I_Ailurophile

The thing about the Age of the Internet is that when it comes to movies, anyone can make anything and have it seen by everyone. The phrase customarily used for such a scenario is "a double-edged" sword, but I'm not sure it applies to this medium; for every one small indie title that is brilliant, there seem to be many more that are pure rubbish. Heavily emphasizing the point in the worst of ways is filmmaker Neil Breen. 'Twisted pair' is the first of his works I have watched. It will also be the last. The fact that someone responsible for something so abysmal could go on to make more films - and has apparently learned nothing whatsoever after somehow making movies for more than ten years previously - speaks very poorly to our modern age. I despair more for the future of the world now, after watching, than I did before I first sat down.

If there are any redeeming qualities here, a point which is at best flimsy and debatable, it might be the music. It's bland and very repetitive, but as composer Breen at least demonstrates some marginal skill for theme that carry a sliver of atmosphere. While it has nothing to do with Breen himself, one might also say that he picked out some nice filming locations to employ - though at the same time, I refer to a handful of environments that are in turn never used well. (More on that in a moment.) And for whatever it's worth, there's also something to be said for the fact that Breen had enough wits about him to hire a cast that down to nearly every last person is almost exactly as bad at acting as he is. If we're being generous we might say that Sara Meritt has a few moments in which she shows potential as an actor despite everything else around her, but otherwise, I suppose Breen should be thankful that no one who is notably more skilled is on hand to show him up.

Beyond these elements, however, there is no value whatsoever in this picture. Breen's story is so astonishingly, poorly written as to be nonsensical, and all but fully incomprehensible. Incredibly, the scene writing and dialogue might be even worse; forget the notion of "characterizations" altogether. Breen's direction is weak, halfhearted, and stilted, with no sense of flow, pacing, tone, or dynamics, let alone energy or emotion. The same absolutely goes for the editing, even as Breen supposedly had someone to help him in that task; the sequencing is a mess, and even fundamental cuts demonstrate a dire lack of capability. The cinematography, like the sound design, is pointlessly flat and sterile. And what could one say of the computer-generated imagery that periodically greets us (including achingly obvious use of green screen) except that if it were any worse, it would recall James Nguyen's "efforts" for 'Birdemic?' All these facets are downright excruciating as the minutes tick by (how in the world is this a full ninety minutes long?) - and with all this in mind, it's safe to say that Breen wasn't capable of using his chosen filming locations in any meaningful or sometimes even logical manner, and his music amounts to nothing. Even if Breen or his co-stars weren't terribly wooden and unconvincing as actors, any such skills would be nullified in the face of everything else this production represents.

And, by the way, on top of that repetitive music, for the record, we can also factor in repetitive CGI effects, repetitive sound effects, repetitive shots, repetitive scenes, repetitive dialogue, and repetitive filming locations. All this, while Breen fails to cobble together a cohesive plot, or achieve any impact at all with his direction, or assemble the constituent parts in a remotely intelligent manner. Usually with a feature so horrible we can at least say that the filmmaker successfully added 1 and 1 to make 2; in this case, I don't think can give Breen even that much. I actually feel a need to apologize to Nguyen for any slight comparison, because for as flummoxing as 'Birdemic' is, it's a vastly superior work.

It was out of curiosity that I sat to watch this. I can't fathom any other possible reason for watching, and even that curiosity seems like a grave error in retrospect. I have seen no shortage of appalling films in my time, and nevertheless 'Twisted pair' might still be the worst of them all. Breen might well be the worst filmmaker I've ever been exposed to. I don't know how else to say it; my strong, urgent recommendation is to completely avoid this muck, and even learning Breen's name in the first place is probably a step too far.

I'm a very cynical person by nature. You tell me that Steven Spielberg is making a movie about his life, the very name of which is self-referential, and I wonder how much earnest reflection and storytelling we'll get, and how much self-absorbed navel-gazing. I readily admit that cynicism also left me predisposed to sour first impressions, as seen even early on with what I felt to be overly cutesy playfulness, instances of atypical forced acting from respected actor Michelle Williams, and a seeming mind (and eye, and ear) for short bursts of reminiscence, with varying degrees of sincerity, more than true thoughtfulness. I had some doubts in the first place, and these were not fully allayed as the minutes started ticking by. Even some choices of lighting and cinematography portend a strange sense of heightened artificiality, let alone select choices of writing or direction, including pacing even within individual scenes.

Be that as it may, however, there is a reason this picture was so highly lauded upon release, and nominated for many awards, and I recognize this, too. For my part I don't necessarily believe 'The Fabelmans' is actually fully deserving of all that high regard - but where this operates at its best, it absolutely thrives. Once Spielberg's self-insert protagonist Sammy, reliving many of the filmmaker's own life experiences, enters his teen years and begins taking the art of cinema very seriously (around thirty minutes in, for those keeping track), the movie gradually finds more strength in uneven fragments, strength which gradually begins to eclipse the weaker facets of the whole. At its best, we see the ingenuity of Spielberg when he was growing into a burgeoning filmmaker (reflected in Sammy), and when he tells the story of a sometimes difficult family life, and when these two parts of him are at odds. At its best, 'The Fabelmans' is in fact brilliant, and through it one learns to appreciate Spielberg all the more.

