I've disappeared for a couple days ramping up for the 15th annual Austin Film Festival, and last night kicked it off with a bang. The opening night film, Oliver Stone's W., played like gangbusters and the followup at the historic Paramount Theatre (Max Payne) left even the fanboys in the audience wanting. I'll have more on Max Payne shortly. James Cromwell introduced the film last night and in so doing announced a just-added "Conversation with" Q&A for this morning.
Shortly after the Q&A concluded, I got the chance to interview the actor and activist whose work in both respects I admire very much. I would simply upload the audio, but I can't for the life of me find my auxiliary cable so the transcript will appear shortly.
As for the film itself, the screening was truly an interesting study of the atmosphere of the city of Austin as well as the generation my esteemed editor refers to as The Generation of Shame (I prefer Doom myself). The film had some key location shoots around downtown easily picked out by any Austinite, some just down Congress Avenue from the Paramount Theatre where we were watching the movie. I overheard some hilarious things in line and afterward that I'll put in a Talking at the Movies piece today or tomorrow.
After reading the plethora of advance reviews out there, I most categorically disagree with two things right off: anyone referring to Josh Brolin's performance as "credible" or some other innocuous adjective isn't worth their salt, and calling Thandie Newton's performance as "Condi" Rice a caricature is trying too hard to look like a critic. Look, I'm an actor and (theatre) director first and a critical writer second, and would never pretend to use the "J" word to describe who I am or what I do for Hollywood Elsewhere.
I don't have a degree or commendation or fame to back me up as a critic, but I've done enough acting and watching to get what's going on with a highly technical performance. The technique Thandie employs here is one of approximation and the necessary degree of imitation, and yes, it absolutely splits your sides quite often. People instinctively laugh at the "dead-on" inhabitation of an impersonation for good reason. The laughter came in so many places, especially for Brolin throughout, but also for Toby Jones' perfect Rove and especially when Dreyfuss flashed Cheney's famous crooked underbite (you'll know when you see it). What's most important, and what makes the performances work across the board is the balance. No one treads the line so dangerously as to come off as Saturday Night Live making a feature film version of Dubya's great struggle.
Cromwell (in concert with Stone's direction) wisely does not choose the route of impersonation and instead inhabits the construct of what Dubya has turned his father into in the film's narrative. To mimic the real-life Herbert Dubya's mannerisms and manner of speech would defeat the purpose of Weiser's script summarily.
Cromwell related before the film began last night that he felt one of the genuine underlying strengths of the film was the real father-son issues both he and Josh brought to the proceedings themselves. The vulnerabilities they expose from their personal lives in how they bring The Two Georges to the screen is what elevates this film from left-leaning social commentary or satire to a complex narrative deservingly compared to Greek tragedy.
It's no secret where I stand politically. According to the plethora of Bush-faitful that have weighed in, I'm in the tank for this movie. What's telling for me is that when talking to a dyed-in-the-wool Republican friend very recently and explaining the tack W. takes, he said something he'd never admit to the set he generally hangs around:
"That's the life I think my dad got pushed into, and it's the mistake of his that I'm repeating. It's who I am and I don't really have a choice."
W. is no mere stunt film, and the 4-6% of truly conflicted, undecided voters who see the movie may find it to sway their feelings about the election. They're the 4-6% that will actually decide this election in some states, and when they think about this story and who John McCain is fundamentally, their eyes might actually open all the way up.
My interview with James Cromwell is yet to come, since transcription will take a bit longer than expected. Might be delayed until tomorrow.