Her Review

Her
Directed by Spike Jonze
Released in 2013

Her speaks so plainly and openly about the state of love today — in spite of its not-so-distant future setting — that it is next to impossible not to connect with it, in some way. Director-writer Spike Jonze wields sentimentality to great effect, guaranteeing his viewers feel the ‘feels’ through a whispered ukulele song or a swelling, tearful break-up. You cannot deny Jonze’s ability to manipulate his audience, no doubt, yet you can — or at least I will, here — question his technique and the artistry of the final product. It is futile to criticize Her’s performances and emotional power, but that does not mean it is a very good film.

I think it was the moment Olivia Wilde’s character, a blind date, splits with Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix), in the first act of the film, when I felt … a tremor. Some unpleasant awareness tore me from the world of the story, with its lacquered rooms and high-waisted trousers. I could liken this disturbance to sleep paralysis, brewing an unshakable anxiety behind the eyes as I came to the following realization: Oh no, this dialogue is not good.

Spike Jonze’s first solo screenplay effort features an enviable conceit — a lonely man falls in love with Samantha, his hyper-intelligent, gregarious operating system (voiced by Scarlett Johansson) — but forgoes almost any naturalism once someone speaks. The result gives us characters constantly thematizing their lives rather than simply living them. A lot of “What are these feelings I am feeling?” and not much feeling, you know? Theodore’s best friend, Amy (Amy Adams, in a real 180 from American Hustle), only talks in tidy aphorisms about the nature of love and desire, like in the trailer’s centerpiece: “Falling in love is a crazy thing to do. It’s like a socially acceptable form of insanity.” Many cherish a good line like that, and I do not doubt it has already made the rounds on tumblr. For me and my cold, dark heart, however, it’s just too on-the-nose to not fidget in my chair and sigh.

The film’s constant broaching of subtext precludes any actual subtext from developing, and not just in dialogue. Jonze has the annoying tendency to interpolate flashbacks of Theodore’s failed marriage (Rooney Mara plays the ex-wife) throughout the first two-thirds of the film. These Instagram-filtered snippets inject a liberal dose of preciousness, serving as heavy-handed exposition to remind you how simultaneously perfect and awful his ex-wife was to him. Jonze also seems adverse to the long take (which Paul Thomas Anderson used to mesmerizing effect when shooting Phoenix in The Master) and too often resorts to cliché in the editing.

By the end of this story, I came away with the feeling that Jonze bungled the brilliant premise he had. Perhaps some sharper social commentary would have been in order. Jonze sets up parallels between human bodies and commodities — as in, Theodore pays for Samantha, because she is a product. In turn, however, she puts emotional demands on Theodore, as any girlfriend would, flesh or gigabyte.

For instance, when Samantha hires a human surrogate to realize the physical intimacy their sex life has been missing, the girl stays silent as she mouths Samantha’s words and kisses Theodore. There is potential here for Jonze to comment on how, by fetishizing technology, we turn the body into a product. Or something like that. Jonze knows he sets up a pretty neat premise for this scene, yet he does not develop it into anything more. Theodore rebuffs the girl’s advances, she starts to cry and she leaves, though not before cherishing Theodore and Samantha’s relationship and lamenting her loneliness.

Like, is that it? Is the movie just people mulling over their relationship(s) out loud before bursting into tears? Her makes for effective sentimental romance, with a couple interesting questions built into the logline, but I would not elevate it any more than that. To reach a higher echelon, Jonze would have to embed larger questions into his script and direction and trust that the situations and simple gestures within a scene speak for themselves. I would never call Her a bad film, but I have a lot of trouble calling it a great one.

Final Verdict:

2.5 Stars Out of 5

This article was written for The Cornell Daily Sun and can be viewed at its original location here.

Where The Wild Things Are Review

Where The Wild Things Are:

Directed by Spike Jonze

Released in 2009

"Well, that was underwhelming." That was the first thought I had when I left the theater after seeing Where The Wild Things Are. The movie lacked focus, it did not pack the punch of emotion like I expected it to and the ending seemed abrupt. I was ready to cast the film aside and call it a disappointment. That was until I gave it some time to sit, to digest. The greatness of some films is not always apparent from the initial impressions; upon leaving Inglourious Basterds I knew I had seen a mad masterpiece but I didn't appreciate the perfection that is Dr. Strangelove until a second viewing. Where The Wild Things Are is no exception; beneath the cuddly, kid movie surface lies a film that is one of the deepest and emotional tales I have seen in years.

Initially, let me explain the general premise to the uninitiated:  Where The Wild Things Are is based off the beloved children's book by Maurice Sendak, released in 1963 and featured in the childhood of millions of American children since. The book is only 10 sentences long and, thus, hard to adapt to a full-length feature film. However, screenwriters Spike Jonze (also the director) and Dave Eggers take the overall premise of the picture book as well as the aesthetic look and make something entirely their own. This film is dark. Children may be fooled into believing that the playful creatures that are featured in the trailer only serve as one-dimensional playful objects but that is a false assumption. They occasionally look very frightening, act violently and behave in such intemperate ways that may even cause nightmares among the youth. Still, if a child has an open mind and a knack for analysis (I want to meet this kid), he or she will thoroughly enjoy this film.

