Here’s my one sentence summary: It’s a cheery “Waiting for Godot.” I liked it—a lot. Which is especially gratifying because it was an accidental see.
We started out trying to pick up “Slum dog Millionaire” at the theater next door. But it was sold out (at 3:15 on a Sunday, what the hell?) so we ran for a newspaper (sitter was already installed, so we had to use the time) and found this one playing a short cab ride away.
I’d been vaguely aware of it. When we went to see “Rachel Getting Married” it was playing at the same theater, and the guy behind us in line was seeing it. He said it was supposed to be good. The guy was a serious movie-goer, but you just never know about other people’s taste.
I also read a brief blip in The New Yorker on it, too, but it was a forgettable review. Part of my, “eh, so what?” response to it, after reading this review, was also that the main character was described as, well, happy. I think the NY-er review said something about the unexamined life. What’s interesting about that?
Had I realized the writer and director was Mike Leigh, the same guy who wrote and directed “Vera Drake” and “Secrets and Lies,” however, it would have been in my top five.
I saw “Vera Drake” a couple of years ago and found it a grim but incredibly moving, compassionate and thought-provoking profile of Vera Drake (played by Imelda Staunton), an abortionist in 1950’s England. Ditto “Secrets and Lies,” which stars Brenda Bleythn as Cynthia Purley, a woman ravaged by life, who also has a secret she is forced--very unwillingly, at first--to confront.
Both earlier movies are profiles of deeply interesting women. So is “Happy-Go-Lucky.” But unlike the earlier ones, HGL is, by and large, an easy ride. You really can’t help but like the unbelievably cheerful and giddy Poppy (Sally Hawkins) and her “mates.” In fact, her friendship with Zoe (Alexis Zegerman), made me envious--I wanted to hang out with them. And as the movie unfolds, you find she actually does have a deeper side, she just doesn’t blather on about it. In fact, she almost never says anything serious.
It’s kind of interesting how Leigh manages to convey a serious message in a mostly un-serious way. Based on the two earlier movies, I would never have believed him capable of such a light touch. The movie does skirt around a couple of grim characters and scenes, but it’s not the stomach-twister that Vera and S&L can be. (In a good way, but still.)
I looked up Leigh when we got home and discovered, to my awe, that though he is credited as the writer on his films, he does not actually write the scripts. He comes up with ideas, frameworks—and then he and the actors go through a careful rehearsal in which they improvise the lines. But it’s all done pre-shooting. “You will find hardly any improvising on camera anywhere in my films,” he has said. “It's very structured, but it's all worked out from elaborate improvisations over a long period.”
His biggest lament is that, because he won’t cast big stars and can’t tell producers exactly what his movies are about, it’s hard to get them made.
“My tragedy as a filmmaker now,” he says, “is that there is a very limited ceiling on the amount of money anyone will give me to make a film. Because they don't know what it's going to be about and because I won't use stars and because there isn't a script. And I really passionately want to have the resources to paint on a much bigger canvas.”
I seriously hope he keeps managing to get his movies made. He’s damned interesting.
We started out trying to pick up “Slum dog Millionaire” at the theater next door. But it was sold out (at 3:15 on a Sunday, what the hell?) so we ran for a newspaper (sitter was already installed, so we had to use the time) and found this one playing a short cab ride away.
I’d been vaguely aware of it. When we went to see “Rachel Getting Married” it was playing at the same theater, and the guy behind us in line was seeing it. He said it was supposed to be good. The guy was a serious movie-goer, but you just never know about other people’s taste.
I also read a brief blip in The New Yorker on it, too, but it was a forgettable review. Part of my, “eh, so what?” response to it, after reading this review, was also that the main character was described as, well, happy. I think the NY-er review said something about the unexamined life. What’s interesting about that?
Had I realized the writer and director was Mike Leigh, the same guy who wrote and directed “Vera Drake” and “Secrets and Lies,” however, it would have been in my top five.
I saw “Vera Drake” a couple of years ago and found it a grim but incredibly moving, compassionate and thought-provoking profile of Vera Drake (played by Imelda Staunton), an abortionist in 1950’s England. Ditto “Secrets and Lies,” which stars Brenda Bleythn as Cynthia Purley, a woman ravaged by life, who also has a secret she is forced--very unwillingly, at first--to confront.
Both earlier movies are profiles of deeply interesting women. So is “Happy-Go-Lucky.” But unlike the earlier ones, HGL is, by and large, an easy ride. You really can’t help but like the unbelievably cheerful and giddy Poppy (Sally Hawkins) and her “mates.” In fact, her friendship with Zoe (Alexis Zegerman), made me envious--I wanted to hang out with them. And as the movie unfolds, you find she actually does have a deeper side, she just doesn’t blather on about it. In fact, she almost never says anything serious.
It’s kind of interesting how Leigh manages to convey a serious message in a mostly un-serious way. Based on the two earlier movies, I would never have believed him capable of such a light touch. The movie does skirt around a couple of grim characters and scenes, but it’s not the stomach-twister that Vera and S&L can be. (In a good way, but still.)
I looked up Leigh when we got home and discovered, to my awe, that though he is credited as the writer on his films, he does not actually write the scripts. He comes up with ideas, frameworks—and then he and the actors go through a careful rehearsal in which they improvise the lines. But it’s all done pre-shooting. “You will find hardly any improvising on camera anywhere in my films,” he has said. “It's very structured, but it's all worked out from elaborate improvisations over a long period.”
His biggest lament is that, because he won’t cast big stars and can’t tell producers exactly what his movies are about, it’s hard to get them made.
“My tragedy as a filmmaker now,” he says, “is that there is a very limited ceiling on the amount of money anyone will give me to make a film. Because they don't know what it's going to be about and because I won't use stars and because there isn't a script. And I really passionately want to have the resources to paint on a much bigger canvas.”
I seriously hope he keeps managing to get his movies made. He’s damned interesting.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment