The Art Is Deceitful Above All Things

In the past several weeks, the literary world was rocked by not one but three scandals surrounding the authenticity of books that were purported to be non-fiction, or based on real events. There was of course James Frey, whose career was shattered into a million little pieces on national television when he admitted to gross fabrication (and taught us all a valuable lesson about pissing-off Oprah). Then there was the case of Nasdijj, the supposed fetal alcohol syndrome-inflicted Navajo author who told of abuse, alcoholism, and rape on the reservation, who in fact turned out to be the very white gay-porn author Timothy Barrus. Yet the most interesting scandal of the bunch has to be l'affaire LeRoy, which concerns the no-longer-mysterious identity of JT LeRoy, the alleged homeless teenage transgendered truck-stop prostitute with AIDS who wrote the collection of autobiographical stories, The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things, and who managed to build an impressive network of celebrity supporters which included Madonna, Bono, Gus van Sant, Tom Waits, Dave Eggers, etc. LeRoy also caught the eye of actress/director/brat Asia Argento, who has now turned those tales of woe into a feature length film. Filmbrain can only hope that Argento had no doubts about LeRoy and his story, for what other possible defense can there be for making this utterly repulsive film. That LeRoy has turned out to be nothing more than the fictional creation of a middle-aged woman leaves us wondering -- would Argento have made the film had she known it was a work of fiction? (And does she, along with the other duped celebs, feel like a jackass?) Filmbrain hasn't read any of LeRoy's books, but if the film is a fair indication, he can't imagine how anybody could mistake these exaggerated tales of serial abuse for the truth. The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things opens with seven year-old Jeremiah (Jimmy Bennett) being turned over to his birth-mother Sarah (Asia Argento, doing her best Courtney Love impersonation), a sadistic, emotionally unstable, drug-addicted prostitute who has no real interest in the boy, other than as an object for abuse. (Why the boy was taken from good foster parents and handed over to such an irresponsible woman is never made clear.) The two hit the road on a journey to nowhere, and for the next ninety minutes we get to watch as Jeremiah is the victim of seemingly endless acts of psychological, physical, and sexual assault. From the drugs and verbal abuse his mother shoves down his throat, to being violently whipped or raped by one of Sarah's many men, Jeremiah (like his biblical namesake) becomes a martyr for everybody, albeit a causeless one. After spending a few years with his abusive fundamentalist Christian grandparents (Ornella Muti and Peter Fonda), Jeremiah (now played by Dylan & Cole Sprouse) reunites with Sarah for a second round of excursions into violence and rape, with an added bonus of poisoning (just to keep it interesting.) The film doesn't end as much as it just stops, with nothing learned or resolved, and Argento's undeveloped, arcless characters no different than they were at the start. Argento's filmmaking is none too impressive, and her attempts at gritty realism wind up looking terribly amateurish. Even cameos by the likes of Winona Ryder, Jeremy Sisto, and Michael Pitt do little to help matters any. The entire project is infused with enough narcissism to make Vincent Gallo blush -- even more so than her debut feature, the autobiographical Scarlet Diva. She draws way too much attention to her performance (while stifling everybody else's) and there's a self-congratulatory air throughout the whole film, as if Argento is continually reminding us how brave and understanding she is by bringing LeRoy's story to the screen. In what has to be one of the most pretentious end-credit sequences of all time, we see Argento's hands thumbing through her well-worn copy of the book, showing us in detail the many underlined passages and margin notes she made. Please! Child abuse is a very serious subject, and any one of the events depicted is enough to result in long lasting damage. Strung together as they are, the film becomes a misanthropic circus of cruelty, which goes out of its way to shock with graphic images. Yet even if the story wasn't a hoax, and somehow one child did endure all of Emily Albert's manufactured evil, The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things is little more than an exercise in exploitation that revels in its many disturbing moments. If Todd Solondz and Gregg Araki went on a three-day crystal meth bender in a locked room with a typewriter, they wouldn't come up with material this vile. If you hate kids, this is your film. Filmbrain can admit to feeling more than a tinge of schadenfreude towards the rich and famous that were duped by the faux enfant terrible. But will the scandal have any effect on the reception of Argento's film? We'll find out next month.

Comments

[girlwithamoviecamera]

i had read about the j.t. scam in the new yorker, some five years ago (an excellent piece by new yorker darling tad friend, entitled "virtual love" -- highly recommended. nb: issue of Nov. 26, 2001)

scandal aside, i have no desire whatsoever to go see another film directed by asia argento. her "scarlet diva" is just about the most conceited, abominably shot, bad acted "film" I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY ENTIRE LIFE. it was particularly painful to watch it for me because i'm italian and thus can fully understand how atrocious the acting really is (to the point of *actually* making me shudder). i don't think you can even save/justify two frames of the whole film. thus, i was shocked to learn that ms. argento was to direct "the heart is deceitful" with such a stellar cast. bah. a mystery.

