Don Cheadle as Mouse Alexander

Continuing my series on acting, I would like to feature one hell of a breakout role. Last Sunday, I watched Devil in a Blue Dress with my mother, and although I detest watching films on television because they tend to be chopped up beyond recognition of the artist's original intention, I figured I would suffer through my misgivings of the medium. I had been meaning to see it and figured I could get a blog entry out of it. I began the movie thinking that I would write an entry on Denzel Washington (playing Easy Rawlins), but, surprisingly, somewhere around the 50-60 minute mark, it became clear who has the more affecting performance in the film.

Don Cheadle plays Mouse Alexander, a small time crook with a noticeable affinity for shooting, violence, and scene-stealing. Although the film explains little about the past relationship between Easy and Mouse, maybe something about a past murder and other hoodwinks, the relationship plays fine without the burden of the exposition or backstory.

Mouse is the embodiment of a loose cannon. His penchant for violence is a variable that works for and against Easy within the film, requiring Easy to calculate Mouse's possible actions into every decision. Cheadle's Mouse is played with a knowing exuberance of the character's brash and unapologetic style.

A lot of times, when you have a violent character on screen, many actors and directors try to push him more to the crazy or deranged side of the spectrum. They have a calmness about them that distances the audience from their actions because the most logical reaction to shooting a person in the face or whatever other heinous deeds would be outrage. For evidence see Hannibal Lector in The Silence of the Lambs, Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men, or myriad of other serial killers portrayed on screen. This isn't so with Don Cheadle. Mouse isn't crazy, he's simply wild; he's not out of control, he's simply working with a different set of morals.

Pay attention to Cheadle's demeanor within the above scene. He raises his voice. He gets impatient. Qualities like this tend to forge a connection between the audience and the character. For a character who has a history of shooting with little provocation, it provides an interesting kinship with the audience. His character, in essence, actuates our own desires when the audience is given that connection with the character; he reacts the way that we would. This character is so successful because of his fervor and candor. Whereas most people would be reticent about shooting a person in the arm, Mouse does not share that view. He's a man with little patience and a big gun.

Introducing a wild card into the film, Cheadle's performance is aided by his chemistry with Denzel Washington. It's nice to see two titans of the acting game before they became what they are today. I love both performances, but I give the edge to Cheadle, not only because he does more with less screen time, but his character's frankness and loyalty are fiendishly compelling aspects of his performance.

Best Line:

"I'm tryin' to do right...I mean you know, now"

Lock that down!

Friends with Benefits is one of the most hypocritically hilarious movies I've seen in awhile. I mean that in the most positive way that I can. Somehow our film outlook has been somewhat reduced films that critically lambaste the genre it inhabits rather than actually presenting intriguing narrative. Such is our postmodern condition. I'm going to rip off a podcast (filmspotting.net) that I love and describe it the way they did. Martin Scorsese made personal films. Today, people make films in homage to his films. FWB fits into this condition as it it seems less interested in buffing the stereotypes of romantic comedies, preferring just to snigger in the corner and throw Cheetos at its head.

I don't really need to get into the plot because it's pretty self-explanatory. Justin Timberlake, plays Dylan, an artistic director who is being charmed by a headhunter named Jamie played by Mila Kunis. Jamie's persuasive nature is undeniable and gets Dylan to relocate to become the art director at GQ. Both coming out of a bad relationship, they decide that their relationship can sustain a little little sex, provided they do not catch feelings in the process.

Forthrightly concerned with seperating itself from the typical drivel at the local movie-plex, the film begins its onslaught on protoypical romantic comedies with the quickly edited opening, crosscutting between what appears to be a conversation between Dylan and Jamie. However, they aren't actually talking; they haven't even met yet. They're both having a similarly banal disagreement with their significant other, moments before being dumped by Andy Samberg and Emma Stone, irrespectively. The scene plays upon the inevitable heartbreak that rom-coms portray and the ever popular statement of the rom-com genre, "It's so tough to find someone sane in LA/NY." I actually liked the opening. I found this sequence and other little digs to the prototypical rom-coms to be entertaining. In fact, there is one scene where Jamie walks past a wall of movie posters promoting Katherine Heigl. She drunkenly screams, "Shut up, Katherine Heigl! You stupid liar!" It is perhaps ironic though that the film tends to fall into these trappings. But it's worth it!



