Showing posts with label conformity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conformity. Show all posts

Saturday, April 6, 2024

Dream Scenario


 




















Director Krystoffer Borgli


Borgli on the set with Nicolas Cage

Borgli directing a scene
































DREAM SCENARIO            B-                                                                                                   USA  (102 mi)  2023  d: Krystoffer Borgli

When a nerdy evolutionary biology professor (a balding Nicolas Cage) suddenly starts appearing in the dreams of hundreds of thousands of people, he becomes an immediate media sensation, seemingly harmless at first, with marketing strategists crafting get rich quick schemes of how to take advantage of his massive recognition, but when things take a dark turn, as the dreams grow violently terrifying, that instant stardom turns sour, becoming the object of derision, where he is literally shunned by the same society that initially embraced him.  This is a cringeworthy satirical assessment of failed dreams, missed opportunities, and the devastating harm done by social media, where fame is equated to hysteria, as innocent people can easily be ostracized by false and fabricated accusations, where a herd mentality takes over with violent tendencies that blindly condemns anything out of the ordinary, as society has always embraced security through conformity, in this case leaving careers shattered and lives destroyed, paying little consequence for their bullying behavior, hiding behind the anonymity of their invisible lives, leaving behind a trail of reckless impulsiveness.  Reminiscent of a terrifying scene in Jacques Audiard’s 2021 #6 Film of the Year Paris, 13th District (Les Olympiades, Paris 13e) where a law student is mistaken for a porn star, with both male and female students openly demeaning her with cyber bullying and sexist taunts, forcing her to withdraw from school and alter her career, while also seemingly spawned from the wild imagination of screenwriter Charlie Kaufman in Spike Jonze’s ADAPTATION (2002), where writer’s block turns into a screenwriter’s nightmare.  The common thread here is actor Nicolas Cage, known for choosing oddball roles played with a strange, over-the-top quirkiness, where his extended range is allowed to shine in this film where he can be completely unfiltered, bringing an eccentric intensity into the role, from a mousy nobody to an unhinged maniac, appearing in ADAPTATION twenty years ago in perhaps the greatest performance of his career, utterly brilliant in a dual role as rival sibling screenwriters, earning an Oscar nomination, with this film feeling like an extension of that role, kind of an absurdist and often surreal writer’s fantasy written and directed by Norwegian filmmaker Kristoffer Borgli in his English language debut. Shot on 16mm film, giving this an intentionally grainy texture, using distorted sound and abrupt cuts that continually keep viewers off-balance, the film creates its own visual language.  

The sheer audacity of the film is at times hilarious, taking us down a dark turn we’ve never taken before, yet what stands out is the utter cluelessness of Paul Matthews (Nicolas Cage), a tenured professor with aspirations of publishing a book on the Swarm intelligence of ants, not exactly in everyone’s wheelhouse, but in his delusional and self-obsessed mind it’s something people should be interested in, where a driving force may be to pull him out of the obscurity of anonymity, resentful of his lack of notoriety, as he hungers for validation.  While it’s been decades since his research in grad school, he still hasn’t published or even started writing anything.  He leads a banal yet comfortable life with his architect wife Janet (Julianne Nicholson) and two teenage daughters, Hannah (Jessica Clement) and Sophie (Lily Bird), with the film opening with Sophie reluctantly floating into the air screaming for her Dad to help while he passively looks on, remaining conspicuously unconcerned, never showing any interest in his daughter’s anxiety.  But it’s all a dream.  Nonetheless, Paul grows defensive, baffled and embarrassed at having to explain his lethargic behavior in the dream to his daughter, trying to convince her this would never happen in real life.  However, Paul is not a man of action, and may as well be invisible, as he’s the kind of guy people pass by on the street without giving him a second thought.  For most people he simply doesn’t exist, forever lurking in the background.  Even in his classroom, he’s largely ignored by students who are only there because it’s required, and are otherwise bored by his teaching methods, which generate no spark of interest.  So when he starts appearing in their dreams, finding himself in the fantasies and nightmares of strangers, mostly as a non-intrusive bystander who simply happens to show up, watching the most horrible things happening to people without helping, he is there, but just stands around, useless and impervious to what’s happening to them.  It wouldn’t really amount to much except their friends and other people they know also have the same kinds of dreams, where he always appears as a passively inert figure who just happens to be there, as if taking a wrong turn somewhere.  To the film’s credit, they never offer any explanation for this astounding development, yet somehow it feels connected with just how unlikable Paul is in the eyes of others, perhaps a manifestation of his own subconscious feelings of self-loathing and inadequacy, becoming a hideous example of his own crippling insecurities.  

