Listen Up Philip

A comedy about a young writer who, upon the publication of his second novel, increasingly alienates himself from his girlfriend and other friends through his arrogant behaviour. He turns for 'intellectual' and 'authorial' support to an ageing author he respects who is as obnoxious as he is.

The humour is meant to come from mocking these unappealing characters but the film itself isn't particularly appealing either. As a satire on the possible pretensions of the publishing world it suffers from lack of originality, an excess of cynicism and contrived delivery.

The overblown irony of the voice-over further ensures this comedy isn't that funny despite a few amusing lines. What presumably intends to be a comedy about annoying people end up being annoying itself.

The story of the struggling writer is not unknown to Jason Schwartzman. He lead the brilliant but oh-so-short HBO show Bored To Death, about a writer who has to turn to detective work for inspiration and cash on the side. It was fresh, because that was just a framing device for something more fun. Listen Up Philip uses struggling to write as the backdrop to cynical drama and sour "I told you so's." If the walls could talk, they would gossip about the fights that have taken place over the years. It opens with a sequence in which Schwartzman's Philip celebrates finishing his second book by rubbing it in the noses of those who didn't believe in him. That's where he gets his satisfaction.

That's the bitter world of Listen Up Philip. Every character is selfish, and miserable for it. The result is a film that's difficult to sympathize with the characters, especially Schwartzman, but it doesn't necessarily ask us to. They may be self-pitying victims of their own hostility, but they eventually do come to self-realizing conclusions, if too late. The film suggests that to make great art (in the form of novels) it requires isolation, cut off from the city and the ones you love, alienating them – as if this is the only way. The jerky behaviour aside, not just general standoffishness but frequent overlapping of relationships, it begs the obvious question of "is it worth it?" Well, no, it's not. Perhaps there are many creatives in the world that need this lesson, either way writer/director Alex Ross Perry is keen to explore it and take us with it.

With a less familiar cast, this would definitely be labeled a mumblecore film. It borrows a French New Wave aesthetic (complete with a jazzy score) featuring rugged and dark hand-held 16mm photography. It can be a little sloppy with a lack of restraint, having some sequences comprised entirely out of dizzying close-ups. It does however add important weight to the drama and fortunately grow more confident by the second half of the film. This style is inherently intimate, if not necessarily engaging, and we feel like voyeurs. In turn, the humour of the film just doesn't work. It didn't elicit a laugh from me, only a smirk. It's not necessarily cringe-worthy, it's just the offbeat nature of it doesn't land in this environment, despite its 'Laugh' categorization at this festival.

It's the ensemble that gives the drama the atmosphere the film needs. The script is otherwise serviceable, with a couple of idiosyncratic if indulgent licks scattered throughout. Instead it's more interested on being on the verge of tears. Elizabeth Moss is the undeniable highlight. She's always been fascinating to watch on AMC's Mad Men, and here she shows the ferocity and vulnerability that makes Peggy compelling. Her character may feel extraneous, but her presence is most welcome. Also great, but on a lesser scale, is Jonathan Pryce, who teeters fine lines with skill and makes a character that could've otherwise been trite (aka the cautionary vision of the future for Philip) believable and endearing. However, the film often seems too aimless with no end game in sight. It feels more organic, but it's missed potential.

In the second half, the narrative bounces through the three characters, a little clumsily, but it's better for exploring the characters with a bit more depth than it could have missed with a straightforward approach. The style is a little free form, which can feel quite liberating, but mostly hints at a lack of discipline in Perry. Even with the film's rawness, it does feature touches of Wes Anderson with a Tenenbaums-esque articulate and omniscient narration – one that only barely justifies itself – as well as insert shots of books inscribed with in- jokes. Maybe the involvement of Schwartzman just attracts that unique style, although here it's rarely connected to him. The cast saves Listen Up Philip from being a complete chore but it still suffers from unsympathetic characters and tired clichés. Save the struggling writer scripts for the exercise pile, please.

6/10

Read more @ The Awards Circuit (http://www.awardscircuit.com/)

Listen Up Philip is a messy character-driven piece in which, oddly enough, the narration is the best part of the film. This is not a film for everyone. The two male leads are pretentious fools that, despite all of their knowledge, lack any true wisdom and consistently make terrible choices. By the end, it's difficult to even feel any pity for them. The female characters, on the other hand, are the saving grace of the story and the actresses are terrific in their roles.

It's far from a typical storyline. Even with the narration, it's hard to say what the plot is, if there is one at all. The film has us enter and exit these characters lives at their most sad, desperate and difficult. Some will find it to be an insightful dark comedy while others will find it to be a pointless, drab drama that is frustrating to watch. The most bothersome aspect is the unsteady hand-held camera work, which comes and goes needlessly.

Listen Up Philip is like only reading the middle chapters of a novel. Fans of Noah Baumbach, Wes Anderson and Woody Allen's films may find a lot to enjoy here but if you're not a fan of character studies, this won't be for you.

I will leave serious examination to others but Elisabeth Moss gives a solo 10 second masterclass in reaction and emotion half way through the movie which makes the film worthwhile. It would be very interesting to know more about the making of the scene, though I guess years of practice plus an abundance of talent plays a part.

Apparently I need to write 10 lines to qualify as a review - The movie is a longer version of the trailer - This is often enough information for most people in a review.

I wonder if the writer / director deliberately cast Moss along side 2 ex-models as the three leading female characters, but more to fill space in the review than anything.

A bizarre movie. A young writer's (Philip) second book is about to be published. He is abrupt, ill mannered, impolite, unpredictable from beginning to end. At the beginning of the movie he rebukes his ex girl friend just because she came late to their appointment, saying he was planning to give this copy to her, but now he is not giving it, and he is living. Later he stops planned promotion of his upcoming book like out of blue sky. Then he leaves his girl friend to get mentoring from an old, famous writer. The guy is just super ego centric, behaving jerky, irritating the viewer from beginning to end. And Jason Schwartzman just fits to this role so naturally.

But funny thing is that this character has its charm also; particularly to women. He gets attraction at first, goes into relation. and then he destroys his credits in the relation without caring.

Can one live like that? Why would/should one like to live like that? What does he want? does he hate to be politicly correct? or just does not want to be a hypocrite? These are the questions stroked my mind after the movie.

One other striking thing in the movie was the superb performance of women characters. From Philip's girl friend Ashley (Elisabeth Moss) to Emily (Dree Hemingway - I would love to see Dree Hemingway in main roles. There is something so teasing with her). They were hyper modern day's real, casual, lovely women.