[Todd]

I think Argento more or less had to be "in" on the whole Leroy thing by the time the movie was made, given the weird rumors that were floating about the two of them (she was carrying his child, etc.).

I've read one of the JT Leroy books, "Sarah", and one of the stories, and I actually thought it was sweet and lovely, for a tale about child prostitution.

[Filmbrain]

This piece by Susie Bright is very interesting. It shows how the JT Leroy thing was not merely a literary hoax, but a straight-out scam. Asking for money for "his" son's French immersion school?

girlwithamoviecamera -- thanks for the New Yorker tip. I was unaware that it was being discussed that long ago.

Todd -- maybe you're right. If that's the case, then I have even less respect for the film.

[girlwithamoviecamera]

actually re: tad friend's awesome piece in the new yorker --- it referred to the story of "anthony godby johnson," a terribly abused child who turned into an uber reclusive, prodigious writer. it details how he (actually she, a 40-something female writer) scammed tons of famous authors/celebs. i read the piece 5 years ago and thought - JT Leroy. uncanny similarities with his saga. almost identical, really, worth reading.

[Filmbrain]

Ah yes, that story was the inspiration for Armistead Maupin's book, The Night Listener, which is frighteningly similar to the LeRoy myth. It's as if Emily Albert and her husband used that as a training manual for their LeRoy hoax.

[Susie Bright]

Whew.... When and where did you see this? If this isn't the perverse icing on the cake! Do you think this is going to turn into the new "Showgirls," or is it beyond that?

My theory on the "did she or didn't she?"— narcissists don't lose one beat when facts contradict their vision. Confronting them wouldn't so much as disturb one hair. With Asia and Speedie (Emily) at the helm, it must have been like "parallel play." And I don't think you're far wrong from what was going on in the bathroom.

[Filmbrain]

I have the Dutch DVD, which has been out for some time.

I'm sure some critics will heap praise on the film, and talk about how brave and uncompromising Argento's vision is. (A comment left on IMDB goes on and on about how "real" the film is.) Sad.

[Dennis Cozzalio]

Reading about this movie made me depressed that there are still filmmakers for whom junkie verisimiltude and harrowing child abuse are a be-all and end-all, some sort of hipster badge of honor. And I wonder about the parents of child actors Cole and Dylan Sprouse. What the hell made them think this would be something they'd want their children to experience/endure? The whole thing makes Linda Blair's experience with Pazuzu look positively quaint. Thanks, Filmbrain, for the heads-up and the excellent writing and thinking about this movie. You've braved one for me, for us, that, as a father of two girls, I'm very grateful I now don't feel the need to judge for myself. I'll be linking to this post from my own blog and expressing my thanks again.

[Filmbrain]

Thanks for the kind words Dennis. Perhaps you are right about the hipster badge of honor thing. I can find no other good explanation for it.

I only recently learned about the Sprouse twins, and their Disney TV show The Suite Life of Zack and Cody. Wonder what Disney will think when they see this one.

[Dennis Cozzalio]

Yeah! Remember when Annette was worried about what Uncle Walt would think of the Beach Party movies, and basically had to approach him, her Bonasera to his Don Corleone, for his approval?

[dvd]

I saw this on the festival circuit last year and didn't respond so virulently as you, Filmbrain - in fact, the swathe of Argento's directorial trowel seemed so broad that the film seemed mostly dimissable. There's nothing wrong with harrowing subject matter, of course, but there in this picture the content had no relevance.

There were a few scenes - like the Marilyn Manson scene - that might have been really good in a better film, but just about all of them were negated by the sheer awfulness of Winona Ryder's cameo.

[Tim]

Why does everybody get so exercised about how "true" stories are? All narratives are essentially selective, and therefore not true representations of life. And Hollywood has been buffing up reality since the days of DW Griffith.

Or do you think Doc Holliday looked like Victor Mature?

Superb site, btw, I'm sorry I only just happened across it. Will be back.

[Peter Nellhaus]

I read Susie Bright's piece on Leroy at Huffington Post several weeks ago, and wondered how the U.S. distribution would be affected. I get the feeling that the film was destined for extremely limited play in any event and even negative publicity could be of some help.

[James Russell]

James Frey ... taught us all a valuable lesson about pissing-off Oprah

I thought it was Jonathan Franzen who did that?

I don't think the scandal over the book will affect the film's reception unduly; it might inspire ruminations (like your own) as to whether or not Argento knew of the hoax before making it, but I doubt it will seriously colour people's views of the film itself. Laura Albert's career, on the other hand...