Case in point, the man has accordingly remarked that part of his driving inspiration for the screenplay was the question "when does a young person in a family start to see his parents as human beings?" We discover Spielberg's answer beginning at the one-hour mark in a sequence that exemplifies all that this feature does so well, and from then on the tenor notably changes. Further accentuating the point, not long after this is a point where all the dishonesty is palpably dropped from Williams' performance, and the effect is so jarring that there's no question in my mind she earned those nominations for Best Actress. For all the unevenness one might subjectively scrutinize, the acting is roundly outstanding - further including stellar work from Paul Dano, Seth Rogen (yes, Seth Rogen), young Gabriel LaBelle and Julia Butters, Judd Hirsch, the late and dearly missed David Lynch (in a role that would fit right in with 'Twin Peaks'), and frankly all others on hand, no matter the size of their part. Moreover, as the length draws on, those elements that first made such a sour first impression all carry more real import on their own merit as the entirety crystallizes more and more. Long before all is said and done, the faults we may discern are handily outshone by the excellence.

Granted, this is not to say that there are no flaws here, and there are still times even through to the end when the sense of style about the film seems to supersede its substance. In other instances the substance Spielberg wants to drive at doesn't quite land, and I'm also not sure that this needed to be as long as it is. But the very personal and somewhat introspective nature of the material ultimately shines through, helping Spielberg as both director and co-writer with Tony Kushner, and all others involved, to latch onto, convey, and amplify the significance of what the flick has to say and do. Nitpick as we may, far more than not everything about 'The Fabelmans' is fantastic: the writing and direction, the acting, John Williams' score, the cinematography, those stunts and effects that are employed, the production design, the costume design, hair, and makeup, and the editing. For all the doubts I had any any time before or during my watch, I'm so very pleased with how good the result is. And if a movie can overcome my cynicism, that speaks very well to it.

I don't think this is necessarily something one needs to go out of their way to see, but whether one has a particular impetus to watch or is just looking for something worthwhile, at length it's well worth checking out.

Its reputation certainly precedes it, yet I don't think I was prepared for what 'Dog day afternoon' turned out to be. Between Victor J. Kemper's cinematography and even more so Sidney Lumet's direction, there is more raw energy in this crime drama than most action flicks can claim. This is reflected in how most any given moment is orchestrated or shot, and most of all in the performances of the cast, namely John Cazale and especially icon Al Pacino. Pacino's portrayal of ill-prepared bank robber Sonny Wortzik exists somewhere on a spectrum between the cold calm of Michael Corleone and the unhinged haggardness of select roles the man has played later in his career, and the result is a real pleasure as a viewer on top of everything else. This is to say nothing of how the film throws us directly into the course of events with no (unneeded) exposition, or the wry sense of humor that pervades much of the first half as these would-be crooks falter at every step - all while unexpectedly currying favor with the public, and learning for themselves how astonishingly reckless and untrustworthy cops are in every possible scenario.

In both its more raucous or violent moments and even where the proceedings are outwardly more quiet, as they subtly and fluidly turn in the latter half, this boasts a simmering intensity that's marvelously absorbing - made only more so by the smart declination of a score over top, allowing events to speak entirely for themselves. Lumet and his cast are more than dexterous enough to bring the drama to bear wherever the story takes them, a further great credit to supporting co-stars like Charles Durning, or Chris Sarandon, who in only a couple of key scenes threatens to steal the show. And this feature would be nothing without screenwriter Frank Pierson, who so ably weaves a very human story, with stark scene writing and underhandedly complex characters, and without getting bogged down in the bigger ideas that the saga could very easily have accentuated still more. Case in point, the tale of these real-life events is also one tied to the gay community, and the trans community. Despite the living history of how horribly LGBTQ people have been treated in this country and by cinema, however, this refuses to fall into the same trap, and likewise declines to speak to these demographic considerations any more than it needs to. Pierson, Lumet, and all others involved are zeroed in purely on the broader strength of the storytelling, and through that lens all the component parts are given all the power they need.

With top-notch production design, sound design, and stunts and effects rounding things out - and before all is said and done, splendidly sharp editing - this picture becomes altogether entrancing at no time at all. Even the dialogue is notably keen. For all the difficulty I commonly have in maintaining brevity when speaking of movies, sometimes it's the mark of an indelible classic that it draws me in so much that I find myself at a relative loss for words. Despite some reservations, I couldn't be happier that 'Dog day afternoon' more than proves itself to be one of those classics. It holds up stupendously, and all told I'm somewhat aghast that it didn't benefit from still more praise and recognition upon release. So far as I'm concerned this is a gem that all but demands viewership, and I'm glad to give it my high and hearty recommendation!