Roger Dodger

This first film of director Dylan Kidd is a smart and entertaining tentative for a male version of 'Sex in the City'. There certainly is a question mark over the morality of a story involving a 16 years young boy tutored into skirt-chase by his adult uncle, and this is one of the very few occasions where the R-rate is justified in my eyes. However, in the era of 'Sex in the City' this genre is already in line with popular entertainment.

The film is smart, extremely well acted, sometimes funny, sometimes moving and overall a pleasant cinema experience. It is probably worth seeing on small screen, as many scenes are intentionally filmed with an unsure hand-held camera. This works well on TV screen, may be a problem in a theater. 8 out of 10 on my personal scale.

Roger Swanson (Campbell Scott) scores every night, he likes to say. However, he has a breakup with his boss and lover (well, duh…) Joyce (Isabella Rossellini), and his 16-year-old nephew Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) shows up, saying that he was looking at colleges in the New York area and decided to give his favorite Uncle Roger a visit. Roger talks a mile a minute, very suave like, and decides to take Nick out on the town in search of sex, which, he claims, is `everywhere'.

A fine, inventive movie, with good acting by the leads. Not many movies would dare to go out on a limb, and this isn't a Hollywood movie (it's distributed by Artisan), but those who have seen it have enjoyed it. Its script, by director Dylan Kidd, is often funny, and could go as Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex but Were Afraid to Ask Part 2, since Nick is basically naïve and oblivious. However, the script leads into the first problem I would like to talk about.

Although funny at many times, during the many lulls, the drama, which is supposed to ensue, doesn't ensue. I didn't feel touched or sympathetic or anything during the `dramatic' sequences, especially during the end, but at least it goes back to comedy, with the fate of Roger and Nick. The script has many laugh-out-loud moments, however. I love the first scene, where Roger is talking to Joyce, Donovan (Ben Shenkman), and Donna (Mina Badie) at the restaurant, and he's going on all about Darwin and evolution, and the eventual fate of the genders. This is a good introduction to Roger: lots of talk, but he can't back it up, and you can tell he has now idea what in the world he is actually saying.

Scott won a few awards for his performance in Roger Dodger, which I can understand. He totally got into his role, and at times it didn't seem like he was acting, everything was coming naturally to him. An example of that is when he's talking to Nick about different ways to look at women (which is about a 10 minute take), he just keeps on talking and talking like it wasn't scripted. I could almost hear the director laughing in the background. I hope that this bounces his career more, because he is a great actor. Eisenberg was also very good as the nervous teen, he also seemed to know what he was doing.

Another point I really liked was the music. It was crystalline, and it sounded solid, which is probably symbolism for Roger: he thinks he's solid with the women, but he really has as much to learn as the student. He thinks that he knows everything that's there, but he doesn't really, and he figures that out throughout the movie. To be forewarned is to be forearmed, so here I go: if you're a feminist or against sexism, this isn't really your movie. Roger's view of women won't appeal to those, but he does talk about that the female sex will eventually rule the earth and men will be their slave (aren't they already?). If you don't mind, though, it's a very good movie that may not deserve all of the acclaim it's getting but is still better than most of the Hollywood drek that's out now.

My rating: 7/10

Rated R for sexuality and language.

Roger Swanson is a coldhearted, fast-talking yuppie businessman who has cynically reduced the man-woman equation to its Darwinian essentials. To Roger, women are objects to be conquered not people to be respected, and he has learned to employ his good looks, charm and over-analytical mind in the service of getting laid. When Nick, his naïve, inexperienced 16-year old nephew comes to town, Roger decides to train the boy in the fine art of manipulation and seduction, taking him out for a night on the town that the youngster will not soon forget.

