All in the Details

May 3, 2006

Epictetus has previously noted that there is nothing on "The Sopranos" that's simple filler; what might look throwaways are usually, in fact, crucial clues, significant details, or indicators of what might lie in store. Or, they function to underscore and deepen character and long-standing themes. Whether it's camera angle, snippet of dialogue, or reaction shot, there's something meaningful to be gleaned; there is always more than meets the eye.

In the most recently aired episode (April 30), the Vito storyline appears to take a sentimental turn, with sticky sweet dialogue and soft-focus love scenes amid wildflowers. As if Jim's handle-bar mustache and grill skills aren't enough, he's also a biker. And volunteer fireman. And hero! And good with his fists. And fair–he would never stoop to Vito's level and grab whatever implement was at hand. Yet he also forgives. What a man, as Epictetus's mother would say.

And what a town: Aside from the typically boring B&B conversation, Dartford is darn near perfect, a haven (heaven) for Vito. But for how long? The exaggerated sentimentality must be serving as a mask; it's done ironically, probably both in homage to and parody of "Brokeback Mountain." It's done as counterpoint to posit what Vito must suspect: That it is only an idyll, and that whether or not he is literally whacked (never the most important issue on "The Sopranos"), there is something unreal about it, that it is destined to end, that his previous life will come calling–at his own behest. "Don't do it," more than one viewer shouted, watching with unfolding horror as Vito dialed his wife from a borrowed cell phone. Does he really think that name that appeared on the readout won't get back to Philly L.? The sentimentality glossing this portion of the episode was just that–gloss, and sign of how much the show's creators (especially David Chase himself) detest that worst of Italian traits.

It's confirmed in the scenes that take place back in the North Ward. When Tony waves to the old woman across the street, we think for a moment he might turn down Julianna's final bid. But $275 a square foot? Goodbye old neighborhood, as if it ever really existed at all. Anyone who knows a little about Newark and surrounding environs (Bloomfield, East Orange) knows that a little gentrification might be a good thing. The sentimental sheen applied in heavy layers by successive generations of Italians is a coverup–these are the folks who've fled to North Caldwell and East Brunswick and Livingston, after all, leaving the core neighborhoods of the old cities to rot.

And a great bit of dramatic craft, there, again: With the image of the old lady before us, how much were we rooting for Tony to say no to the arrival of Jamba Juice? But he is nothing if not a pragmatist–and corporate pragmatist, at that–and it will be up the Parisi's and Baccala's of the organization to seek other monetizing opportunities besides the simple shakedown. Look for more out-of-the-box thinking on the order of Bobby B's staged shooting of the would-be hip-hop star. Like functionaries inflating page views and ad clicks by spreading content over several web pages, the crew will have to work to do more (and make more) with less. And like oil execs and real estate tycoons manipulating their markets, Tony can benefit from the great American capitalist marketplace.

Other notes: Is Tony as liquid as we've been led to believe? His hospital stay put the issue out there, and it was touched on again when Tony winced at AJ's comment: "But you have all the money in the world!" And lest anyone think children don't notice the habits of their parents, AJ's comment about Tony's bowl of ice cream was perfect–much more real, much more authentic, and much less sentimental than any of the prefab crap about Godfather I and II. And the ever-blanker looks on AJ's face with each mention of his father by his club-kid friends were simple proof of the pain at the core.

Small moments, all of them, and as in the best of art they tell us big truths. The secret is in the precision of detail. Forget the broad gestures and potential whacks; focus on the fine points. And always be suspicious when small towns are shot in soft focus.


Repeat Viewings, Redux

April 6, 2006

Pursuant to a recent post, Epictetus is copping to a spontaneous viewing of "Body Heat" last night on Cinemax or Showtime or Starz or HBO, or incarnations thereof, or somewhere on what the previous generation quaintly called "the dial."

What quickly became clear (other than how different Kathleen Turner once looked) is that "Body Heat" could have been made in the forties with Fred MacMurray or John Garfield in the Ned Racine role. (Ned Racine! What a great name.) The sex was not all that explicit–in fact, the steamy clinches really were reminiscent of similar scenes in classic noir, save for tasteful display of bared shoulders here and sweaty abdomen there, plus one or two other body parts visible in Super Bowl telecasts of yore–and even the score seemed more appropriate to the flicks running on TCM most nights. And let's not forget the underrated Ted Danson, who shows unexpected nimbleness in his soft-shoe scenes (dancin', Danson–get it?).

Anyway, the question comes up again: Is this something Epictectus et familia would have actually and actively spent energy and money to see (digital cable being the ultimate passive medium)? Probably not (and thanks to babalicious for commenting on this issue).

But it also raises what might be a more interesting question: What are the criteria for specifically selecting a given certain film/program on DVD or pay-per-view? Which movies are worth the effort and money–and which just cannot be watched spontaneously, no matter what? Which demand your specific attention and why?

Example: Epictetus would probably not stop to watch "The Bicycle Thief" if it unexpectedly showed up on cable (an unlikely event, but never mind that). But Epictetus would rent it with the express purpose of sitting down to view it. Yes to "The Seven Samurai" on DVD, but no to "The Magnificent Seven" on DVD. And so forth.


Repeat Viewings

March 29, 2006

What is it about certain films that not only helps them stand up to but invite obsessive repeated viewings?

The question has taken on fresh urgency for Epictetus since a recent family gathering at which a tipsy aunt confided something more than mere fondness for "Boogie Nights." "Every time it's on," she whispered from behind a just-topped glass of red wine, "I have to watch it. And. I. Mean. Every. Time." Read the rest of this entry »


Superman, the only son

March 24, 2006

In the trailer for the new Superman, the following voice-over is intoned in deep earnestness: “For them I sent my only son.” Lord, save me from your followers. 


V for … what?

March 24, 2006

Initial thoughts on what some would anoint as the grand political statement we need now.

1) Natalie Portman, quite fetching for a time in ringlets and fitted blouses, is reminiscent in ways of Audrey Hepburn but with an earnest gravitas more suitable to our times. (We’ll also take the SNL hip-hop vid: We love you Natalie!)

2) Stephen Rea does a good Little Steven/Silvio impersonation as a hunched, self-recriminating investigating officer, but kills whatever meager momentum the narrative struggles to build

3) Dominoes? Butter? An account at a Fed-Ex like courier service? Quite a resourceful freedom fighter. Or terrorist. Evil-doer? Hero? 4) Stephen Fry, the talk-show host whose Benny Hill inspired parody of the chancellor gets him executed, was good–holding up on his own a minor story line that ended up being most compelling, especially for the relative subtlety in its dramatization.

In fact, it’s the overall bluntness of the movie that kills off whatever good ideas and intentions inspired it. Read the rest of this entry »