Dr. Ramdas), Hart Bochner (Don), Susan Berman (Ivy Stone), Polly Draper (Suzy Duncan), Christian Clemenson (Bruce), Merwin Goldsmith (Moe Glickstein) Directed by Susan Seidelman (#1987 - Smithereens, #2186 - Desperately Seeking Susan)

Review: 

"I was so happy with the response to that screening, because, when a movie is a flop, people tend to not want to talk about it. I loved making “Making Mr. Right,” but people seem to not want to bring up the fact that it was a flop at the box-office or hurt my feelings. It was in theatres for such a short amount of time, and then it was never really pushed on DVD. So Metrograph was the first time I had seen it with an audience up on a big screen in thirty years. And I laughed! I always thought maybe people didn’t get the style. It’s an A.I. romantic comedy."

Admittedly, this is the kind of movie you might try out on the back end of a to-do list of movie packs and obligations. This was one of the six movies on a "6 Comedies [MGM]" collection (next to Honeymoon in Vegas, Overboard, Speechless, Baby Boom, and Real Men) that I bought many years ago, and, well, it finally dovetailed with Susan Seidelman. This was her third feature film as a director and she played some influence on the script that had been written by Floyd Byars and Laurie Frank in 1985, specifically in the shift in focus from a Frankenstein-type story to one resembling Pygmalion. For whatever reason, the main production company behind this was Barry & Enright Productions, a TV company originally formed by Jack Barry and Dan Enright in the 1940s that occasionally produced movies (most notably with Private Lessons [1981]). Distributed by Orion Pictures to minimal audience returns, Seidelman's next feature came with Cookie in 1989*; Seidelman has expressed no hard feelings about how the film went, even attending a Q&A screening for the film in recent years.

So, what's the movie about? Well, in the (presumably) near future, a scientist makes an android (which happens to look just like him) and is priming it for deep space exploration that dovetails right with a PR consultant (recently dumped) that is hired to help humanize the android for the project sponsors. It starts its attempts at capturing the vibe of someone who might fall for, say, a robot by having an opening that shows an old-fashioned dumping and shaving while going to work. For a 99-minute movie, it might wind up as light fare, but there is an earnest spirit about the movie (namely because it has a fairly neat style in terms of its setting and look that will surely inspire interest from those who know what retro-futurism is) that I like enough to at least say is at least a possible small gem as a comedy of errors. It just happens to have a bit of deference to those who might have an interest in something different from the perceived normal, particularly since most of the men in the film are, well, kooks (at least Robert Trebor* is delightfully smarmy for a small role), particularly in their feelings. So it isn't just "but is the robot fully functional?*", it's a comedy about people who really need to know what they want out of life, people, and, well, themselves. It might interest you to know that this was the one big role for Magnuson, who had dabbled in music and a few minor film roles (such as Desperately Seeking Susan). She apparently actually wanted the supporting role that ended up being cast for Headly but it seems Seidelman saw something worthwhile in her that comes out here. There is a certain type of moxie that comes through with her that I can't help but enjoy in a whimsical sense (besides, she has one line that is basically the lifeblood of the chaotic worker: "I'm always late; but, I'm worth it."). The make-or-break comes with Malkovich and his dual role as one who can't stand people and one who wants to understand things beyond what he was made for. So one side gets to play the hapless oddball and the other lumbers around with a ditzy sense of timing, and it generally works out for a few quirky moments. Whether it really is all that convincing is up to you (stranger people have fallen for stranger things), I suppose. The others in the cast have a few little moments of charm that spring for amusement in the crisscross of oddballs and Miami chic, whether that involves a brief interlude with the loopy Metcalf or the charming Headly. As a whole, Making Mr. Right just couldn't find the right audience when it really mattered for those who like some offbeat romantic comedies, suffice to say. But if you like the idea of a movie that pokes at the odd quirks that come with people that don't have everything figured out in their personal lives that happens to involve romance with a robot, you might have a hidden winner here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

 

*Cookie had Peter Falk and Dianne Wiest, but She-Devil (1991) which paired Meryl Streep (who I'm sure other people know pretty well, but...) with, and I'm not kidding: Roseanne. 