As conceived by first time writer/director Dylan Kidd, `Roger Dodger' is less a full-fledged narrative and more a series of extended conversations. And I, for one, couldn't be happier, for the dialogue Kidd has come up with is sharp, observant, insightful and witty, as Roger opens up and reveals his unique perspective on the dating scene. He uses his mouth like a machine gun, shooting rounds of rapid-fire, staccato comments, indifferent to who's left standing when he's done. He really has no qualms about `corrupting' his underage nephew, never seeing or caring about the corrosive effect he may be having on him. In the process, we learn quite a bit about Roger as a person, most especially the aloofness he feels from others and his inability to make any kind of emotional connection that really works. Long estranged from his father and sister, Roger is also facing a breakup with the older woman he's recently come to fancy (his boss in fact). Roger is a humorous figure but also an immensely sad one, for he really does seem - for all his bravado and bluster to the contrary - to be a lonely, unhappy guy. We are simultaneously drawn to him by his confidence and charisma and repelled by his smarminess and coldness, just like the characters in the film. As Roger, Campbell Scott does a superb job bringing out both of those seemingly contradictory qualities. A non-stop talker, Roger knows how to draw all the attention in the room to himself; he is (at the risk of mixing my metaphors here) like a chattering vortex up there on the screen and we can't help but be sucked in by his personality and presence. No wonder Scott won the 2002 award for Best Actor from the National Board of Review. In fact, I haven't seen a performance this smooth, alive and energetic in a very long time. Equally impressive is young Jesse Eisenberg whose wide-eyed innocence and youthful decency provide an effective counterpoint to the brash but empty Roger. Isabella Rossellini, Elizabeth Berkley and Jennifer Beals also turn in outstanding performances as the various ladies who play a part in the two men's adventure.

In his debut film, Kidd shows himself to be in full control of his medium. He employs a jittery, handheld camera in almost every scene, a technique that may bother some people but which heightens the sense of realism so essential to the nature of the story. In this way, the audience is made to feel almost like an eavesdropper on the various conversations. Kidd should also be commended - in this day of maximum special effects and minimal verbiage - for allowing his characters to speak at great length on any number of topics. Many another filmmaker would have felt intimidated by such a heavy reliance on dialogue. Kidd, obviously, feels intoxicated by the beauty of language and his intoxication becomes ours.

Roger is a fascinating case study mainly because we feel so ambivalent in our attitude towards him. Just as we are about to consign him to the category of heartless, cold-blooded b***ard, he wins us over by showing us that barest glimmer of humanity that peeks out every so often from beneath his well-oiled exterior.

`Roger Dodger' is not only an intriguing, amusing and poignant tale of realtionships and sex in the modern world, but a confident first film that augurs well for its gifted young maker.

Rather unpleasant movie with a terrific performance by Scott as a quick-witted chauvinist. I liked the opening scene best, which was sharp and funny and drew Scott's character very nicely, but I felt the movie never had a clear idea of its own intentions and never knew where it was going, which is why it never really gets anywhere.

Now, on the one hand I can understand not wanting to make the movie pat, not wanting to spell things out for the viewer, but I just felt not enough was done with Scott's obvious rage and self-destructive behavior. The movie gives you a fairly awful person but veers uncomfortably between showing you him at his worst and trying to work up some empathy with him, a gambit that fails because the character is always kept at an emotional distance.

I gave this 7/10 but I'm not sure if it deserved something that high or not. But it is intriguing.

By the way, the cinematography, which has elicited a lot of hostility, didn't bother me at all. I saw it on TV, perhaps it's more bothersome in the theater.

I wouldn't have thought from previews that "Roger Dodger" would have an ounce of romance in it, but it does. The scene between Elizabeth Berkeley, Jennifer Beals (both very good by the way--who would have thought?) and Roger's nephew is incredibly sweet and touching, but without being overly sentimental or cloying. Campbell Scott gives a fabulous performance as Roger, illustrating how broad his acting range is. My only complaint with the movie is its incredibly annoying cinematography. All of the compositions are cluttered and claustrophobic, sometimes so much so that the main focus of the shot is entirely obscured. And this trend toward hand-held cameras needs to be stopped. I think directors feel that hand-held cinematography lends a gritty, realistic point of view to their films, but more frequently it serves only to distract.

But a fairly minor quibble about an otherwise very good film.

Grade: A-