One notable strength of the film is the relationship built between Mila and Justin. The film actually spends a lot of time selling the friendship between these two. The sex scenes are pretty hilarious, completely unsexy, and have a purposefully light tone because it actually portrays two buddies having sex together. They square off intellectually and emotionally which is great because most films don't really sell that relationship (cough*No Strings Attached, I'm looking at you) too well. Mila is amazing who seems perfect as the foul-mouthed guy's girls, but does not lose all her feminine qualities. She also made me laugh which most girls onscreen do not. Justin Timberlake is great, once again transporting his charisma from the stage to the screen in an effortlessly cool way (Will Smith anyone?). These two work well together and present an interesting conception of male and female relationships.

Friends with Benefits flips the gender roles of its genre. Mila Kunis' character, the fast-talking, non-bullshitter, plays the masculine role by courting JT's character. She whisks him around the city, taking him out to dinner and drinks, showing him the beauty of NY in the way you'd expect a man to do on a first date. She's a lot more domineering and forceful as well. Of course, it could be a component of her being from NY, but nonetheless she does take on those conventional character traits. JT's character is kind feminized in this way as well; he is a lot more mild-mannered, laid-back, and all too swept away by Kunis' aggressive charm. Continuing with this theory, naturally JT would be the one to bring up the FWB arrangement. Usually it's the the girl who brings up the sex only relationship because a man would come off too sleazy if he brings it up. It works here because, by and large, Justin Timberlake is feminized by virtue of the subverted conventional gender politics (that's worth a blog entry in of itself).

It is a fun ride, filled with funny, believable character, especially Woody Harrelson who kills every scene he is in and presents what I think to be a fairly noteworthy conception of a gay man. The film presents enough intriguing elements to atone for its conventionally structured plot line while also more effectively portraying the main relationship than your typical romantic comedy. It's certainly a DVD purchase for me.

Peace.

Tom Wilkinson as Arthur Edens

The film Michael Clayton has a bevy of scintillating performances, not the least of which given by Tom Wilkinson. Wilkinson may enjoy the distinction of being That Guy for some people. That Guy who you see in a lot of films, but never know his name. This British actor's supporting turn is a beautiful addition to the movie given Wilkinson's interpretation of an overworked lawyer with a crisis of conscience. His performance emphasizes the thin line between derangement and genius.

A little context first, Wilkinson plays Arthur Edens, a senior litigator of Kenner, Bauch, and Ledeen, in the midst of a 6-year case involving dangerous insecticides and a large corporation called U North. The film's main action centers on Arthur Edens mental collapse and the fallout that results from his ridiculous behavior. Edens reaches his breaking point with the case, no longer able to support the venomous actions of the evil corporation. He soon goes rogue sending the firm and the company into a mad dash to prevent his outlandish actions.

Michael Clayton - "I'm not the enemy" by warnerbrospictures

Wilkinson's character, until this point in the film, is bat-shit crazy. In an effort to cleanse his mind and cast off his sedation he skips his prescribed medication. This results in him taking off his clothes in the middle of a deposition and professing his love for a witness in the case while chasing her naked across a parking lot. So at this point, his character has little credibility; he is certainly a wild-card that must be accounted for, but has not true authority in terms of intellect. The excellent part about this scene is his emotional turn: the audience thinks of him as a loon for most of the film, but in this scene, Edens character is revealed to be more of a threat than once expected. Yes, he's crazy, but he still has a sharp legal mind that will demand more skill for Michael Clayton to threaten or trick him.

Take a look at the blocking of this scene. Wilkinson plays a majority of the scene deferring to Clooney. His shoulders are hunched forward; he's looking down. Wilkinson's blocking suggests that he is ashamed, like he's crazy or something. The audience is comfortable with this notion considering the fact that he is off his medication and acting irrationally. Now, the turning point of the scene happens midway through when Clayton tells Edens, "Don't make it easy for them." It's truly great direction by Tony Gilroy because at this crucial moment, they lock eyes, almost like a standoff in a Western. There is a noticeable shift in tone in the scene. Afterwards, Edens, composed with a slight sense of compassion, points out that Clayton is nothing more than a bag-man and that he is in no position to make him do anything. With a straight and nonplussed attitude, he firmly delivers the line, assured, and confident. He continues his hunched stance, but slowly puffs his chest out. During the scene, he engages eye contact more and more as he continues his speech, challenging Clayton both argumentatively and physically.