In terms of plot, Where The Wild Things Are is the story about Max, played by the aptly named Max Records, who lives an imaginative yet lonely life at home. His sister has miserable friends who tear down his ice sculptures and she only looks on with mild disapproval, not acting or even being apologetic. Max's mom, with the ever reliable Catherine Keener at the helm, is a caricature of a mother that sadly exists in the real world but would make any mother, despite some similarities with this character, cringe. She is a divorcee or single mom from unknown circumstances, though it is fairly sure that the father walked out on the family early on. During a date with a man played by Mark Ruffalo (featured for maybe 40 seconds of screen time), she ignores Max despite his incessant pleads for attention. This culminates to Max embarrassing himself and his mother in front of this "date," much to mom's chagrin, and Max fleeing his house without looking back. All the while, he is dressed up in a wolf suit. Looking for liberation, he finds a sailboat and takes it to a faraway island where he encounters the Wild Things. They are about to eat him when he reveals to them his "magical powers" that are so powerful that he could make "people's heads explode." Clearly a manufactured lie, this excuse is bought by the creatures and they crown him king. From then on, the plot is not the focus.

The problem I had with the film upon conclusion was how it just meandered along, with no general concrete plot beneath it all. Max and the Wild Things have fun by engaging in a "Rumpus" or having a "dirt clod" fight, all featuring breaking stuff or throwing things in some way. There are scenes between these events such as the building of a large fort "where only the things you want to happen, would happen." There is never any sense of progression; the film's approach is very freewheeling and loose. However, this is revealed to not be the film's true value or even necessity.

Where The Wild Things Are's weapon is symbolism. It wields it often and with the grace of a poet.  A second viewing of the film may be mandatory to truly appreciate the detail and effort that went into it. The Wild Things are comprised of seven different creatures:  humble, loving Ira (Forest Whittaker), the mute and menacing Bull (Michael Berry Jr.), Judith, the pessimistic and rebellious one (an excellent Catherine O'Hara), the sympathetic yet plainly pathetic goat creature Alexander (Paul Dano), the consistently loyal Douglas (Chris Cooper), the affectionate and motherly figure KW (Lauren Ambrose) and, last but not least, the leading figure, Carol (James Gandolfini). These different creatures all represent a different aspect of Max's mind, thus showing the multiple personalities he has. He finds Carol to be the closest like him, accepting him without hesitation from the start. Max also sees the worst of himself in Carol, shown by the hostility between them near the end. Carol goes on anger tantrums, tearing apart their houses which reminds Max of his similar situations at home when he wrecked his own house. This bond proves to be the film's strongest point, as evidenced by the bittersweet conclusion. When Max sails back home, Carol runs to him in an emotionally devastated state, finally cognizant of the harm his ignorance has caused. He is unable to embrace Max for one last time but emits a howl of such shaky sentimental stature that only tears or ignorant laughs from the audience will result. As Max sails into the sunset, Carol gets a last look at the boy who revealed the best and worst in him. The analogy here is how Max's father recklessly abandoned his family but did not realize his mistake until it was too late. The father misses his family dearly now, just as Carol's tears show, but will never be able to partake in that final endearment. Upon realizing this revelation, I was torn. Not in a long time has a film hit me with such an emotional blow.

Truly, the film can be endlessly perused and analyzed for small details that carry significance. And they are there. Watch KW's introduction of the mysterious Bob and Terry and try not to think about the mother's date with that special individual or even the sister's unworthy friends. Better yet, Carol goes on a tantrum and reacts violently against Douglas who spouts the best line of the film regarding his "favorite arm." That, again, relates to Max's real world and Carol's pathetic excuses only make Max realize how immature he has become. The final salute to childhood will strike a chord with the high school crowd as shown by my thoughts. We are stuck in the middle between child and adult, not knowing when it is safe to set sail for the life of responsibility that lies ahead. But, shown by Max's journey, we all have the bravery to take that leap of faith. Clearly, there is no doubt that symbolism is this film's source of significance and emotion. Anyone who ponders the events of the screen will ultimately gain much satisfaction from realizing what was behind the cuddly exterior.

But what an exterior it is. Shot entirely in live action, Where The Wild Things Are takes an innovative approach at CGI through its natural blend of fantastical creatures in a real world. The Wild Things were filmed in costume with a static face; this was later changed when the voice talent was added and the faces emoted digital yet very lifelike feelings. They contain a stunning level of detail and emotional range that captures the nuances of every happy, sad or anger-filled moment. Complementing this triumph in imagery is the beautiful cinematography. Filmed in Australia, Where The Wild Things Are takes place on a wonderful island with great variety shown by the lush forests yet stark deserts adjacent to each other. While logically impossible (this is a fantasy story after all), this antithesis in environment only amplifies the beauty of everything else.

In the end, Where The Wild Things Are is a unique, fascinating film. Never before have I had such a 180° turnaround on a film from utter disappointment to unhinged love. The characters, and the true meaning that lies beneath them all, are fully developed even when they may seem shallow initially. The absolutely stunning visual work only helps the film's cause in the end as well, portraying the film's message about childhood even more effectively. I am not disappointed by Where The Wild Things Are:  I love it. Maybe my irrational dismissal of the film without truly comprehending what I saw suggests I have some growing up to do myself.

Final Verdict:

4.5/5 Stars