Algebra in Love

Stillman's first feature in 13 years investigates the merciless social rules within a campus: it's fun, as wittily and entertainingly dialogued as his previous efforts, but way more off-beat and darkly screwballish. It almost plays as an intellectual version of cult favorite "Heathers" (it might be no coincidence if it also revolves around a bunch of co-eds named after flowers), sparing us the B-movieish third act of Michael Lehmann's film. Lots of fun, with a musical twist around the end that might be able to improve the film's chances to cult-ness.

I caught "Damsels in Distress" in Venice, where it was selected out of competition as the closing film for 2011's festival. Audience was quite appreciative, laughing out loud throughout the whole screening.

Violet Wister (Greta Gerwig), Rose (Megalyn Echikunwoke), Heather (Carrie MacLemore), and Lily (Analeigh Tipton) have many things in common; they all talk with a smug tone and they attend the liberal arts school Seven Oaks, which seems to exist in its own little world. To be frank, it seems that Damsels in Distress has erected a world all its own, where pop culture doesn't exist and neither do Televisions, automobiles, or anything along the lines of utilities that we've become accustomed to today.

I love films that exist in the screenwriter's head. One of the more recent examples is Wes Anderson's majestic and enthusiastic Moonrise Kingdom, a film that appeared to have its own mindset and, within in it, its own set of characters, laws, rules, and agenda that it wanted to accomplish. Damsels in Distress isn't quite as majestic and enthusiastic. It's rather monotone, uninteresting, and groggy for the most part. What a shame since this is director Whit Stillman's return to film after a thirteen year hiatus.

The storyline concerns those four girls as they go about their lives at this preppy Ivy League school. One of the first things they do, after recruiting Lily, is recreate the school's "suicide prevention center" where they will use aroma therapy, donuts, and coffee in order to reassure students about their place in the world. Why? In the meantime, the girls began to get entangled romantically with men, from the sophisticated Charles (Adam Brody) to the absolute hunk Xavier (also called, "Zavier," played by Hugo Becker). These relationships seem innocuous but prove to be possibly lethal to the girl's unbreakable bond together and this is what, sort of, gets the film on its feet.

Damsels in Distress seems like a satire lost at sea. It's satirizing, or attempting to, Ivy League life and the strange quirks it possesses. The problem is it never fully gets a grip and forms an agenda on what it wants to parody. We get shells of characters who feel robotic and cold, only capable of saying a funny line but incapable of brewing characterization. The satirical element isn't that witty and neither is much of the film. This is more down the line of surrealism than satire.

Stillman greatly reminds me of the quirk-expert I explored earlier this past summer and the man I just mentioned not too long ago; Wes Anderson. Stillman seems to be completely capable of setting up a beautiful long shot, focusing on characters, and intimately capturing life's wonderful eccentricities. But he struggles in the same field Anderson struggled in with his two features, Bottle Rocket and Rushmore, respectively; he focuses so much on look and subtle beauty that he successfully undermines the storyline and the characters within it. Damsels in Distress concludes with a random song-and-dance number almost cementing the fact that there was no conceivable way to completely end this sort of story. It's choppy and inconsistent. But it all looks pretty.

Starring: Greta Gerwig, Adam Brody, Analeigh Tipton, Megalyn Echikunwoke, Carrie MacLemore, Hugo Becker, and Ryan Metcalf. Directed by: Whit Stillman.

I walked out of this movie after ten minutes. There were endless scenes of vapid young people engaging in pseudo-intellectual discussions. This movie lacks the "narrative drive" of "Barcelona" or "The Last Days of Disco." Those movies meandered, this one didn't get out of park. Aren't people supposed to get better at their jobs as they gain more experience? How is this filmmaker becoming more of an amateur?

Most theater chains will refund your money if you leave early enough. Some give you fifteen minutes into the movie, some give you half an hour. IMDb says I have to make this review ten lines long, which is one line for every minute of this movie I could stand to watch. Made it.

Damsels in Distress might be described as a romantic comedy. It's greatest value lays, however, in blending parody with social commentary. Roughly speaking, the college campus in the movie is divided into two camps: rich-but-uneducated and poor-but-unkempt. Between them are the main protagonists with Good Samaritan attitude. And none of the above are fully likable.

I guess that the parody is rather straightforward. The social commentary, on the other hand, might be too intellectual for the average viewer. This was obviously a conscious effort but apparently led to alienating mainstream audience. The reason I'm pointing this out is because in it's essence Damsels in Distress is in no way inferior to, for example, Judd Apatow's Knocked Up or The 40 Years Old Virgin.

This seems to be Whim Stillman's most focused effort to date: Gone are endless Woody Allen-esque dialogues better suitable for Off-Broadway than the big screen. The movie references some of Stillman's previous work, the most obvious being Gretta Gerwig as a surrogate Chloë Sevigny. But this is where i quit deep-diving and continued enjoying the movie.

It's clear that some reviewers "got" this film and some didn't. As always, Stillman delivers with marvelous, laugh-out-loud funny dialogue. This is so rare that that that virtue alone sets it apart from the majority of the drivel that passes for conversation in movie scripts these days. You can't tell me that there aren't some one-liners in there that you hear and just *wish* you could have uttered yourself if only you'd had the wit (Whit?).

The characters are all flawed, some lovably so, some not--just like life. You're not meant to like all of them, and it's part of the subtle, social observation of which Stillman is capable that the unlikable characters are not always immediately unlikable. Some characters learn from their mistakes and misperceptions, some do not. Again, like life.

The thing that is so winsome about Stillman's movies is that virtue always triumphs. There is a sweetness to his choice that the good always eclipses the bad. It's almost heart-achingly sweet, because we know that that is not how things usually work out, and yet you find yourself rooting for these flawed, quirky, sometimes idiotic characters to get out of their own way and allow their better natures to win the day. I've wondered for a long time about the central role of dancing in his movies, and maybe it's that when you're dancing, it's hard to do much else, and you become one with music, rhythm, and your dance partner(s). Perhaps that's what he wants for his characters--to use dance as a vehicle to get out of their own way and lead a happier, less complicated, less tortured existence.

My favorite of his movies will always be "Metropolitan," but this is an excellent new addition to his oeuvre. We've been waiting for "the new one" for a while, and now that it's here I find it a sheer delight.