The scene is all about power. Clayton attempts to bluff Edens into thinking that Edens is running out of options and needs to relinquish control. But with Edens' sharp mind and legal prowess, he does not relent; he's holding the Aces.

Finely acted and directed, this is one of my favorite scenes of the film. The end is killer as well.

Michael Clayton
I'm not the enemy

Arthur Edens
Then, who are you?

Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting

Good acting. Like pornography, you might not know how to describe it, but you know it when you see it. Having directed a couple of films in my day (and thinking I know a thing or two about it), I thought it would be fun to do a series on acting. In this series, I'll highlight performances that I really liked or disliked and tell you why or why not I thought they were effective.

Acting is organic and humane; it's something that is ineffable for most people because it draws upon our experience of fellow human beings, something we're all so accustomed to dealing with. Slight vocal inflections, longing gazes, sly smiles are elements that make up a great acting performance. An actresses' job is to communicate with their body the character's goal in a scene. They characterize these goals within a scene and carry them over the length of a film portraying that character's changes (some people call this change an arc). Now, my acting experience is limited to a couple turns as the Cowardly Lion and Ebenezer Scrooge back in elementary school, but having worked with numerous actors, directors, and listened to hours of commentary I think I've centered on a good barometer of Truth in acting. Hopefully, you'll have a few things to look for after reading this.

Robin Williams as Sean Maguire

It's fair to say that he was the inspiration for this list. Specifically, this scene right here.

To set this scene up a bit, Robin Williams plays Sean Maguire, a widowed therapist tasked with counseling Will Hunting (Matt Damon), a genius mathematician with a violent past. After Hunting flippantly mocks Maguire in their first meeting, Maguire takes him to the park to show him that he's not another therapist that will put up with Hunting's behavior.

The first thing I want to point out in this performance is Williams' use of his eyes. They tend to peer out to the distance during the scene, like he's surveying. Contrasting his eyes with Damon's, whose eyes are staring down and forward, you can immediately gather that Williams is older, wiser, and more experienced. He's going to use these qualities in his speech. There is also a sadness and gravity that you can feel through the screen. I believe an actor's greatest tool is his eyes. It's very hard to lie with your eyes; that's why they call them the windows of your soul.

If you look at his facial expressions, you'll notice that his eyes sparingly change though his mouth and cheeks may show a slight smile or purse. This is contrast. Complexity is another important element in an actor's arsenal. In my experience, we don't always say what we mean or portray the emotions that we feel. Maguire's face portrays a mix vulnerability, pity, and wisdom. He doesn't overplay his pity for Will. Early in the film, Will has scared away therapist who have tried the pity card already. In order for us to root for him as Will's therapist, he has to straighten out Will Hunting with empathy, strength, and care. That is what Will needs. At this moment, for me at least, you really buy him as the only guy who can save this kid, the only guy who can help Will save himself. That is Williams' goal in this scene.

What's exciting about this scene is the intensity of it. If you noticed, Gus Van Zant doesn't cut away from Williams. He just leaves the audience there in that moment entranced. Music, often used as a crutch of emotion for lack-luster performances, doesn't cut in until the last 20 or so seconds of his speech. You just kind of stare, hanging on to every word, like Will Hunting. Williams' goal of getting through to Hunting is complete by Damon's performance.

I think Williams' success in the scene and the film is accountable to his career as a comedian. Comedians have the propensity to be amazing dramatic actors. Comedians and actors share one crucial element, something that I respect a lot: vulnerability. Standing up and making fun of yourself, your life story, and your personality to a roomful of hostile, drunken, paying customers is a frightening nightmare for most people; they do it every night. Acting involves a similar amount of bravery, especially when your acting in front of an exhausted, hungry crew of people waiting for you to remember your lines so they can break for lunch. That's why I think Jamie Foxx, Robin Williams, Whoopi Goldberg, and Jim Carrey are such great dramatic actors. You can't fake that vulnerability.

Good acting is about bearing a character's soul. In order to tell a good performance from a bad one, you just have to think, "Did they commit?" "All the way?" Take a look at Williams performance, you can see in his eyes that he's not remembering those lines, he's getting at the root of what his character is trying to say in that scene. He's bringing every ounce of heart he can to that role.

So I hope this was helpful. I'm going to try to keep this series up as much as I can.