Take My Nose…Please


Lisa Lampinelli reacts to finding Christmas displays up in March at Wal-Mart.

Lisa Lampinelli reacts to finding Christmas displays up in March at Wal-Mart.

(2016) Documentary (Parvenu Ventures) Emily Askin, Jackie Hoffman, Joan Rivers, Kathy Griffin, Star Jones, Cher, Wanda Sykes, Roseanne Barr, Margaret Cho, Lisa Lampinelli, Judy Gold, Stacey Eisner, Dr. Mark Constantion, Phyllis Diller, Dr. Vail C. Reese, Linda Wells, Rob Fuchs, Steve Smyth, Dr. Sherrell J. Aston, Dr. Paula J. Martin, Julie Halston, Virginia Postrel, Adrianne Tolsch. Directed by Joan Kron

miami-film-festival-2017

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, meaning that the definition of beauty is subjective. That’s not quite true however. Women, particularly those in the entertainment industry, are held up to almost impossible standards of attractiveness – a svelte figure, soft skin, shiny hair, perfectly applied make-up – women spend a ridiculous amount of time “getting ready” and not because they all want to but because it is expected.

In general, women have been made to feel unattractive if they don’t look like a supermodel. They starve themselves to get into a size 2 dress and get surgery to augment their breasts because men like ‘em big. And as far as cosmetic surgery goes, women make up more than 90% of the patients. Some of it is vanity but how much is it really?

Take My Nose…Please follows two comediennes who are considering getting nose jobs. Emily Askin is fairly new to the business but she has been told point blank that in order to find success in the industry a smaller nose is a must. Jackie Hoffman is a veteran comic who believes herself to be ugly but has nonetheless had a pretty decent career. She regrets not getting a nose job when she was offered one early on in her career and has decided that now approaching middle age she wants to get one done now. We do follow them from the initial consultation to the final unveiling. It’s somewhat fascinating just from a “how does the process work” standpoint but it isn’t as interesting at least to me as the other part of the movie.

Kron also spends a lot of time looking at how cosmetic surgery is often not spoken about publicly although comediennes have been unusually open about it; Phyllis Diller was one of the first celebrities to discuss her own cosmetic surgery in interviews and in her own act. These days those women who get work done are not shy about admitting it as far as female stand-ups go but when it comes to mainstream actresses and non-entertainment industry celebrities, cosmetic surgery is often a dirty little secret. In fact, non-celebrity women who have “work done” often don’t tell anyone but close friends and family.

In fact, as much time as is spent with Askin, Hoffman and their surgeons, the real center of the movie is how women self-perceive and how society affects that. One of the things I found refreshing is that Kron doesn’t appear to have a problem with women who have cosmetic surgery; women who think their noses are too big, hook too much or have an unsightly bump just want to improve themselves and there’s nothing wrong with that. A person ought to look the way they want to and if they can afford to have the surgery, good for them. I think that’s a far better attitude than stigmatizing women who have a nip and/or tuck done, or a boob job or a nose job as vain peacocks who are all about surface things. I didn’t get that impression from either Hoffman or Askin. Their goal was to make their lives better but there is the cautionary tale of Totie Fields which the movie does explore.

Fields was one of the funniest women of her time (the 60s into the mid-70s). She went into have some work done and complications from that surgery led to blood clots which led to the amputation of one of her legs. Her career was never the same and two years later she died from more blood clots causing a pulmonary embolism. She discusses her health problems candidly on a talk show, footage of which is shown in the film. Her story is perhaps the most heartbreaking in the movie.

Considering this is a first film, the work here is impressive. There are plenty of interviews which can be fatal to a documentary but Kron makes sure that the interviewees are funny and have something important to add, so the reliance on them isn’t a problem. There are plenty of very funny segments and even a little bit of insight as to what women think of themselves. If there’s any issue I have with the movie it’s just that Kron might be attempting to do a little too much – there are segments that don’t really add much to the movie and detract from the focus. Otherwise this is quite an excellent documentary that takes a subject some might find innocuous and turns it into something marvelous. That’s no easy feat, let me tell you.

REASONS TO GO: The film makes some valid and insightful points about how women are viewed by our society. The comediennes keep things light-hearted and interesting. Although there are a lot of talking heads at least they’re not boring.
REASONS TO STAY: There are some occasional tangents that didn’t need to be there.
FAMILY VALUES: There’s some profanity here.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Kron, who has spent most of her career as a journalist (the last 25 years at Allure) is making her film directing debut at age 89.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 3/4/17: Rotten Tomatoes: No score yet. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Truth About Beauty
FINAL RATING: 8/10
NEXT: Lipstick Under My Burkha

Advertisements

Desire for Beauty


The things we go through to look good.

