« Filmbrain's Screen Capture Quiz: Round 5 -- Week 1 | Main | The Rococo and the Punk »
Oh well, whatever, nevermind
![]() Some years ago, a friend of Gus Van Sant's dragged him to see Bela Tarr's Sátántangó, the greatest seven-hour film of all time. Said Van Sant, "It was exactly what I needed to see at that exact moment in my life. It also summed up some things that I'd been thinking about for a long time and been influenced by but never put to use. The film was accomplishing those things, and a lot of that had to do with the timing of the story and how long he would take to describe certain actions that are simple yet the more you watch them the more they grow in their illumination. It was very inspirational." The result of this experience was Gerry -- a masterpiece of minimalism that is Van Sant's best film, and a welcome return following a disappointing mainstream three-picture run in Hollywood. (Yes, Filmbrain hated Good Will Hunting.) The Tarr influence was perhaps even stronger in Elephant, his take on the Columbine shootings. While not quite as perfect as Gerry, it was still a fascinating thing to behold, and its long takes, behind the shoulder walking shots, and liberal use of time loops (where the same scene is repeated from a different perspective) was straight out of Sátántangó. Van Sant's latest film, Last Days, is the final (?) chapter in his trilogy about death (and walking). Though not a biopic, it is inspired by the life of Kurt Cobain, or rather by the days leading up to his suicide. While Gerry was a buddy pic (of sorts), and Elephant a collective, Last Days is (for the most part) a one-man show. Pretty boy Michael Pitt is pretty damn good as Blake, the shaggy, mumbling rock star who glides ghostlike through the film. We hardly ever see his face, and much of his performance relies heavily on lumbering, lethargic movements, which at times have an almost balletic quality to them. Though there are a handful of people on the periphery of Blake's life -- from the parasitic entourage that live in his dilapidated mansion, to the band and family members who try desperately to reach him by telephone -- they function as little more than white noise. Blake makes no attempt at communication (he often hides or scampers away from them), and they, for the most part, pay little attention to him. It's only when a door-to-door Yellow Pages salesman shows up that Blake makes a genuine effort to communicate -- he longs for contact, just not with those closest to him. The first half-hour or so is tremendous -- Blake stomping through the woods, building a fire, singing Home on the Range, coming home, attempting to eat a bowl of cereal, walking through the house in a black negligee -- it's a shame the entire film isn't like this. The introduction of the other characters changes the mood tremendously -- and not for the better. Sure, it's nice to see Kim Gordon on the big screen, but her scene, like Harmony Korine's, doesn't really bring much to the proceedings. Mamet-staple Ricky Jay gets to tell one of his infamous magician stories, and though it resonates somewhat with Cobain's death (a suicide, deemed "death by misadventure") it too seems awkward and out of place. The problem with Last Days, at least when compared to Gerry and Elephant, is that it draws too much attention to itself -- you become more conscious of the conceits and the narrative "tricks" than in the previous films. The use of time loops, for example, which was used to great effect in Elephant (actively following several characters over the same period of time) isn't quite necessary here -- and it comes off as more of an afterthought, and somewhat gimmicky. The other characters (Asia Argento, Lukas Haas, et al.) just aren't significant enough to warrant their own perspective. Then there are the moments that suffer from being a bit too obvious -- the kind of things that Van Sant avoided in the other two films. The mansion as metaphor for Blake -- strong and guarded on the outside, but crumbling on the inside. Or Blake stepping into his daughter's bedroom to find three kittens purring by the crib. (This coming after record producer Kim Gordon asks him if he's spoken to his daughter lately.) Unlike Gerry and Elephant, which Filmbrain was completely drawn into, trance-like, from start to finish, Last Days has too many moments that pull you out -- as if Van Sant was tapping you on the shoulder and whispering in your ear. It's not that it ruins the film, but does make it seem like a step backward from Elephant, rather than forward. Still, there are quite a few great moments in Last Days, including one which might be the most memorable of 2005 -- Blake, in negligee and boots, slowly slumping to the floor in a drug-induced stupor while a Boyz II Men video plays in the background. Pitt performs two musical numbers in the film, including a multi-layered guitar-sampler-drum piece that is shot from outside a window, with the camera slowly pulling back during the entire sequence. These two scenes, along with Harris Savides' cinematography, and the musique concrète sound design are reasons enough not to miss the film. J. Hoberman (Village Voice) considers Last Days to be Gus Van Sant's masterpiece, and the best of the trilogy, calling it "productively reductive" -- certainly a true statement for the first third. Filmbrain would probably agree with Hoberman's assessment if Van Sant had let the entire film play out this way -- as a true solo performance. Instead, Last Days turns out to be an uneven affair, where pure cinematic poetry is marred by moments that border on the pretentious. That said, with each day that passes, the desire to see it again grows stronger. |
July 15, 2005 in Film | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345163ca69e200e5507861e98834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oh well, whatever, nevermind:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I haven't seen Last Days yet, but with both Gerry and Elephant, though I liked them a great deal as I was leaving the theater, they accumulated great power for me in the days and weeks afterwards. I think I liked Gerry because its extreme minimalism made it utterly hypnotic (it was like watching a narrative equivalent of Michael Snow's Wavelength) and Elephant because of its refusal (perverse, many claimed) to provide even a hint of motivation, and convincing me that any motivation provided by the director would have been pat and false. (I wish he'd left out the shower scene though!).
btw, is Kim Gordon the Kim Gordon, of Sonic Youth?
Posted by: girish | Jul 15, 2005 6:04:07 PM
Dammit, I've been feeling the same way. The more I think about it, the more it sneaks up on me. I may even try to sit through what I then dubbed a "punshing art wank" once more before flippin' on the word processor.
