Le grand saut

This is a fun film - very lighthearted with beautiful sets, fast paced dialog and caricatures at every corner and turn.

It seems to pay homage to old Capra screwball comedies - and it's pretty much old fashioned farce right from the beginning.

The film is far from perfect. Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance is labored. She tries to squeeze every last snicker she can with her character. She misses the mark in my opinion, moving and talking with so much effort and pace - just to get a laugh - that in the end, she gets none.

Paul Newman goes the other way - he understates his character and when contrasted to the lunacy of both the environment and the story around him - it makes for some great scenes. He makes a great villain in this movie - and for me, he's a large reason why the movie works.

Tim Robbins does a good job, especially at the start of the film. His best moments come when the story and the environment overwhelm his character.

There's great moments, like the ridiculous Muncie fight song, the Monty Python-esque mail room, Charles Durning with wings and the grim, faceless board members - with their inane questions and so frightened to lose their authority that they agree to virtually anything.

This film isn't genius or anything, but if you enjoyed the antics of something like 'Arsenic and Old Lace' then this is worth catching. It's delightfully silly - and has some interesting visuals and symbolism along the way.

This film is frequently mentioned in college film classes for its interesting use of a door or window framing nearly every scene in the movie. I adore the art deco detail that encases the film from the doors, to the cars, to the clock machinery, it's a real beauty visually. There is something giddy and whimsical about watching it. I think critics of films are often scratching for a profound meaning when none is intended.

There is a particularly wonderful scene where an adorable little boy picks up the hoola-hoop for the first time and begins swinging it around his waist. I think I replayed the scene several times just for the expression of the boy's face.

Its theme song, Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia, was composed by Khachaturian. The theme song has a majestic, soaring orchestration that stays in your head for hours.

This is one good looking movie and has many Coen recognisable signature quirks to make it worthy of a comparison to their earlier and later works. I will come back on those quirks later.

I love the way the Coens always combine high-brow subtlety with low-brow slapstick which makes it so accessible. This movie is not heavy on subtlety but there are some genius moments in it to make it watchable again and again. Newman for one is great in this movie and having the best of times. He makes minimal acting an artform. Really, he could act anyone of that screen with his eyes closed. Jennifer Jason Leigh is a contrast with her hand waving,her Katherine Hepburn- affected-ballsy way of speaking and general overacting but I guess she sets the scene quite brilliantly to complement the decor and general 30's feel of the movie. You see, apparently the Coens have a penchant for the 30's movies style(and so they should.. Many a great movie was made in that decade) but the story in which an imbecile's dingus, against all odds became a total Fad and all the rage, doesn't quite fit that decade. I can't think of any Dingus which became all the rage in the thirties (life was too hard for thingamabobs then, I suppose) and the earliest example, the hoolahoop, was definately a brainchild of the 50's (Life was good and spendable income to buy doodahs was more readily available ). I don't mind that at all but I was confused to find out that it was set in the 50's because of all the visual and audible references to the 30's. If Mussburgers office wasn't an art-deco Love-fest (that clock!)I don't know what is.

I guess this review is definitely style over content but you know what? That just doesn't matter because plot is secondary to the visuals, and dialogue in this movie. And that is just alright by me. It is the reason why these movies are so good for repeat viewings. Once you know a plot, you are not likely to watch it again just for the plot's sake. It is the sights, the sounds the dialogue that makes you want to watch a movie again and again. Oh you don't believe me? Name your favourite movie (not the one you tell your friends is your favourite but the one you watch again and again). What makes you want to watch it repeatedly? Is it because you want to know what happens for the 100th time? Ofcourse not! You want to watch it for the 100th time because of the dialogue, the fun, the special effects the object of your desire etc. etc...

Now I am not saying that plot is not important but I am saying that what makes Coen Brother's movies so good is that they think about their viewer/audience who wants to watch their movies until they can repeat every line in the movie(and becoming sad anoraks in the process). I actually know people who watched the Big Lebowski half way and walked out of the cinema only to find them Lebowski addicts after one more viewing. I am not naming names but you know who you are...

I liked this movie the first time round... I know I will love it later...

Now for the Coen parallels between this movie and the Big Lebowski:

Jennifer's way of speaking was similar to Julianne's Maud. They were both "feisty" Brunettes who fall for the main character(I wouldn't call 'em heroes)

The voice over to remind us that it is a fairytale at the beginning and end by guardian-angel-types. (Sam Elliot in Big and Bill Cobbs in the Hudsucker) Bizarre Dance Dream Sequences that have nothing to do with the plot but are hugely enjoyable. Blond Bombshell (Anna-Nicole Smith in Hudsucker and Tara Reid in the Big Lebowski)Who want to seduce the hero. Steve Buscemi. Memorable Lines...

So all in all I guess I recommend it!

****

The first time I saw this film, I enjoyed it. No doubt about it.

I wondered why some people didn't like it. What's not to like?

I saw it again, and paid more attention to some of the finer details, realizing what a rich, full textured film it was.

And yet again I saw it. Still more revelations.

In fact, every time I see it, and I'm sure to see it again, I enjoy it more and more with each subsequent viewing.

This film's narrative is nearly as perfect as the Hula Hoop itself, despite the albeit fictional account of the invention of said "dingus".

But it strikes me as odd and unfortunate when I encounter someone who's seen this and not enjoyed it.

All I can say is, have you tried it more than once? It isn't exactly what I'd call an acquired taste, but when you see how rich in detail and humour it is, you may begin to appreciate it for what it truly is; a great film that deserves a second chance. K.

I don`t think that I`ve enjoyed a movie so much for years. The film is beautifully shot ( the opening pan over a snow laden New York skyline is breathtaking). The acting is uniformly excellent (Jennifer Jason Lee gives one of the best female comedy performances of the last decade. She`s outstanding!) and the film is directed in that warm but sharp-eyed manner of previous US social comedy directors such as Frank Capra and Preston Sturgess. I first saw the film in the cinema. I`ve since seen it again on television, and the photography doesn`t impress so much on the small screen.

If you haven`t already seen it, try to see it on a big screen. Sadly the movie got a very small release in the UK and is almost unknown over here.I am so very glad I caught it. It`s terrific.