CatherineRhodes.com

Right blend of comedy and pathos

Giving a boost to the relevance of Time Mag

“Next Fall” at the Geffen last night was really good, one of the best plays we’ve seen there. The title works on many levels. Next fall is when one of the gay characters is going to come out to his parents. Since the screenplay discusses themes of Christianity, the term “fall” has religious overtones, as in the fall of man, fall of Adam, fall from grace. Plus, on a more abstract level, the reason for the crisis point that brought everyone together was a physical fall that sent the character to the ED. Great acting, smart dialogue. Big YES.

“Ides of March” is now one of my favorite political movies of all time, really. (Gosling and Clooney — yummy, a little something for the ladies.) The writers took the play, which I saw as “Farragut North” at the Geffen, and dialed it up a notch. No new ground here, after all this is Clinton territory that we explored with “Primary Colors” and “Wag the Dog.” But the story of loyalty and betrayal done extremely well. Did she write the letter and does he have it? Big YES.

What these two share is the tension between two men within a relationship. The father-son dynamic, issues of ambition, of toppling the other to gain prominence. I’ve been focused so much on female characters and leads that I’ve forgotten how interesting the male dynamic is. While there can be a happy pack of alpha females, there can be only one alpha male at the head of the pack.

Not just "the gay dad movie"

Like Ravel's "Bolero" of movies

They were hungry

Beginners is a small triumph. About the imprinting that’s done by nature and by childhood, and our ability to override that imprint as an adult. Funny, sweet, but smart. Reminds me of the concept that when you meet your soulmate you don’t love them, you recognize them.  YES.

“Falling Skies” turned out to be a dud. The pilot was promising but the next two episodes devolved into idiocy.  NO NO NO, unless you’re in prison and there’s only one show on TV.

Super 8. A Spielberg movie is always the triumph of hope over experience.  I see his name as a writer or director and think, maybe it will be different this time. But alas, it’s not. Impossibly wise and adorable children, overarching treacly soundtrack, bumbling adults, poor mistreated aliens. Oh vey. Between this and “Falling Skies,” I promise that the next time f I see the Speilberg brand I’m gonna run.  NO!

“Superior Donuts” at the Geffen was pure pleasure. A bit like Beginners in theme, about trying to change one’s life as an adult to redo decisions from the past. YES

The Exorcist. Wow, what a brilliant film. I’ve wanted to see the new director’s cut for some time but was worried I’d be too frightened to sleep. Terrific character development, grand baroque Catholic theme, and lots of ordinary smart people trying to solve an unknown problem. They could not make this movie today with the clean restraint that kept it so taut and involving. No slashers, no torture, no violence really. I was afraid that the Linda Blair Satan would look campy due to overexposure as a cultural icon, but it doesn’t.  God bless the 70s for movie making. GIANT YES

Just Kids. I enjoyed the book immensely, though must admit its flaws. The first third was terrific, the middle third sagged, as if Patti was trying to define the historical record rather than tell a story, ie: it became a travel log of where they went, who was there. The last third devolved into “Saint Robert” which got pretty tiresome given that we’re talking about a man with thin talent who is only notable for the controversy of his subject matter. Qualified Yes.

Is that the only role Tony Soprano can play?

The hottest theater ticket in town is “God of Carnage” with the spectacular original Broadway cast. I had the chance to see it last Sunday when my friend R. got discounted rush seats. Thankfully, I didn’t pay full price because the show was mediocre. The premise sounded fascinating: two couples meet to discuss their sons’ playground fight that left one boy with two knocked-out teeth. The conversation starts out cordially enough but unravels into carnage. Not really, no blood, although we are treated to projectile vomiting and lots of dead tulips on the carpet by the end.

I’m fascinated by this premise, how thin the social compact truly is and how quickly things can deconstruct into Lord of the Flies territory. This was the theme of my all-time fav Deadwood: what happens to civilization in the absence of laws? But “God of Carnage” brought nothing new to the conversation. There just wasn’t enough depth, no big reveal, no satisfying takeaway. The most interesting piece was how funny the show was, and how odd that the audience roared with laughter at monstrous behavior. My friend liked the shifting aliances between the couples, but it wasn’t profound enough to save an otherwise thin screenplay.

NO, unless you get free seats.

This picture captures the crazy-quilt feel of the movie

There’s a lot of press right now over Terence Malik’s long-awaited film, The Tree of Life. Warning, people, it’s a bizarro movie experience. In fact, it’s a candidate to replace Fantasia as the acid-droppers rental of choice. It has an over-arching biblical foundation, which I liked but my friend P. found annoying. It opens with a reference to Job, has a heavy-handed Cain and Abel story, allusions to Jesus, and of course the title has its origins in the Garden of Eden fable. About as subtle as a sledgehammer.

The film is visually and aurally stunning, as opera plays over footage of galaxies exploding, but absolutely nothing happens for 2 1/2 hours. It’s all vignettes and impressions. So if you see it, be prepared to ease into the film and just let it wash over you while suspending the idea that there is a plot to follow. This is art-house filmmaking on steroids.

YES for the right viewer (non-linear, patient or tripping), NO for everyone else