Social media is what connects all these people together, as they’re surprised to discover the same man is appearing in all their dreams, becoming an instant celebrity, talked about on television reports, where Paul’s photograph becomes a viral Internet meme shared by people around the world, showering him with the attention he has long sought after, where it goes to his head, thinking he’s somehow responsible for this phenomenon, literally bathing in the limelight.  “So, then I’m finally cool,” he says to his daughter, hoping it will draw attention to selling his book.  He’s not alone, as others also try to capitalize on the moment, including an enterprising new-age PR firm called Thoughts? headed by CEO Trent (Michael Cera, always appearing in a baseball cap) and his associate Mary (Kate Berlant), suggesting Paul could enter a dream holding an advertised product, or have Obama dream about him, thinking they could rake in the money, literally naming their own price, as Paul is the hottest thing on the market, with Trent describing him as “the most interesting person in the world.”  But the film veers off on another tangent when Trent’s attractive assistant Molly (Dylan Gelula) takes Paul aside and expresses a personal interest in spending some time with him, as in her dream Paul was an active participant in a sex fantasy, which catches him a bit off guard, as he was never active in another person’s dream before.  This goes about how you might expect, as Molly is thrilled by the idea, but Paul fails to live up to what she imagines.  It’s an unsettling experience causing humiliation and shame, yet it’s played for laughs, where the experience alters the entire tone of the picture, knocking him off his pedestal, suddenly becoming angry and testy with people, as he can’t control what is happening in their dreams.  The subtle shift turns nightmarish, becoming disturbing and alarming, as Paul’s benign passivity in dreams grows more menacing, turning into a grotesque Freddy Krueger figure, where his instant stardom quickly fades, and people turn on him with a vengeance, becoming more aggressively vicious, hounding him wherever he goes, spray painting “Loser” on his car, where the entire world loathes what he’s become.  They no longer want to have anything to do with him, including his own family, who reject him, tragically losing his job in the process, spiraling into a pathetic netherworld of exile and ostracization.  The flip-flop into horror loses the acidic bite of satire, resembling something else altogether, yet the cruelty on display is staggering, mirroring what can happen when social media turns toxic and runs amok, leaving a hollow emptiness where reality used to be, creating a heartless, soulless landscape of what the world would look like without a human conscience. 

Friday, November 10, 2017

Life Guidance






Director Ruth Mader

 
 



LIFE GUIDANCE            B-                                    
Austria  (101 mi)  2017  d:  Ruth Mader

Fourteen years have passed since her earlier film STRUGGLE (2003), a wrenching look at immigrants bussed into Austria to perform the dirty, menial jobs that no Austrians would dare do, driving past the meticulously clean homes, then showing a 30-minute, near wordless montage, shot after shot of workers in the field picking strawberries, or gutting turkeys in a slaughterhouse, or polishing glasses and placing them in a case, or scrubbing down someone’s pool, which is followed by an equally austere exposé of middle class life, where jobs are a chore, with workers leading empty, solitary lives, often disconnected from their own children through divorce or separation and their elderly parents sent to senior homes, having little contact with each, where the film connects how the supposed subhuman species of migrant workers are no less exploited than the so-called successful middle class, who are commercially exploited by false expectations that happiness can be bought and paid for, languishing in a spiritual void, leading meaningless lives that are empty of love and affection.  In any case, stark imagery is used to combine what seems like two entirely opposite worlds into one brilliantly detached observation of the human race.  While fictionalized, Mader’s near-documentary film resembles the meticulous nature of the best Austrian documentaries, like Hubert Saupert’s Darwin's Nightmare (2004), Nikolaus Geyrhalter’s OUR DAILY BREAD (2005), or Michael Glawogger’s WORKING MAN’S DEATH (2005).  Mader has made another documentary, WHAT IS LOVE (2012), but it was only released in Austria with additional screenings at film festivals in Germany and Sweden, nowhere else.  Interestingly, Ms. Mader appeared at the Chicago Film Festival, requesting the expertise of an interpreter, but when one was provided from the German Goethe Institute, Ms. Mader instructed her to sit down, that she wouldn’t be needed after all, and spoke in near perfect English, suggesting an extreme Austrian aversion to German culture. 

