Seus Amigos, Seus Vizinhos

"Your Friends and Neighbors" (1998) is the second film by director/writer Neil LaBute and it tells the story of three couples and their complicated friendships and relationships. I've seen it more than once during the last couple of days - and I found it incredibly clever written, well acted (especially by Jason Patric and Catherine Keener - their only scene together was the second best in the movie - so dynamic and tight) and skillfully directed. LaBute certainly has a very unique sense of humor and he knows well the history of cinema. To give all characters the names that rhyme - Mary, Barry, Terri, Cheri, Cary and Jerry - was a clever idea - the characters are interchangeable in their relationships and it does not matter really, who is with whom - Mary with Barry or with Cary or Jerry or Barry with Barry, and Cheri with Terri or Jerry? The important thing is that they are selfish and often unpleasant and despicable people who are not happy with themselves and can't make happy their spouses or partners. Another interesting trick - the repeating scene in the Art gallery that starts with exactly the same words for each character but leads to different developments. I mentioned that LaBute knows his movies. Have you noticed the poster from Goddard's Le Mépris, (1963) aka "Contempt" with Brigitte Bardot? "Contempt" features one of the most fascinating and longest scenes of a breakup ever filmed. The breakup scene between Terri (Catherine Keener) and Jerry (Ben Stiller) started like in "Contempt" but it only lasted a few minutes and it was a good scene. Actually, I loved all scenes with Catherine Keener and if I have to choose one character that I liked, it would be Terry. Seems that Charlie Kaufman might have seen LaBute's movie because Terry and Maxine from "Being John Malkovich" have a lot in common. I was actually waiting for Terry to say to Jerry, "The thing is if you ever get me, you would not know what to do with me".

Jason Patric was a revelation - I don't know him very well but I remember that he gave a very good performance in "Narc". As for the scene in a steam room, it is not just the best of the film; it is one of the best scenes - monologues ever. I know not many would agree with me but the scene is as powerful, unforgettable and strangely erotic as the monologue in Bergman's "Persona". LaBute's writing, his camera, and mesmerizing performance by Patric made this scene an instant classic.

The film is not perfect and sometimes it drags but overall I found it interesting and enjoyable. You don't have to like the characters in order to like and appreciate the film. Sadly, the beautiful, sensual and talented Nastassja Kinski (Cherri) does not have much to play while Ben Stiller does and I am not his fan - even in this film.

LaBute's usage of "Metallica"s "Enter Sandman" (performed by Apocalyptica) during the opening and the closing credits instantly pulled me in and Bryony Atkinson's song "My Hollow" is terrific.

Jerry lives with Terri but Terri is irritated by everything he does especially the way he talks during sex and needs to analyse everything. They are friends with Barry and Mary who have sexual problems as Mary is rarely roused for sex. Jerry makes a move to meet up with Mary to have sex behind Barry's back. Meanwhile Cheri works at an art gallery and picks up people there and Jerry and Barry's friend Cary lives his sex life devoid of any care or consideration for anyone else.

I have previously seen In the Company Of Men so I was prepared for the sort of view point the director seems to take regarding the nature of men and women but even then, this is still a pretty depressing look at relationships. Our characters are barely even given names, certainly no last names, and they are rarely used when you listen. More than that the names are pretty typical – the sort of names you might make up if you were put on the spot, like John Smith. The point being that these characters are not supposed to be fictional but more `everyman' characters. However is this what everyone is like? – does everyone have major relationship issues and try to have affairs with their best friends etc? Do people really have stories of male rape as their best sexual experience? I doubt it – this is a real condensing of the whole human experience into a handful of characters.

It works quite well because it is very frank and this kept my interest. Not shocking but I did want to keep watching because the dialogue was good. Sadly I could have cared less about the actual lives before me. As a plot I didn't get involved partly because it was so fake feeling – it was obvious from day 1 that LaBute was not going to give us the luxury of even one mildly messed up relationship, no – it was obvious that everything that could fail would. The dialogue does save the film as it is well written and darkly funny, however it just wasn't enough of a story – instead it was rather smugly self aware.

The cast do well with the dialogue and the film is staged more like a play than a roaming film, with mostly static interior shots used. Stiller is good but doesn't excel himself. Eckhart shows how good an actor he is by playing a character so the opposite of his character in LaBute's previous film and playing it well. Patric steals the show but his character is the least developed. He is the funny one and is like Eckhart's character in `In the Company Of Men' in that he is selfish and cruel to women. However his character seems to be LaBute's ideal in this piece as he is the only one who seems to get what he wants – is this the moral of the film? The female characters are weaker as you'd expect. Brenneman cuts a pathetic character and simply mops around a lot. Kinski is given little to do although Keener has a stronger part to play.

Overall I enjoyed this because it was full of good dialogue that keeps you listening because of how very frank it is. However that doesn't mean that the story or film is involving and it does feel a little distant and not based in any life I've ever lived. A bit too cruel, harsh and dark but it just about gets by on those credentials – but the music of Metallica played on violin is worth watching the credits for!

"Your Friends and Neighbors" is one of those movies which sports a good cast, is well produced, and has few flaws with one HUGE exception. It sucks. Supposed to be a provocative misanthropic study of the politics of sex among three guys and three gals, the characters are obvious fabrications who are doing the director's bidding, behaving in silly and unnatural ways so as to make the flick work...more or less. Some young adults may find a modicum of entertainment in this film. However, those who have been there, done that, will likely find the flick a fraudulent dissertation and much ado about nothing.

As I watched this film, I noticed the distinct acidity in

my mouth, which I'm sure the director of "Your Friends and Neighbors" was looking for. However, I found myself feeling irritated by the "clever" devices used in the film. For example, using the "artist's assistant" scene over and over to tell us a little about each person's character, is a trite and "cute" trick, employed many times before in films- and better. Worse yet, the scenes didn't show me anything "new" about the characters that I > didn't already know. Worse yet, the Jason Patric character, while well- acted, was a far too obvious one.

I already knew what his problem was long before the "pseudo-confessional" sauna scene. I mean, what a surprise. In fact, I was stunned to hear LINES I'd heard and read years ago, in this scene. This was obviously the big set-piece, the Oscar-baiting scene every actor dreams about, but I was waiting to hear him say something original. If this was supposed to be "insightful", then give me a break. The characters I didn't understand, were Amy Brenneman and her big, lunky husband. Since (gasp) "Insight 101" was the prevailing theme of this film, what was the deal with this pair? Eternal boredom, or not enough work-outs at the gym? Were the "pregnant pauses' at the dinner table supposed to remind me of a Bergman film? These silences held only dead air- not meaning. It didn't take long before I didn't care. While I'm sure that the director/writer wanted us to know that these outwardly sharp and clever people were dysfunctional in their relationships (surprise)- I wanted something new.

And might I mention- "La Ronde" has already been made, and so very much better.

I gave this movie about 45 minutes and then left. I cannot believe Roger Ebert actually gave this movie 4 stars! It took forever to get going and was painstakingly slow. A more dramatic flair for a very promising plot. Anybody who liked this movie must be comatose!