Permission

New York is a magical place for lovers.

(2017) Dramedy (Good Deed) Rebecca Hall, Dan Stevens, Jason Sudeikis, Gina Gershon, Francois Arnaud, Raul Castillo, David Joseph Craig, Axel Crano, Bridget Everett, Michelle Hurst, Marc Iserlis, Morgan Spector, Sarah Steele, Lindsey Elizabeth, Mariola Figueroa. Directed by Brian Crano

 

It’s no secret that part of any romantic relationship is sex. Some relationships require monogamy; others allow a more open sexual relationship. One size really doesn’t fit all when it comes to making a romance work.

Will (Stevens) and Anna (Hall) have been dating for more than a decade, since both were essentially old enough to date. They live in a nice loft in Brooklyn and are getting ready to move in to a house that Will is fixing up for them. Will owns a handmade furniture business along with Reece (Spector) who is the husband of Hale (Craig) who is Anna’s brother.

At Anna’s birthday celebration, Reece points out to the birthday girl and her beau that the two have never been with anyone else sexually other than each other and that there was no way for either one to know if they were actually right for each other until they had. Although Reece was drunk at the time, the idea sticks in their craws until Anna brings it up and forces Will to talk about it with her. They come to a mutual agreement (albeit reluctantly on Will’s part) that the two should see other people for sex while remaining together as a couple.

Anna wastes no time, getting into the bed of a sensitive musician type named Dane (Arnaud) who as time goes by starts to show signs he’s falling in love with Anna. In the meantime, Will becomes involved with an aggressive older lady (Gershon) who introduces him to the joys of psychotropics and bathtub sex. She gives him permission to do anything he wants – so he does.

In the meantime, Hale very much wants to bring a baby into his life although Reece isn’t enthusiastic about the idea. Hale’s baby fever is exacerbated by Glenn (Sudeikis), a new father who hangs out in the park that Hale frequents.

Both couples are on the crux of something. Can Reece and Hale add another life into their family without jeopardizing the relationship they have? And speaking of relationships, will that of Will and Anna be able to withstand the infidelity even as permitted as it might be?

In many ways there is plenty of familiar territory being explored here. There have been several movies about couples that decide to allow their partners to indulge in sexual flings and in general it doesn’t end well for those couples who choose to go through with it. I don’t know if that’s an American perspective or not – European films seem to be much less uptight about sexual fidelity in relationships than American ones are.

I like the way there relationship between Reece and Hale is depicted. Too often the gay couple is either comic relief or too good to be true. Hale and Reece have problems, the type of problems that many straight couples have to deal with. The fact that they are gay is almost incidental and that’s true to life. The thing is, gay couples are just couples. They have their ups and downs, they have to deal with the same issues straight couples deal with and they are not always lovey dovey to one another. The fact that the writer/director is gay probably has a lot to do with it but it is nice to see a gay couple presented as just a normal couple struggling to stay together just as a straight couple would be. We need more of that.

Hall and Stevens, both Brits incidentally, have a nominal chemistry between them but nothing that jumps off the screen at you. In many ways that’s what you might expect for a long-term couple who are at a crossroads; it’s getting to the point where their relationship needs to grow into the next level and neither one appears to be enthusiastic about doing so. While the sex thing is a catalyst, one suspects that Will and Anna would be having a crisis even if they hadn’t introduced this permission to cheat into the mix.

The movie does have an abundance of indie clichés – the hipster Brooklyn environment, the somewhat twee score (which becomes a little overbearing at times) and the apparent living beyond their means of the couple in question. This seems to me to have been better off set in Queens than in Brooklyn which is a little too hipster and cliché for the story Crano wants to tell.

I also didn’t care for the ending which was inevitable and a bit telegraphed. I don’t need a happy ending to be happy about a movie but the emotional fallout of the events of the film doesn’t ring true in all cases. Relationships are messy and the ending is a little bit too pat for my taste and therefore a little less authentic. However the filmmaker did make an effort to create a thoughtful movie on a subject that concerns all couples and he gets points for that. I just wish he could have ended it better.

REASONS TO GO: It’s nice to see a gay couple treated as a couple that happens to be gay.
REASONS TO STAY: The ending felt inauthentic and really took me out of the film in not a good way.
FAMILY VALUES: There is plenty of profanity, sexuality and some brief nudity.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Hall and Spector are married to each other and Brian Crano and David Joseph Craig are also married to each other.
BEYOND THE THEATERS: Amazon, Fandango Now, Google Play,  Vudu
CRITICAL MASS: As of 2/10/17: Rotten Tomatoes: 72% positive reviews. Metacritic: 61/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Hall Pass
FINAL RATING: 6.5/10
NEXT: The Ritual

Advertisement

Chuck (2017)

Liev Schreiber gets ready to take on the role of Chuck Wepner.