*Hey, I imagine people are still waiting (but obviously not saying out loud, on the internet, or in conversation) for sex robots, it isn't that hard of a question to ask if you can put your ding-dongs in 'em.

*I remember Trebor well from Hercules: The Legendary Journeys, where he regularly appeared as Salmoneus - he was pretty funny in that show. He passed away just last year - RIP.

Desperately Seeking Susan.

Review #2186: Desperately Seeking Susan.

Cast: 

Rosanna Arquette (Roberta Glass), Aidan Quinn (Dez), Madonna (Susan Thomas), Robert Joy (Jim Dandy), Mark Blum (Gary Glass), Laurie Metcalf (Leslie Glass), Will Patton (Wayne Nolan), Anna Levine (Crystal), Peter Maloney (Ian), Steven Wright (Larry Stillman D.D.S.), John Turturro (Ray), Anne Carlisle (Victoria), José Angel Santana (Boutique Owner), Richard Portnow (Party Guest), and Giancarlo Esposito (Street Vendor) Directed by Susan Seidelman (#1987 - Smithereens)

Review: 

“The city was falling apart and downtown there were aspiring artists because rent was so cheap. So I wanted to populate the film with people who were authentic to that time. I didn’t care whether someone in Kansas would recognize them, but New Yorkers would know they were New Yorkers.” 

Okay, maybe the biggest curiosity isn't the fact that this is the film that followed Susan Seidelman's Smithereens (1982). But I like the films that come after an electrifying debut feature, particularly one that is, well, packed with a few names to recognize from somewhere or another. The film was written by Leora Barish, who had been inspired by the film Celine and Julie Go Boating (1974), which in of itself had references to classic novels such as Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. It was a script that languished for a few years before Sarah Pillsbury and Midge Sanford found it as producers with a new company in tow. After a good deal spent in turnaround trying to get a studio to get behind it (ultimately being Orion Pictures) and a few names tossed around, the "clear visual style” shown by Seidelman with Smithereens was the one that worked to her advantaged. It was Seidelman that had decided on who would be cast as "Susan", which led her to steer away from actresses such as: Ellen Barkin, Melanie Griffith, and Jennifer Jason Leigh (it wasn't the only role with others in the running - more on that later). Instead, she went for a certain presence that lived near her at the time. Madonna had exactly two sorts of experience in film: an indie underground drama A Certain Sacrifice (which had been filmed in the late 1970s) and a cameo appearance in Vision Quest...with each not being released until 1985. As if the stars aligned perfectly, her popularity as a singer (editor note: understatement) was at a fever pitch by the time the film was finished shooting because of the commercial success of her second music album (Like a Virgin). Not surprisingly, "Into the Groove" is heard for the credits, which, well, I dig songs like this. As a whole, the film was a modest hit with audiences upon release and was even turned into a musical a couple of years later. 

Oh sure, the film is a film for Madonna to shine through from time to time, but Arquette is just as adept in proving key to a movie that is a warm tribute to the screwball comedy: mistaken identity and the ever-growing sense of amusement. It touches upon familiar aspects that come through with the experience of someone who craves adventure and finds way more than what they bargained for. Arquette (best known for the TV film The Executioner's Song [1982]) is ideal in that entertaining sense of wonder and befuddlement for antics because the frustration of being a listless housewife that (in the age of newspapers with personal ads that people looked at) we can relate with. That timing is on point through and through for a crisply amusing experience. Quinn was cast after attempts to get a few actors named Dennis Quaid and Kevin Costner to read for the role fell to deaf ears. Go figure, it is probably the best relief the film has going for it, because Quinn and his sardonic charm roll right off with Arquette. And then of course there is Madonna, who practically rolls every little movement and sentence as if it was just a flick of the wrist, one for which Seidelman said was a "variation of herself...bringing her attitude to it". She exudes a certain type of aura that has that rightful sense of fun in the pleasures of charades and half-truths in the ideal apex of one acting without the weight of too much superstar status to handle playing some sort of variation of themselves, which goes hand-in-hand in chuckles when paired with that goofy (but totally believable) Joy. Blum is that ideal sense of the doofus too good for Arquette to set up the inevitable when it comes to screwball mismatches. The film manages to be patient enough for its 104-minute runtime to grant each lead their time to shine in a breezy and fairly engaging trip through a certain lens that goes to its location along with the fashion that makes it practically impossible to forget for its time. It is ultimately a solid second effort for Seidelman, packed with enough fair charm to make for a New York-style delight in screwy entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Lady Bird.

