Illuminata

"Write what you know about" has long been the dictum for writers ranging all the way from accomplished published authors to struggling composition class students; is there a playwright then who can resist the temptation to compose a play about composing a play? It has, of course, been done countless times in the past ("Shakespeare in Love" being but the most recent popular example), but, alas, rarely as dully as in "Illuminata," Brandon Cole's tale of a turn-of-the-century repertory company struggling, amid personal conflicts, theatrical roadblocks and even death, to produce an original work (itself entitled "Illuminata"). Cole, along with co-writer and director, John Turturro, centers his story on the playwright, Tuccio, (also played by Turturro), as he copes with temperamental actors, theatre owners and critics, all of whom conspire, intentionally or unintentionally, to sabotage his work.

Like so many films that attempt to deal seriously with the creative process, "Illuminata" seems naively to suggest that inspiration can only be achieved after the creator has undergone a series of concomitant life experiences that somehow illuminate the truths hitherto obscured in darkness. Thus, since, in this case, the play-within-the-play deals with the issue of marital infidelity, it is only after the entire cast and crew of the production have participated in a night long sexual roundelay (which consists essentially of switching partners in a style too cute for words) that the play (which failed in its first performance the night before) can come to complete artistic fruition. This cloying and cliched view of theatre as merely a reflection of life (or vice versa) might have been acceptable had the script provided any truly interesting characters, profound insights or satiric wit to carry us through. As it is, though, the characters are both unappealing and woefully underdeveloped, the insights consist of mere self-indulgent paeans to the glory of artistic creation and the humor rests mainly in a series of surprisingly crude illustrations of sexual activity. Furthermore, Turturro is such a dull, uninspiring lead, with his constant sadsack expression and look of pained bewilderment, that he conveys no sense of the dynamism essential to a person capable of producing a work of genius. This leaves the rest of the cast, some of whom are very good, pretty much adrift as they thrash about looking for something solid in the way of character development to hold onto.

Actually, the highlight of this film comes during the opening credit sequence, a beautifully done marionette performance that is almost heartbreaking in its otherworldly beauty and delicacy. It is a measure of the failure of the rest of the film that the audience wishes IT were performed by marionettes as well.

This is one of the few movies I have had to escape by walking out. Others in the movie house did the same before me. This movie was boring, lacked coherence, relied on cheap jokes and gratuitous topless scenes and tasteless sexual innuendo. The whole thing just fell apart. I don't know how Susan Sarandon was talked into appearing in this.

I'm also tired of endless self-centered movies being made about actors doing acting or making plays or movies. The direction might as well have been phoned in. Most of this can be blamed on actor John Turturro who adapted this movie from a play and who co-authored the screenplay and co-produced and directed this disappointment. The only redeeming qualities, as I see it, were the set design and photography.

The reason I joined the IMDB database was to warn others about this waste of time and money. I have enjoyed Turturro's acting in past movies and that is where, in my opinion, his energies are best utilized.

This is something to watch! A beautiful soundtrack, an excellent cast, and untouchable screen writing! Comedy and drama are woven inextricably well together in it--though I'm of a mind to throw it into the comedy category as it is quite the gut-buster.

Tuturro is indefatigably adorable (literally) as per the usual custom, while his lovely long-time partner Borowitz achieves an austere yet at the same time sensual sort of emotional anchor in the film. Sewell, gorgeous as always, makes for an excellently vain and superficial thespian. Hilarity, however, takes the stage before all else, spinning itself into and around the players and the plot. Spinning around like clandestine lovers, 5-foot bureaus, and pale-faced Pieros--all swirling about between worlds behind and before the red curtain.

Old-timers Sarandon, Walken, D'Angelo, & Gazzara (a theatrical whore, a Wildean "macaroni queen", a stuffy unfulfilled power-wife, and an Old-Father Hubbard respectively) seem to enjoy taking a break from the rigmarole of Hollywood blockbusters and relaxing into the comfort of off-beat but positively unforgettable roles. Least forgettable among them, however, is Walken and his dance of seduction, which will most undoubtedly sear itself permanently into the back of anyone's brain.

Cates, Irwin, Bassi, Behar, Aida, Sussman, and McCann are all indispensable as well, even though I list them in shameful lump here; due time for each would have the film extended another 2 hours, but what is given of them still allows each thespian to shine superbly nevertheless. They are simply smaller gems in the treasure chest this film is.

Too many people have compared it to Shakespeare in Love and other mainstream films--but mainstream it is not. Don't bother to comment on it if you confuse it with them and disdain it insofar as it does not compare with them; you only show that you don't understand it. Understand in its stead that "not getting it" is okay. For those who say, "Poor Tuccio: he was so young, and so untalented," (:-D) know that for the rest of us, the film is almost flawlessly styled, each and every moment an essential thread of a tapestry, silk and gold studded in emeralds and rubies. Yeah, a lot like that.

Much like the play it centers on, Illuminata, it is hard for most people to understand it seems; one of its primary themes I would say, if it must be stated overtly, is that the imperfection of life prevails. But don't read too hard into that either, friend; the film "goes in the wind, like someone that knows their way," which is to say that it 'floats' along. But what many mistake for meaningless meandering is really its fluidity, its subtle weaving. It is a film meant to be enjoyed thoroughly, like fine wine, to use a cliché; an opportunity to cut loose and laugh at the absurdity of it all, life that is. Even the tragic heroine played by Borowitz, whom we all agree is most noble and flawless in the beginning, in the end we see, is flawed. Each of them: flawed. And that's okay; in fact, that's the point.

Thus, I give this a 10 out of 10 because I am satisfied in all respects with the film. Its soundtrack (which I bought), its cinematography (ooh la la), its cast (magnifico), plot (incandescent), and dialog (hilarious)--are all artfully interwoven, making it a gem unfortunately overlooked or misunderstood by the general public.

Oh, and by the way: the puppets are just meant to be pretty, friends. Representative in some instances of the scenes to follow, but for aesthetic effect mainly (kudos on the puppeteering & puppets themselves).

"Tuccio! Tuccio! Tuccio!"

Just saw this on TV. As a lifelong professional actor, and therefore of "the other world" (the other other world is everybody else, the "private people"), I want to say how it seemed to me to be made for actors only. Full of wondrous insights, dealing with the shallowness of actors, and their ever present self-concern that maybe where real life is concerned, they just don't "get it", but want to. (Hence our "method" approach to the craft.)

For me it has everything that I've never seen before in films that purport to be about the theatre, but in actuality pander to the ignorance of Private People about things of the theatre, and lie. These guys really don't care about that, but would rather stick to the truth. Yes, it's a huge "in" joke. Like the no-no of breaking up on stage, and destroying the fourth wall, not supposed to do that, it upsets the audience.

This exploration of that unreal world will always stand for me to be definitive. If you're one of the outsiders, don't bother, you won't understand. If this sounds elitist, it's not meant to be. Put it down to an actor's insecurity. But enjoy it for its beauty if you wish, don't look for more.

Wonderful characters, glib and meaningful dialogue, a portrait of theater and its denizens so complete you believe the film is a biography.

There are no small actors here because there are no small parts. What might have been a cameo becomes a pivotal role.

It has been said that the film was missing direction. Not at all. What was happening there was style. This guys loves women and shape and color, and what he likes best is wit.

The entire cast....and that is everybody, was wonderful, so good you could smell the sweat. Camera and sets were so good you could hear floor boards creak. Music, well and tastefully done.

Recommendation: see it once for the discovery, twice for the appreciation, three times for the education. You will not be bored.