The things we go through to look good.

(2013) Documentary (Green Box) Agata Kulesza, Maria Czubaszek, Lew Starowicz, Mikolaj Lizut, Katazyna Miller, Piotr Najsztub, Julia Pietrucha, Maria Rotkiel, Marzena Sienkiewicz, Agnieszka Szulim. Directed by Miguel Gaudencio

There is no doubt that our society in general is overly obsessed with physical beauty. We place a great deal of stock in it; We choose our mates largely due to it; we buy products because of it. Sex sells, so we all want to be sexy.

This unusual Polish documentary looks at the obsession with beauty as four individuals begin the road to plastic surgery. Kasia, a wife and mother, is going for a breast augmentation. She has always wanted larger breasts and although her husband insists that this isn’t something that he desires, she quite candidly tells interviewer Agata Kulesza (an acclaimed Polish actress, perhaps best known to American audiences for her role as the aunt and judge Wanda in Ida) that she is doing this for herself alone.

Kuba is an aspiring actor who seems handsome enough already; he thinks a little Botox here and there might get him roles that he wasn’t being considered for until now. Monika is having a few nips and tucks done; she wants to remain young and beautiful for as long as she can. However, she is denied the procedures she wants done; the doctors believe she is too young for it.

And finally there’s Kamilla, whose nose has been the cause of much bullying (we see a re-enactment of her school days when a bitchy young girl, after borrowing some smokes in the bathroom, proclaims haughtily “If I were you, I’d get plastic surgery.” Fed up with the teasing and the bullying, she resolves to get rhinoplasty which she sees as the key to finding peace and happiness for herself.

We follow all four of these subjects through the various stages of surgery, with Kulesza conducting periodic interviews while in Kamilla’s case, we see re-enactments of the teasing she has to endure. In fact, this is an odd mixture of documentary and drama; one reviewer characterized it as “reality TV” and she isn’t far off the mark. This isn’t scripted all that much but there are segments which certainly are. How much of it is scripted however is not very easily discernible; some of the situations seem rather contrived and/or convenient if indeed they are real.

The cinematography is exquisite here; some of the images are downright cinematic paintings. Subjects look pensively into the horizon, the light of the setting sun creating an angelic corona around their heads. Mothers play with children, chasing after them in the park. Friends hang out in clubs, dancing to the mechanized beat of modern music. While not all of the footage is germane to what is happening in the storylines, the movie would be less beautiful without it.

The subject of beauty and our attitudes towards it has an inherent problem; the subject itself is shallow. Beauty is, indeed, only skin deep and the societal obsession with it is something that would make a great documentary. At times there is some depth to the conversation here but it is incomplete; the director, who has done a couple of features as well as a passel of award-winning music videos, seems more focused on beautiful images than in depth of thought. Perhaps that is his point in a nutshell.

Nonetheless, I would have liked to see more on why society is so wrapped up in physical beauty and why it is such a driving force. This much is universal; it’s the same in Asia as it is in Europe and the Americas. Why is beauty so important to us? Why aren’t we more focused on, say, intelligence, or character? Alas, these questions aren’t even asked and perhaps this isn’t the right venue for it. The people who are focused on here are fairly simple and even though they are all already beautiful, they are not satisfied with it. That is, perhaps, the point after all.

The movie received a brief theatrical release in Europe but is hitting VOD here and can also be seen on Vimeo. While this is certainly not the last word on the subject, Desire for Beauty serves as an excellent starting point to begin a discussion on how this obsession with looks is impacting society – and ourselves.

REASONS TO GO: Fascinating subject. Interesting blend of drama and documentary.
REASONS TO STAY: Not always easy to tell where dramatic recreations begin and documentary ends. Unavoidably shallow in places.
FAMILY VALUES: Some nudity and harsh language as well as some graphic surgery footage not for the squeamish.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Kulesza accepted her role in the film after meeting with the director despite the fact that there was no script written.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 7/13/15: Rotten Tomatoes: No score yet. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Girl Model
FINAL RATING: 6/10
NEXT: Roar

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For


Born to be wild.

Born to be wild.