Review #1983: Lady Bird.

Cast: 

Saoirse Ronan (Christine "Lady Bird" McPherson), Laurie Metcalf (Marion McPherson), Tracy Letts (Larry McPherson), Lucas Hedges (Danny O'Neill), Timothée Chalamet (Kyle Scheible), Beanie Feldstein (Julie Steffans), Lois Smith (Sister Sarah Joan), Stephen McKinley Henderson (Father Leviatch), Odeya Rush (Jenna Walton), Jordan Rodrigues (Miguel McPherson), Marielle Scott (Shelly Yuhan), and Jake McDorman (Mr. Bruno) Written and Directed by Greta Gerwig.

Review: 

“I really wanted to make a movie that was a reflection on home and what does home mean, and how does leaving home define what it is for you and your love for it. I felt like it was a love letter to Sacramento, and I felt like, what better way to make a love letter than through somebody who wants to get out, and then realize that they loved it?”

Sometimes, it really does help to go home in becoming a director. Greta Gerwig was born in Sacramento, California to a nurse and a credit union worker. A self-described "intense child", she attended St. Francis High School before attending Barnard College (one of the undergraduate colleges of Columbia University) to study English and philosophy. After graduation, she wanted to be a playwright but went to acting when she did not receive admission to playwright programs. In 2006, she began an association with Joe Swanberg by appearing in a small role in one of his films. The following year, she served as co-writer and star in Hannah Takes the Stairs, which has been label a "mumblecore film" (basically an independent film with natural acting and dialogue).  Gerwig became a director with Nights and Weekends (2008), serving as co-director with Swanberg while also writing and starring in the film. Lady Bird was the first solo effort for Gerwig; she followed that film up with Little Women (2019), which she also wrote, and her next film as writer and director is slated to come out this year with Barbie.

What a joyful time we have here. It is always a welcome occasion to view a comedy-drama that clearly is meant to evoke a worthwhile memory (it is set in 2002, so seeing a cell phone not in everyone's hand is certainly a given). Gerwig invited the cast and crew to read old yearbooks, photos, journals, and the passages of Joan Didion (a Sacramento native); she has stated that the film has a "core of truth that resonates with what I know". Sure, there have been a handful of coming-of-age films in the recent era such as Boyhood (2014) and Moonlight (2016) that have touched upon the plight of growing up in a modern sense, but Lady Bird manages to strike its own chord in being a lively film full of worthwhile characters and situations that seem real that never seems to linger in artificiality. It is a period piece of a specific time and place, but it is a worthwhile piece, one that depicts the power that comes in love and turbulence in youth and trying to figure oneself out at a key age. In its love letter to Sacramento, it is also a letter that details the importance of what matters most in the realm of families and attention. The truth of the matter is that home never feels like home until you make your way out of it for the first time. This is done in a way that never teeters on the brink of sappiness, mind you. It strolls along for 94 minutes with a pace on the episodic side that shows the general qualities that come along with growth in a youth beyond general labeling. With that in mind, Ronan (an American-born Irish actress already familiar with acting as a teen) has the self-confidence necessary to make the title role wholly believable in all the facets that come in the messiness of people when coming out of their shell. She soars as a bird trying to do flight on their own strength and does so with general warmth and timing to result in an endearing performance of flailing courage. Metcalf (best known for Roseanne alongside Tony Award-winning performances on Broadway) is the perfect match in family turbulence with two determined individuals. In other words, both sides are distinctly human in their qualities and flaws, which is mainly expressed in passive-aggression practicality. Their communication (or lack thereof) is what drives the film beyond the usual dynamic between parent and sibling, probably best represented by the opening sequence: a nice moment of listening to a book-on-tape that segues right into an argument over ungratefulness versus wanting to escape the "Midwest of California" before closing by someone jumping out of a car. Accompanying the action in tender support is Letts (who also has considerable experience in the theater), who proves brilliant in his scenes opposite Ronan. Hedges and Feldstein accompany Ronan in showing the facets of the joys and pain that come with having to accept hard truths about people on the cusp of adulthood that can either range from estrangement to worthwhile reunion (Feldstein in particular is quite amusing and bright). Chalamet practically absorbs the screen with a confidence that is entirely amusing in all the ways intended in the people that the script wishes to evoke of that particular character (which is basically a hipster). There is a small contribution of worthwhile seasoned support from Smith and Henderson, and the rest of the cast contribute well to the film seeming like a memory seared into one's mind, whether that involves spiraling lies or finding some sort of calling on a Sunday. At the end of the day, I enjoyed the film in its searing honesty that is consistently endearing in its elements of comedy and drama that jumps out at you with clear timing and focus. Gerwig has stated her desire to do a spiritual successor to the film that would still be set in Sacramento, and I can safely say I look forward to the possibility of seeing it in a theater someday. That I think is a clear indicator of how a pretty good movie can leave your imagination wanting more.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: American Psycho.

