The Good Night

Saw the world premiere showing of the Good Night at the Sundance Film Festival last week and have come to report back on my findings. Was really looking forward to this one, story sounded interesting in an Eternal Sunshine kinda way, and the cast is top notch. The Good Night stars Martin Freeman as former brit pop star Gary, who hasn't exactly been doing a whole lot since his famed band went on the skids. Gary lives a less then fulfilling life with his long time girlfriend Dora, played by the excellent Gywenth Paltrow, and keeps company with successful ex bandmate Paul, played by the hilarious Simon Pegg. Gary spends his days doing meaningless commercial gigs in which his creative talents are kept in check in order to create more familiar music that sounds like the theme from "Cheers". Understandably Gary needs an outlet from his less then stellar career and from his almost non-existent relationship with Dora. One night Garys finds that outlet in his dreams, more specifically in the perfect female form played by Penelope Cruz. Desperate to escape reality Gary finds himself wanting more to live in his sleeping life then in his real life and he finds an unusual guide in Mel, played by Danny Devito. Mel mentors Gary on this lucid dreaming and soon Gary finds himself mastering his dreams, but in reality his good nights are turning into bad days.

Sounds interesting but does it work, well not so much. Much like a dream the story is scatter shot and incomplete. We only get a glimpse into the characters lives and as the story goes along we still don't have a lot of info here. Does Gary want to be a pop star again, is he jealous of the success of his friend, does he really care about his girlfriend - did he ever and whats so special about his dream girl? Gary is as lost in life as he is on the audience, he feels distant as do most of the characters here, aside from the amusing Paul. In the end this movie just doesn't quite work out, maybe it wasn't supposed just like a dream. All that being said its a nice first movie by Jake Paltrow, he's got a good vision and his effort here is obviously promising but frankly the story was beneath his directing talents. As for the actors, Martin Freeman, Gywenth, Devito - all very good work but again the story just is so-so and the acting can't save that. The Good Night, just a decent night at the movies

There's something about dreams that requires relaxation and patience. They have a certain fluidity about them that if they're hurried or rushed they just aren't as effective. As is fitting for a film about dreams, "The Good Night" works because of good acting and gentle pacing. The result is one of those good old fashioned dark comedies that walks the line between drama and dark humor.

Martin Freeman is one of these actors that takes grips on the "average guy" role and has as much fun as he can with it. As Gary, the band member turned commercial music composer, he is effective in demonstrating his lack of joy in his current relationship with Dora (Gwyneth Paltrow) and sinking into obsessive dreams about the make believe Anna (Penelope Cruz). Freeman is always a good lead because no matter what he does, he's likable and we're always rooting him on, even as Dora calls him a jerk and she's probably right at one point.

But a lot of the humor in the film comes from the supporting players. Simon Pegg is always a no brainer for comedy because of his spot on delivery. As Gary's friend and boss, Paul, he jumps into the role of the somewhat amoral friend with his own relationship problems. However, he does still listen to Gary and even takes joy in some of his obsessiveness.

Then there's Danny Devito, playing the typical Danny Devito character as he hosts a dream support group but works odd jobs and hasn't had a relationship of his own for over 40 years. Despite all this, he still hears Gary out and Gary takes a lot of his advice. Devito has a lot of good one liners and a very funny introduction scene.

As to the movie as a whole, it's good but not great. Definitely worth a look. Part of me saw this as a dark comedy going through the motions and becoming very predictable as we got closer to the end. The premise was very fresh though and director Jake Paltrow really seizes the opportunity of capturing the dreamlike quality of some of the scenes. The performances and well paced direction really glue the movie together though, and at 90 minutes, it's not a bad movie to give a watch.

Making a movie about dreams or dreaming is tough, and it shows in this one. The difficulty with dreams in any bit of fiction is that they can't be held accountable; that is, by definition, there isn't any kind of direct correspondence between dream occurrences and narrative significance. A dream (singular) here and there can enrich a narrative with symbolism, causality, subconscious, but when the dream becomes plural then almost universally a story starts to break down. Having gritted my teeth through movies like Waking Life and The Cell, to name a few, I've come to associate "dream" with "lazy" in cinema.

That being said, I had to see what Simon Pegg and Martin Freeman would do in a movie together. And the bottom line is, due to these two guys, the movie is worth a watch. Don't may more than $4 to see it.

What you get really is a movie without consequences. You have Martin Freeman obsessed with a dream character. OK, kind of interesting, but there's not enough dimension to his girlfriend (Paltrow), who just seems like a nag, or his friend/former bandmate (Pegg), who, granted, is extremely funny but ultimately without Pathos, to really make his dream obsession a truly engrossing psychological/sociological study.

And again, what happens here is that the dream sequences, and even the obsession with them, because of the, by definition, incommensurable quality of dreams, their inability to be authentically expressed through proxy (language, film, journals, etc.), leave us as audience members bereft of any feeling of causality, arc, or direction.

Also, as a sidenote, the pseudo-documentary format that the film opens with and halfheartedly maintains is confusing and ultimately misdirecting. It ends up looking like the mistake of a novice director.

Martin Freeman performs his lines well, Pegg is funny, DeVito is a pleasing eccentric, and Paltrow isn't as annoying as she usually is (however Cruz is somewhat intolerable), so the movie is worth seeing once, if you've got nothing better to do.

I'm still not completely sure what this movie was exactly about. The initial layer suggests a story about an insecure bloke who tries to escape his run aground life through lucid dreaming. Real life and the dream world coincide as he finds out that the woman he is pushing away from his life is actually the one he wants to stay with. People trying to dig beyond this layer have some difficulty. Not because this movie is especially deep but simply because there's not much beyond it period.

Do movies have to be deep or insightful? Of course they don't. But this one to me suggested it may become that. And when it didn't, it left me feel a bit dissatisfied.

With an interesting story nonetheless, solid acting throughout, some great jokes and appealing visuals this movie rises well above the average Hollywood production. What it simply lacks are some really poignant scenes and build up towards the end. But just like the main character Gary who never rises above himself, the movie doesn't either. But maybe that was the whole point.

That said, there's absolutely no harm in bringing this one home for a view.

7/10

In many ways, "The Good Night" is like the Thurber story "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty". It's also about a dull man who retreats into a fantasy world instead of living out his fantasies for real. But unlike "Mitty", "The Good Night" is incredibly dull and lifeless....and makes for difficult viewing.

Gary (Martin Freeman) is a man whose best years, it seems, are behind him. In his youth, he'd been in a rock band. Now, he's writing music for TV commercials and his marriage is hollow and unfulfilling. So, he begins to retreat into a fantasy world in his dreams where a perfect woman (Penelope Cruz) loves him unconditionally and wants him physically. What's to become of his marriage and what will happen if he actually in real life meets a woman who seems to be the fantasy lady?

It's odd that the film is about a guy who writes music and yet there is so little incidental music in the film. Too often it's quiet and flat...which, I understand , it a metaphor for Gary's inner life. But it makes for tough viewing and the film really could have used an infusion of energy.

By the way, although I am a trained therapist, I've never put a ton of stock in dream interpretation...particularly Freudian dream interpretation. But clearly this film IS incredibly Freudian and Gary tends to use his fantasies as wish fulfillment....and Analytic psychotherapists would no doubt adore the movie since it's based so much on Freudian concepts.

Overall, it's not a bad film but it's also one which COULD have been so much better. A story about mid-life crises and disaffection is potentially very watchable and insightful...but this one just didn't hit that mark. The issues it touches on are great and I liked the ending...but why did the journey there need to be so lifeless?