Posted by: Aaron Hillis | Jul 15, 2005 6:07:53 PM
Girish -- it's funny you should mention Wavelength, because I had that in mind during the music scene, which is sort of Snow's film in reverse.
(And yes, it is Mrs. Thurston Moore in the film.)
Posted by: Filmbrain | Jul 15, 2005 8:11:09 PM
Even though it's not as good as Gerry, I think this is still the best American film I've seen (and possibly will see?) this year.
Fun trivia: in one of his scenes, Ricky Jay picks up something from a table and talks about how it's made of the same stuff as old film stock and is in the process of decaying. That something, which is never seen, can only be one or two of his vintage (and indeed disintegrating) dice. That stuff did take me out of the film, too, but I imagine it won't be as big of a deal to people who aren't familiar with Jay himself. Then again, those are the same people who will likely wonder why they're being asked to watch some guy stumble mumble for ninety minutes...
Now that his trilogy is over, it'll be interesting to see Van Sant take on an onstensibly commercial property again (an adaptation of The Time Traveller's Wife for Brad Pitt's production company).
Posted by: dvd | Jul 16, 2005 6:57:02 AM
Here's an interesting take on the film by Michael Azarrad, the rock critic who wrote an excellent Nirvana bio, "Comes As You Are". It's interesing because he is approaching the film as a rock writer, not a film "critic", and he knew Cobain fairly well (hope this isn't too long):
"ILL WILL HUNTING
I watched precisely 51 minutes of Gus Van Sant’s new film Last Days, about the final 48 hours of a suicidal rock star named Blake, i.e.., Kurt Cobain. Yeah, I walked out of the screening, not even sticking around to hear my own voice right at the end of the movie, having an out-of-body, autopilot conversation with Kurt Loder on MTV the day Cobain died. Mainly, I walked out because the movie is very boring. But there’s more to it than that.
Van Sant says the film is only loosely based on Cobain, but that’s a raging cop-out, a self-granted license to take ill-advised liberties with the story and, far worse, a hedge against criticism that he might have gotten it all wrong. See, the movie is filled with so many exact details that he just can’t have it both ways. For instance, actor Mike Pitt’s imitation of Kurt’s little-boy lope in the opening moments of the film is so spot-on that it made me laugh, and it goes on from there: the familiar sweaters, sunglasses, hunting caps, left-handed handwriting, even several characters in the film who closely resemble people who really did live in or hang around at Kurt’s house. There’s a greenhouse on the property, where Blake kills himself with a shotgun. (Even the twin actors who play door-to-door Mormons are from Kurt’s hometown of Aberdeen, Washington.)
The problem is, Van Sant can’t resist lopping the tricky corners off an already compelling story in order to make it comprehensible to us simpletons sitting out there in the dark. Kurt’s — I mean Blake’s — mansion is a dilapated mess, what Van Sant calls a “metaphorical element of Blake’s life decomposing.” I wonder if he thought that one up all by himself. The reality was, Kurt’s home, as decorated and furnished by his wife, was tasteful and immaculate. How much more interesting it would have been to see Blake/Kurt shambling about such an impeccable home, but that would have flown in the face of Van Sant’s preconceived ideas about who Kurt was.
For the first hour at least, Van Sant reduces Kurt to a gibbering, near-catatonic drug zombie; that’s another conveniently simplistic depiction, far from the much more complicated truth. Kurt might have been profoundly depressed and zonked out of his mind on drugs, but I guarantee you he never talked to a bowl of Cocoa Puffs.
There was one great moment: at one point Blake switches on the TV, which begins beaming the spectacularly mediocre “On Bended Knee” video by Boys II Men. This sort of thing happened all the time in the Cobain household — the television was always tuned to MTV, and Kurt would always switch it on without the sound, watching the screen while holding a fully engaged conversation. Whether it was some of the piteous r&b that was popular at the time, the equally piteous commercial grunge, or any kind of pop music at all, it was never anything less than a jolt to sit and watch it with someone who epitomized everything that music did not. But Van Sant chooses to ruin the scene by having Blake o.d. in a manner which closely resembles something that actually happened, although, once again, in a much more interesting place and context.
The more I think about it, the more it becomes clear that Van Sant had access to some very inside information. He could have made a nuanced, challenging and revelatory film. Instead, he refused to let the truth get in the way of what he thought was a better story.
But what do you expect from a guy who claims that “Venus in Furs” is the “‘I Wanna Hold Your Hand’ of punk rock.” Any pinhead knows the “I Wanna Hold Your Hand” of punk rock is “Rockaway Beach.”
Posted by: Sal C. | Jul 18, 2005 3:05:07 PM
dvd -- How did you figure that out? That's pretty fascinating.
Sal - thanks for posting the article. I think part of the problem with the film is that the subject is closer to people than those of the other two films (both of which were based on real-life events). Even though few knew Cobain like Azarrad did, his death affected many, and it's hard to watch the film without bringing in your own preconceived notions of what Cobain's last days must have been like.
I agree with Azarrad in that if the film was only meant to be loosely based on KC, he shouldn't have added all those detailed similarities.
Posted by: Filmbrain | Jul 18, 2005 4:34:15 PM
My only problem with Azarrad's article is that Van Sant's film is meant to be nothing more than Van Sant's own personal interpretation of the Cobain myth and a study on the whole cultural phenomenon/mystique of rock artist suicides (I think Elliot Smith was a big influence on the film as well).
Even if the film seems like a biopic, it's not meant to be. It's kind of like criticizing Citizen Kane for not being accurate on the details of William Randolph Hearst's life.
Posted by: Jay Blanchard | Jul 19, 2005 4:33:13 PM



