Gigantic
Directed by: Matt Aselton
Starring: Paul Dano, Zooey Deschanel, Ed Asner, and John Goodman
Released: 2008
Country of Origin: USA
Runtime: 98 min.
Sometimes I wonder if films like Juno or Little Miss Sunshine getting nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars has been positive or negative for "indie" movies. I was happy for both films at the time. It was nice to see some left-of-center films being recognized by such a prestigious organization, when films of that nature are often over-looked in favor of crowd pleasers, movies about the Holocaust, and social dramas starring Kate Winslet. I thought the attention might provide more opportunities for talented, up and coming directors to express their unique visions to a wider audience. Instead, it seems we have opened the flood-gates to movies that may have been best left un-made. Matt Aselton's debut Gigantic seems to be one of those features. That's not saying it's a horrible film, it had it's moments where I was genuinely intrigued. However, as the film progressed I became detached and uninterested in what was happening.
The film follows high-end mattress salesman, Brian Weathersby as he attempts to adopt a Chinese baby, navigates the beginnings of a relationship with a demanding customer's daughter, and gets randomly beat up and shot at by a mysterious homeless man. Brian is played by Paul Dano, who approaches the role with a quiet reserve that provides a polar opposite to the zealous preacher he played in There Will Be Blood. His life seems to be pretty simple and unruffled. In his spare time at work he checks up with an adoption agency, where he is hoping to get approval to adopt a child from China. This is something he has always wanted to do but seems to have no real reason why this is such an important goal. When an overbearing customer, played by John Goodman, comes looking for a mattress to help with his back problems, a small ripple begins to disrupt the calm waters of Brian's life. After the sale, the customer's daughter, Happy (Zooey Deschanel) arrives with payment for the bed. She is beautiful, quirky, and immediately falls asleep on the mattress she is supposed to pay for. Happy and Brian begin dating, causing more ripples and making Brian's quiet life more complicated than he is used to. Brian is also followed by a very disagreeable, homeless Zach Galifianakis who beats him up whenever he gets the chance.
I feel bad for Zooey Deschanel. She seems to be backing herself into a corner with the characters she plays. She never really does a bad job, it's just the type of role she seems stuck in is overused and approaching a slight level of annoyance. In Gigantic, she plays a cute, quirky, but ultimately damaged twenty-something who wants to be in love but is self-sabotaged by her own issues and spontaneous whims. This is, with a few variations, the same character she played in both All The Real Girls and (500) Days Of Summer, in which the roles work and the films are better because of her performance. So, why do those films succeed, when a film like this fails? Both, All The Real Girls and (500) Days Of Summer, have a clear direction in the story and purpose of the film. Gigantic feels like a first draft. Often it seems to lose its way, ideas and thoughts are started but fail to progress in any meaningful way. Many scenes seems completely unnecessary and often have a subtle pretentious air about them. Certain parts, such as the sequence where Brian joins his father and brothers on a retreat to the woods to bond with hallucinogenic mushrooms, feel as if the director is trying to express something profound and important only to come across flat and shallow. There may have been a good film here somewhere, but it's lost among mistakes that are common in independent dramatic comedies.
The aspect of the homeless man and his malicious intent towards Brian adds a level of surrealism that while slightly intriguing, is pointless and completely unnecessary. I understand that this previous statement may seem a little hypocritical of me, since my last review was praising the works of Werner Herzog and David Lynch. Both of those directors have been endlessly criticized for adding elements into their films that have no meaning and often seem to be strange for the sake of being strange. The difference here is that the surrealism seems completely out of place and adds nothing to the experience. Surrealism is a tricky area, it's near impossible to explain what works and what doesn't. It may come down to a personal preference but the surrealist elements of Herzog and Lynch seem to be used with skill and necessity, Gigantic's use of similar techniques seems amateurish and detracts from the film.
A good film will grab your attention and hopefully keep that hold on you until the credits start to roll. This film slowly lost my attention and it failed to connect with me in any way. At the end I didn't care what was going on and were it not for starting this blog to discuss almost every film I see, I'm sure I would be well on my way to forgetting it completely.
FINAL VERDICT: I can't recommend this film at all. There are plenty of people who eat up this kind of film and I'm sure those folks will love it. Maybe you will find something in here that sparks something in you but I found nothing of any lasting value in this movie. As I said, it's not horrible. It's forgettable. Something I often consider a worse sin than if it were completely awful. A film so bad I want to kill myself and everyone in the theater at least provoked an extreme reaction, causing me to never forget that experience. Ask me in two years what I thought of Gigantic and I will say: "Oh yea, that film. I completely forgot about it." Ask me in two years what I thought of Mamma Mia! and I will probably stab you.
Since you personally requested a rebuttal, here it is.
ReplyDeleteThis is a movie I would rather give repeated viewings to than something like Juno. This is perhaps due to the fact that there was no obnoxious mainstream hype to taint my perspective on it, as was the case with Juno and Little Miss Sunshine to a lesser degree. But nonetheless, this fact alone makes it a more worthwhile film in my mind than the Juno's of the world.
I don't consider the story or the performances by the lead actors to be especially brilliant, but they were good enough to not detract from the stronger points of the movie, which in my opinion were fantastic supporting performances by John Goodman and Ed Asner along with very cool art direction and beautiful cinematography.
I also obviously had a greater appreciation for the more surrealistic moments, which I though were well conceived and were a contributing factor to this film having more character than your typical cookie-cutter indie dramedy.
I'm certainly not one to mindlessly give high scores to any indie-ish film with quirky characters and complicated romances (I was 5 years ago, but I'm not nowadays). I thought Sunshine Cleaning was a waste of time and I lose interest in 90% of these type of movies half-way through watching the trailer. But for whatever reason I found a lot to appreciate about this one.
And let us not forget that Gigantic recycled Zooey's role from All The Real Girls a year before 500 Days Of Summer did. Just sayin.
Oh, man. I'd forgotten about John Goodman's character when we were talking about this the other day. I LOVED that character. Enough to re-watch this, probably...
ReplyDeleteThe fact that this was made before 500 Days of Summer didn't even register with me at all. Good point lenn-o.
ReplyDeleteI thought John Goodman was good but only in certain scenes. I really liked the dinner scene where he grills Brian on the logistics of raising a child with one parent. That was one of the high points in the movie. Other then that, I honestly wasn't that impressed with him, he certainly had a strong presence but I think its impossible for him not to have a strong presence.
I thought Ed Anser's performance was a little clumsy. I really didn't like any of the times he seemed confused that things didn't work the way they did "back in the day." It seemed forced and like he wasn't trying all that hard. It may have been the lines he was given but he didn't impress me at all.
The only performance I thought was worth it, was Jane Alexander. The scene where she pulls Happy aside to talk to her on the fire escape of the building was maybe the best part of the whole film (at least her side of the conversation). It looked great and her character brought the only believable and real complexity in the film.
I still hold that the homeless beatings seemed hollow. When those things work for me, there is a weight to them. They come across like they have a purpose. I may not understand the purpose and the filmaker may not understand the purpose but its sold like there was one. This wasn't sold well to me. Like I said, its impossible to tell what will work and what won't with surrealism... I don't even fully understand why I like it in other films when I didn't with this.
Thanks for the debate Lenny, you should disagree with me more often.... you can be the Siskel to my Ebert.
Yeah I failed to acknowledge Jane Alexander. Her 5 minutes were awesome.
ReplyDelete