Mader continues to be a specialist in heartless human detachment, making another carefully observed exposé of Austrian culture, though this one has satiric sci-fi overtones, set in the near future, imagining a more perfect world where everything is in perfect order, with the majority of lifeless, zombie-like citizens believing they are happy and content, but free will has all but vanished on the planet, replaced by a culture of obedience and complicity, where conformity is the rule.  What this resembles is George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, or the early George Lucas film, THX 1138 (1971), where near robotic citizens rebel against their rigidly controlled society, which Ms. Mader suggests is an accurate picture of Austria today.  Society is divided into “top achievers,” the cheerful middle class of optimum efficiency, living in pristine neighborhoods that are immaculately clean, and the “minimum recipients,” the dregs of society from the poor neighborhoods who are sent to live sedated lives in the Fortress of Sleep, never amounting to anything.  Using actors that are void of emotion, our hero is Alexander Dworsky (Fritz Karl, bearing a strange resemblance to Colin Firth), a straight-laced financial analyst, viewed as a corporate everyman living a life of bliss, seemingly having everything anyone could ever want, with a beautiful wife, a beautiful son, and a beautiful house.  In a world where we see school children singing patriotic self-improvement songs, like propaganda expression heard during China’s Cultural Revolution, Alexander is tearfully distraught, actually showing emotion one day, observed by his son, who immediately reports him to the authorities, setting the film in motion, as Gregor Fainmann (Florian Teichtmeister), a sinister agent from Life Guidance comes to recalibrate his purpose and optimize his potential, sending him to a reeducation camp where business men in suits perform arts and crafts that resemble a return to kindergarten class.  Due to the ridiculousness of the minimum requirements, using no skill or brain power whatsoever, Alexander begins to question this intervention, to the horror of his wife, wondering if others feel the same way.

Everything Life Guidance offers comes under the guise of corporations trying to help, painting themselves in the best possible light, as if they are being as benevolent as possible, suggesting it is all for a better good, yet Alexander feels imprisoned by the extent of their reach, as everyone appears hypnotized into an artificial state of cheerfulness, like the frighteningly submissive Stepford Wives.  In order to navigate his way through this darkly mysterious world, he must defy the system by playing along, where he can’t do anything to stand out, but must blend in as perfectly as possible, investigating the inner workings of this excessively secret yet imposing organization, though this is not a film where viewers are particularly sympathetic, due to a style of austere emotionless coldness.  Using sleek interiors and architecturally clean designs, the sterile locations chosen are excellent, as nothing ever looks out of place, where modern society is viewed as a grim, impersonal world without an ounce of humor.  While there are moments of extreme Kafkaesque absurdity that spark a laugh, the film takes great pains to minimize these moments, creating instead an anguishing existential journey where we might just find ourselves in similar circumstances, with viewers living vicariously through Alexander.  Initially he explores society’s outcasts, discovering how they are treated, where there’s simply no hope of advancement to the middle class, instead they are seen as non-entities, undesirables, throwaways.  As if expecting to find the secret key that unlocks the door to all this madness, Alexander wants explanations for what appears to be a police state, with secret agents everywhere that routinely follow him.  Growing darker and more unsettling, his journey is reminiscent of Freder’s journey into the underground from Fritz Lang’s METROPOLIS (1927), though even more chilling, as the capitalist system in Lang’s film used poor workers as slaves to run the town, while Mader’s film disposes of them entirely, using the middle class exclusively to run the worker state, showing little need for the undesirables who are deemed less than ambitious.  This promotes a supremacist view, a supreme arrogance of those at the top who are viewed as successful, ultimately turning against the disposable others who are viewed as worthless, creating a built-in protectionist antagonism that keeps an authoritarian system thoroughly in charge of preserving the status quo.