(2017) Sports Biography (IFC) Liev Schreiber, Elisabeth Moss, Naomi Watts, Ron Perlman, Michael Rapaport, Jim Gaffigan, Pooch Hall, Jason Jones, Morgan Spector, Sadie Sink, Zina Wilde, Catherine Corcoran, Wass Stevens, Angela Marie Ray, Liz Celeste, Ivan Martin, Joe Starr, Jen Ponton, William Hill, Mark Borkowski, Marell Miniutti, Leslie Lyles, Megan Sikora. Directed by Phillippe Falardeau

 

America loves an underdog and perhaps there’s been no bigger underdog in U.S. boxing history than Chuck Wepner. A journeyman heavyweight in the 1970s based in Bayonne, New Jersey, he’d had a decent enough career, winning the Jersey State Heavyweight Championship but had never really fought any of the big dogs of the era – until 1975.

Wepner (Schreiber) has a certain amount of local fame as he is treated like he’d won the heavyweight championship of the world. Of course, admiration doesn’t put food on the table so he runs a liquor route to make ends meet. His wife Phyliss (Moss) endures the boxing in which he takes terrible beatings but Chuck tends to have a wandering eye – and the other body parts unfortunately wander as well. The marriage is most definitely sailing through rough waters and while Chuck is devoted to his daughter Kimberly (Sink) his ego tends to get in the way of making smart choices.

After Ali (Hall) wins the Rumble in the Jungle against George Foreman, his manager Don King invites Wepner to fight for the championship against Ali, then just a little past his prime. The match is expected to be a joke but Wepner gives Ali everything he can handle, coming just 18 seconds away from going the distance until Ali, angered that Wepner had knocked him down, pummeled him into a technical knockout. Still, Wepner became a folk hero.

A young out-of-work actor named Sylvester Stallone (Spector) sees the fight and is inspired to write a character based on Wepner – Stallone names him Rocky Balboa. The rest is history and although Wepner has nothing to do with the movie itself, he feels a sense of accomplishment when the movie wins multiple Oscars as if he had been responsible. He starts billing himself as “The Real Rocky.”

But all the accolades and adulation get Chuck’s ego spiraling out of control and he spends the Disco Decade in debauchery, doing drugs, drinking heavily and partying with women. Having had enough, Phyliss leaves him for good and Chuck sinks into a deep depression fueled by drugs and alcohol. Standing by him is his estranged brother John (Rapaport), his best friend (Gaffigan), his longtime manager (Perlman) and a barmaid named Linda (Watts) who is unimpressed with Chuck’s fame. Will it be enough to get him back on the straight and narrow?

Because the stories are so similar, the first part of the film comes off as kind of a Rocky Lite which may or may not be what the filmmakers intended. Then, in a sense, it all goes off the rails as Wepner gets lost in the trappings of fame, 70s style – discos, tons of drugs, tons of sex. It turns into a cautionary tale at that point which is diametrically different to the underdog story that it began as.

One of the things that really caught my attention is that Falardeau accomplishes either digitally or by using film stock the look of era movies which helps keep you right in the 70s. The trappings of the time – the truly obnoxious hair, the boxy cars, the outlandish clothes and the pulse of disco – further set the tone.

Schreiber of late has gotten notoriety for playing the Hollywood fixer Ray Donovan on Showtime and I can’t help but notice that while both Donovan and Wepner are violent men, Donovan is clever and street smart while Wepner is easily swayed by praise. Wepner has an ego which makes some sense since he came from a background in which his ego along with his body took a pounding. When everybody loves you, it’s hard not to love yourself.

While there is some humor to the movie it falls flat in that regard a little more often than I would have liked. The humor is a bit heavy-handed and the movie would have benefited from a lighter tone overall. As for the story, some of you might be aware of Wepner’s history but most people won’t; still, the story is a bit predictable even though it is based on Wepner’s life. Hollywood has had lots of Wepners in its history.

As boxing movies go, this one isn’t going to make any grand changes to the genre but it doesn’t disgrace itself either. It’s entertaining enough and for those who are wary of the big summer blockbusters that are taking up most of the screens in the local multiplex, this makes a very entertaining counter option.

REASONS TO GO: The movie was shot to look like it was filmed in the 70s which enhances the sense of era.  Schreiber is appealing as Wepner in a Ray Donovan-esque way.
REASONS TO STAY: The filmmaker needed a lighter touch here. Overall the film is inoffensive but predictable.
FAMILY VALUES: There is all sorts of profanity, plenty of drug use, some sexuality and nudity, a lot of boxing violence and a few bloody images.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The movie was originally titled The Bleeder in reference to Wepner’s boxing nickname “The Bayonne Bleeder.” Wepner claims the title changed due to it sounding like a horror film but it is also well-known that he detested the nickname.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 5/26/17: Rotten Tomatoes: 77% positive reviews. Metacritic: 68/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Ali
FINAL RATING: 6.5/10
NEXT: Power Rangers