Accords & désaccords

Once again we get to see Sean Penn at his charming and reckless best. I thoroughly enjoyed watching him go into his self destructive mode, losing out on the things that are really important. One could start off thinking of him as an arrogant ass, but then come to realize that he is more insecure than almost anyone. His fear of the looming Django Renihart is pretty cool. Imagine being the second best and knowing it, that is, being so good but not quite there. How many people can tell you who the second man to walk on the moon was? The money comes and the money goes and the man goes on. The cinematography of this film is wonderful, capturing an era when the jazz performer was the king.

In my opinion, there is more than one type of Woody Allen film. There is the antic lunacy of films like Bananas and Sleeper, the serio-comic "serious" film with "meaning", like Annie Hall, Husbands and Wives and Deconstructing Harry and then there are what I think are Woody Allen's "love notes", if you'll bear with the expression, films like The Purple Rose of Cairo, Bullets Over Broadway and Sweet and Lowdown, films as a general rule that are period pieces (generally the '30's or thereabouts) that are basically mash notes from Allen to something Allen particularly cares about, such as jazz in Sweet and Lowdown (specifically jazz guitar and Django Reinhardt). The score is great, which is typical for a Woody Allen film. Allen does these little films vey well and they are almost always worth watching. Sean Penn plays a self-centered, egotistical creep with talent. I will leave any further interpretations regarding the preceding statement to the Gentle Reader. Why he was nominated for an Oscar escapes me. Samantha Morton, on the other hand, gives a sweet, if almost one-note, performance, which basically sums up the movie: worth the time and effort to watch, but a one-note film. If you like this side of Woody (and I do), this is worth seeing.

This is a very enjoyable movie. It has many touches in it that are classic Woody Allen, so it should appeal to his many fans. It is also so strong on the jazz material that it should appeal to jazz afficianados even if they are not Woody Allen fans.

The biographical / documentary styles keep this movie away from Woody's worst excesses (I am a fan, but not a blinkered one)and provide momentum. There are one or two scenes that migrate towards farce, such as the hold-up scene(s) and the "moon seat".

This film is well worth seeing.

When we try to understand genius, or love, or "why?", we run into the same problem that the ancients encountered:

"I went to the poets … I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings, and asked what was the meaning of them — thinking that they would teach me something. I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves. That showed me in an instant that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them." — Socrates, The Apology

So here we have Woody telling a story about a storyteller, who talks and struts endlessly (Penn has a ball with this), but can only say anything through music, and he can't explain a bit of it. Much like Woody, who prattles on about every neurosis, but speaks volumes through his control of the medium. It's just something he's born to do.

And this is the only way to understand Django -- with only two working fingers on his fretting hand (accidental disfigurement), he reinvented the whole medium of guitar. The new shape of his hand forced him into holding octaves - which can be done on guitar with two adjacent fingers, unlike on the piano - and changing the way leads and comping - here, self-accompaniment - were played. His art was the necessary step before Les Paul, and thence to Wes Montgomery, and so on to you and me.

Here is devotion without hagiography, because all of this is wrapped into "one of those Emmett Ray stories", where you can 'never be sure' of what is truth, confabulation, or exaggeration.

Brilliance. Bravo, to all.

The two movies that come to mind when I think about Sean Penn and his acting ability are not Mystic River and Fast Times at Ridgemont High. They are Carlito's Way and Sweet & Lowdown. In both of these movies, he immerses himself in the characters, while in most of his other movies, including the art house hits like 21 Grams and Hurly Burly, he plays more or less the same type of person. Sweet and Lowdown has Penn playing a self-absorbed classical guitarist who obsesses over a world-renowned guitarist much in the way Woody Allen obsesses over things in his other movies. Woody himself shows up as a commentator (this, like Zelig, is presented in mock documentary fashion). It is amusing, if slight (and a sign of things to come in 2000-2002, with Small Time Crooks, Curse of the Jade Scorpion and Hollywood Ending). Samantha Morton won a justified Oscar nomination, but Uma Thurman and Gretchen Mol are wasted (Uma got second billing over Sean Penn, and is hardly in the movie!) Not a Woody Allen masterpiece, but fans could do worse.