Movie Night: Uncle Buck.

Review #643: Uncle Buck.

Cast
John Candy (Buck Russell), Jean Louisa Kelly (Tia Russell), Macaulay Culkin (Miles Russell), Gaby Hoffmann (Maizy Russell), Amy Madigan (Chanice Kobolowski), Jay Underwood (Bug), Garrett M. Brown (Bob Russell), Elaine Bromka (Cindy Russell), and Laurie Metcalf (Marcie Dahlgren-Frost) Directed by John Hughes (#046 - The Breakfast Club, #207 - Ferris Bueller's Day Off, #249 - Sixteen Candles)

Review
When it comes to John Hughes films (whether as writer or director), Movie Night revisits him and his movies every so often. This is another example, though at time it's one with John Candy, which is a plus. In fact, the main reason this movie is any good is because of John Candy and how his character is just so fun to watch interact with the other characters. I especially how he looks menacing to the teenagers, which made me though this was going to suddenly turn into a horror movie half way through (Imagine that, a comedy that turns into a horror film. I wonder how that would work out..), which is kinda nice. The movie is probably not as funny as Hughes' other movies, but it makes up for it by at least being entertaining enough. It's been a while since I've seen a clown get punched in the face, so I guess it gets a (rare) point for that. The actors had decent enough, Kelly does well in portraying such a mean character (who oddly reminds me of Lucy from Peanuts), and Culkin is....Culkin, only not as clever. I think. Anyway, the movie is passable, it at least is enjoyable enough and not too long to be a waste, you could spend 99 minutes doing worse stuff, this movie is along the "just fine" category, though really it's John Candy who makes the movie good, if not perfect.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Toy Story.

Review #440: Toy Story.

Cast
Tom Hanks (Woody), Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Don Rickles (Mr. Potato Head), Jim Varney (Slinky Dog), Erik von Detten (Sid Phillips), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Morris (Andy Davis), John Ratzenberger (Hamm), Annie Potts (Bo Peep), Laurie Metcalf (Ms. Davis), R. Lee Ermey (Sarge), Sarah Freeman (Hannah Phillips), and Joe Ranft (Lenny) Directed by John Lasseter.

Review
Trying to ask what would be the rating for this film is pointless as this is a really good film, with a lot of heart and with a lot of good animation. As I said in my review of Toy Story 3 (#382. Gee I really messed up the chronology, didn't I. At least I reviewed this first instead of the second film), Hanks and Allen pair off each other really well (fun fact: Billy Crystal was offered the role of Buzz Lightyear, but turned it down), and the scene where Woody tells Buzz he is a toy makes me laugh a lot. But the film has its moments of drama and adventure, and it doesn't feel manufactured or phoned in. The film was written by a variety of writers, and I'd make a joke about Josh Whedon, but I've honestly never even watched any of his shows, so there's no purpose, but the writing is good though. This was the first computer animated film and Pixar's first film, and it is a monumental success, especially with the story, the acting, and the animation. Truly excellent. Countdown to 450 Reviews: 10...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.