(2014) Action (Dimension) Mickey Rourke, Josh Brolin, Eva Green, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Powers Boothe, Rosario Dawson, Jamie Chung, Jessica Alba, Dennis Haysbert, Christopher Meloni, Jamie King, Bruce Willis, Alexa Vega, Jeremy Piven, Christopher Lloyd, Stacey Keach, Martin Csokas, Ray Liotta, Juno Temple, Jude Ciccolella, Julia Garner, Kimberly Cox. Directed by Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller

The world is a rough place and nowhere is it rougher than Sin City. A place where the corrupt wield absolute power with ruthless brutality, where tough guys hook up with even tougher dames, where anything can be had – for a price. That price might just be your soul.

Like the original Sin City, the story here is told in vignettes. In one, the ultra-lucky Johnny (Gordon-Levitt) finds a poker game which is run by Senator Roark (Boothe), the spider at the center of all the corruption of Sin City – and he doesn’t like to lose. It’s bad for business.

In the next, Dwight (Brolin), a former newspaper photographer turned private eye is looked up by his ex-girlfriend Ava (Green) who dumped him for a rich man (Csokas). He never could turn down a damsel in distress, and the brutish Manute (Haysbert) who watches Ava for her husband, isn’t about to let Dwight get in the way of the plan.

 

Nancy (Alba) still mourns the death of her love, Detective John Hartigan (Willis) who watches over Nancy from the other side. Nancy longs to take her revenge on Senator Roark who was responsible for Hartigan’s early exit, but she doesn’t have the nerve to pull the trigger. However, when Roark comes after her she knows that she has no choice but to take on the powerful senator. She can’t do it alone and so she enlists the aid of Marv (Rourke), the iron mountain of a man who protects her as best he can in a city that has no mercy.

It has been nine years since the first Sin City has been released and times as well as movie-going audiences have changed. However, the look of the sequel/prequel is pretty much the same as the first, shot in black and white with bursts of color – a headful of red hair, a bright blue coat, burning green eyes – with highly stylized backgrounds. I would imagine nearly the entire film was shot on green screen.

Still, if you like your noir hard-bitten with sexy dames more dangerous than the big guns of the guys, you’re in for a treat. The all-star cast all are down with the vision of Rodriguez and Miller, the latter of whom penned the graphic novels that the movie is based on; for the record, two of the vignettes are from the graphic novels, two were written by Miller especially for the movie.

 

Rourke, as Marv, is a force of nature. He’s grim, not too bright and damn near unstoppable, the kind of jamoke you’d want to have your back in a fight. Rourke gives him dignity and a love of violence in equal measures. He don’t remember things too good but he can be counted on when the chips are down.

Brolin takes over for Clive Owen who played Dwight in the first movie – his work on The Knick precluded his involvement here. Brolin is less suave than Owen but captures the inner demons of Dwight far more viscerally than Owen did. They do explain why Dwight’s face changed (and near the end Brolin is wearing prosthetics to look more like Owen) but they can’t explain away the English accent that Dwight affects in the first movie. Oops.

In fact, several roles have been recast. Michael Clarke Duncan passed away between films and Haysbert takes over the role of Manute nicely. Brittany Murphy, who also passed away between movies, had played Shellie in the first movie. Rather than recast her, Miller and Rodriguez instead wrote a new character to take over her part. Finally, Devon Aoki who played Miho in the first film was pregnant at the time of shooting, so Jamie Chung took over. Miho in either actress’ hands is one of my favorite roles in the series.

What is also missing from the first movie is attitude. There’s some of it here but the movie is a little more grim than the first, takes itself a little more seriously than the first one did. Whereas there is a ton of violence and gore here, it is missing the same kind of energy that the first film had. It feels more cynical and less fun.

There is enough going on here to make it worth your while and fans of Mickey Rourke are going to enjoy him cutting loose here as he does – he’s in nearly all of the vignettes. There are also some fun cameos, like Christopher Meloni as a besotted cop, Christopher Lloyd as a medico who doesn’t ask too many questions and Ray Liotta as an amoral husband having an affair who plans to end it the hard way.

I did enjoy parts of it enough to give it a very mild recommendation, but it simply doesn’t hold up next to the first film which was over the top, and balls to the wall. This one tries to be but ends up trying too hard.

REASONS TO GO: Still a visual treat. Some hard-bitten performances.

REASONS TO STAY: Lacks panache. Grimmer than the first.

FAMILY VALUES:  All sorts of violence, bloodshed and foul language as well as a surfeit of sexuality and nudity.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: In the film Eva Green and Martin Csokas play a married couple. In real life, they had a romantic relationship for four years.

CRITICAL MASS: As of 9/1/14: Rotten Tomatoes: 45% positive reviews. Metacritic: 45/100.

COMPARISON SHOPPING: Cold in July

FINAL RATING: 5.5/10

NEXT: Carriers