[Filmbrain]

Tim --

The people who bought into JT LeRoy's story did so out of a belief that this poor young man had endured all that the books claimed he did. Don't forget that even outside of his books, there were the emails sent with tales of AIDS, addiction, etc.

I can understand a filmmaker wanting to bring a story like this to screen -- a boy who, against all odds, survived terrible ordeals yet managed to become a writer, find a new life, etc. Yet this is nothing more than a nasty, hateful story that offers nothing more than an exercise in cruelty.

[la_depressionada]

the husband of the alleged perp is shopping a book deal.

[Seab]

There's no scandal involving J.T. Leroy. He/She did not have the books published as a "memoir", which is the only thing Frey is guilty of. If it had been published as a novel/fiction as Leroy's books are, there would be no hullabaloo, and Frey wouldn't be in the shit storm he (or is it more his publisher?) got himself into. Sarah, the novel, is fantastic and worthy of the praise no matter who wrote it. Heart wasn't near as good and was a grim and unpleasent read that I could never finish. Wouldn't bother seeing the movie anyway. I do hold out hope that somewhere down the line van Sant will get Sarah made into a movie -- it's a great story.

[Mikko]

I saw the film 18 months ago, and I can't remember how I felt about the supposed "realism" of the film at that time, but in retrospect, learning about the fraud doesn't change my opinion of the film. I still think it's one of the best films I saw in 2004.

I love your title (art is deceitful), but everything that follows seems to contradict how I would understand the meaning of that sentence.

Yes, the film has exploitative elements, but what were you expecting from the daughter of Dario Argento? An honest question: don't you think Miike is exploitative? No one is objective, but I find that many intelligent american critics go awry in thinking that picking on some american indie filmmakers (or films) makes them somehow more credible.

I'm of course biased too, as the film includes probably the most enjoyable Sonic Youth soundtrack they've done. I ended up liking the film a hell of a lot more once I felt that Asia was trying to make a film that explored the possibility of film as a kind of visceral instrumental song. This hit me pretty late into the film, and I don't consider the film to be perfect in any way. But the fact that every criticism I've read on the film spends more time talking about the book or the film's literal or theatrical "weaknesses" makes me feel like they've utterly misunderstood the film.

" [...] If Todd Solondz and Gregg Araki went on a three-day crystal meth bender in a locked room with a typewriter, they wouldn't come up with material this vile. If you hate kids, this is your film."

Palindromes and Mysterious Skin both made it into my top ten of films I saw last year, so I guess we're bound to disagree. Anyhow, thinking that the fact that film is exploitative, to some degree, means that anyone enjoying the film actually wishes to see children suffer (or gets off on it) is absolutely ridiculous and sounds like someone with an attitude of 50s censorship.

[Filmbrain]

Mikko --

I think you give Argento too much credit -- I don't agree that the film is some sort of visceral experiment. She's no Gaspar Noe -- there's nothing substantive about the work. It's far too wrapped up in its own narcissism to even work as pure exploitation.

As for Miike -- no, I don't think he's exploitative. All of his films, as disturbing as they are, have their tongues firmly planted in cheek. Miike doesn't attempt to convey any messages, and there's clear humor in all of them. Such is not the case with Argento's film.

Take Red to Kill, the Hong Kong Category III film from some years ago as a contrast. A truly sick film about a man who rapes a retarded girl. Far more graphic than The Heart is..., and far crueler, yet it never fancies itself anything more than it is. Argento throws in a bunch of celeb cameos, gets Sonic Youth to do the score, and suddenly it's an "art" film.

I'd really love to hear what it is about the film that earned it a place on your best-of-2004 list. (Other than the score.)

Seab -- Yes, the LeRoy books were published as fiction, but all the attention (and support) was due to the well publicized fact that it was all taken from his own experiences. Celebs don't rally behind a writer for their eloquence. If Sarah and the other works were published under Laura Albert's name, the cult would never have begun.

Update: Knoop admits all.

[Sean]

The cult probably wouldn't have gotten as big -- but I still think it would have been there. I don't think anyone out there today is really surprised by this. Sarah stands on its own and even with this big reveal I still think the book will be held in high regard in years to come. Which you can't say about Frey's work -- as good a read as it might be, it has forever lost it's impact by simply falsely calling itself a memoir. If anyone read Sarah and thought it was autobiographical or in anyway similar to a memoir is, well, a bit dumb. So I wouldn't call it a scandal -- but I guess there are people out there who felt a close and personal relationship to this creation who will disagree. But this Ms. Albert is a pretty colorful character herself and I think the stories are quite personal to her as well -- and weren't just written for a laugh, but as a serious endeavor that needed help getting off the ground. Whether or not this eases the blow for the devoted shall be seen. Though this world she created, in her books and elsewhere, I think, is quite impressive, even for a woman who was in her thirties.