"The Wackness"

email this story
read comments (20)
post a comment

Tipsters have been telling me to see Jonathan Levine's The Wackness, which I managed to catch this morning at 9:30. It's a quirky coming-of-age dramedy about a Jewish teenaged pot dealer (Josh Peck) falling for the lah-dee-dah step-daughter (Olivia Thirlby) of his marginally unhinged therapist (Ben Kingsley) whom he simultaneously develops a close friendship with. It was wildly cheered after this morning's Eccles screening, but I was yes and no about it.

The story, which director-writer Levine apparently based on his own adolescent wanderings, is well told but the basic points seem familiar as hell in numerous ways, and the visually murky, sepia-like photography starts to feel almost claustrophobic after a while. Petra Korner's widescreen images aren't Gordon Willis-y as much as flat-out funereal. I was sitting there going "good God, does everything have to look this fucking dreary? With all this grayish-green shadow slime covering everyone and everything?"

I don't like Peck that much either. He's a good spirited actor with a mashed-in face and jutting jaw that makes him resemble a genetically deficient Eric Bogosian, but there's something low-lifey about the guy. For his part in the film he's wearing one of those greasy, part-in-the-middle homie haircuts that kids had about 10 or 15 years ago, and he talks with a vaguely retarded-sounding "street" patois. It feels like a tremendous effort for Peck to speak a correctly-composed sentence and pronounce the words correctly...yo! He looks and talks like an alien. (Calorically challenged until a couple of years ago, Peck played the obnoxious porker who was killed in '04's Mean Creek.)

And I get riled at movies with characters who constantly medicate with cigarettes, joints, booze, lines of coke. Can any major character in this film get through five minutes straight without adding a stimulant to their system? Irritating as hell. I wanted to throw something at the screen after a while.

But Kingsley's pot-smoking therapist is gloriously skewed in this thing. He's almost enough of a reason alone to see it. But that damn cinematography, man...it was really bringing me down. Then you add in Peck's weird and all those fucking cigarettes and doobies that everyone keeps sucking into their lungs and before you know it you're thinking about hitting a health club just to flush the experience out of your system.

"Ballast" review<< previous | next >>Steven Sebring, Patti Smith

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on January 20, 2008 at 1:58 PM

comment #1

MAGGA says ...

Wells, there is something to be said for allowing someone elses reality to stimulate you. There are people who self-medicate this way. There are, believe it or not, smokers and coke users out there with lives and value. And there are people who feel abou life the way dark cinematography symbolises. I know nothing about this movie, but the flaws you listed leads me to almost believe that you are looking for movies about yourself rather than ones that allow you to parttake in the reality of others.

Posted by MAGGA at January 20, 2008 3:23 PM

comment #2

businesstoolz says ...

You're really beginning to show your age Wells.

"For his part in the film he's wearing one of those greasy, part-in-the-middle homie haircuts that kids had about 10 or 15 years ago, and he talks with a vaguely retarded-sounding "street" patois."

The film does take place in '94. Unless you missed that part. From what I understand I'll love it. I do want to see it. I was 22 in '94 had a haircut like that, walked everywhere with a backpack on and was rarely without a "blunt" or some Black Moon on my discman. I'm sure Jeff has no idea who Black Moon is. I think the film will go right over the heads of people Jeff's age. Plus, (like Jeff's son for instance) there is another generation too young for it so they wont get it from that perspective either.

I think I'm going to go listen to Liquid Swords on iPod. Another reference Jeff's generation wont get.

Posted by businesstoolz at January 20, 2008 3:55 PM

comment #3

Monument says ...

I don't want to see this for a purely arbitrary reason, the name. If only it had been written by Diablo Cody, then I could really hate it.

And I don't know about the movie, but people in real life who are constantly self medicating are the absolute worst. Whether it's the guy that needs to smoke every 15 minutes, the chick with the Diet Coke fused to her hand, the jackass (male or female) that insists that they can't do anything with their "Starbucks" (not coffee, Starbucks). As for the rest, I've known plenty of junkies, it's a sad and pitiable existence, far beyond irritating.

Posted by Monument at January 20, 2008 3:56 PM

comment #4

T. Holly says ...

Devin Faraci enjoying himself way to easily at his first Sundance.

Posted by T. Holly at January 20, 2008 4:25 PM

comment #5

T. Holly says ...

toooo, way.

Posted by T. Holly at January 20, 2008 4:26 PM

comment #6

rocco says ...

"yes and no"??...what, have you officially retired mezzo mezzo?

Posted by rocco at January 20, 2008 4:54 PM

comment #7

Rothchild says ...

This is a 10 out of 10 movie. Whoever snatches it up is going to make a big chunk of money.

I really admired Peck's choice to have a 15 year old haircut in a movie that takes place 13 years ago.

Posted by Rothchild at January 20, 2008 5:11 PM

comment #8

shepherd12345 says ...

Wackness is good but classic "sundance" quirkfest - the commercial hit of the fest BY FAR is Bigger Stronger Faster, the steroids doc - check out the variety review. This thing is going to play for months in the flyover zone.

Posted by shepherd12345 at January 20, 2008 5:50 PM

comment #9

christian says ...

Here's Bill Hicks on the subject of cultural self-medication:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=J10w3FuCwfQ&feature=related

Posted by christian at January 20, 2008 6:09 PM

comment #10

Josh Massey says ...

Change. The. Title.

Posted by Josh Massey at January 20, 2008 6:22 PM

comment #11

erniesouchak says ...

This movie pretty much blows, and I fully agree with Wells re: the cinematography: arbitrarily ugly. It's set in 1994, for Chrissakes, why all the sepia? Sir Ben must've owed someone affiliated with this thing a huge favor.

Posted by erniesouchak at January 20, 2008 6:37 PM

comment #12

D.Z. says ...

Didn't this movie already get made in 1994? It was titled Basketball Diaries, if I recall...

Posted by D.Z. at January 20, 2008 9:10 PM

comment #13

D.Z. says ...

Oh, and Oliver Stone's doing a Bush movie nine years too late... http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ie2ce917e12a453acb5527861ca60d093

Posted by D.Z. at January 20, 2008 9:11 PM

comment #14

jeffmcm says ...

Shut up, DZ.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 20, 2008 11:20 PM

comment #15

Walter Sobchak says ...

"quirky coming-of-age dramedy"? What's NOT to like?

Does it have a cute soundtrack by Feist, too?

Posted by Walter Sobchak at January 21, 2008 12:05 AM

comment #16

le corbeau says ...

Oliver Stone tackling any subject is too late. Too late for me to care what insanity and inanity a drug-addled rich guy with an ADD directing and editing style will bring to it.

I'd rather watch Salvador every night for a week than Oliver Stone's next seven movies once each.

Posted by le corbeau at January 21, 2008 5:12 AM

comment #17