Organ Grinder

email this story
read comments (36)
post a comment

I had a pretty good current going when I tapped out my 12.12 pan of The Day The Earth Stood Still. But my Seven Pounds review hasn't panned out at all, in large part because I'm not allowed to talk about the basic shot -- i.e., the climactic third-act revelation that tells viewers what Will Smith's character has actually been up to, which has been kept obscure throughout 98% of the film.

Unless the viewer has simply read the IMDB reader comments about the plot particulars, which have been sitting there plain as day for many months.

Seven Pounds is about a guy played by Will Smith trying to make amends, save himself, save others, find redemption, etc. An important third-act component is a big white jellyfish. Suffice that there's a satirical Seven Pounds poster, inspired by one for Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, on my back-up drive that I'd like to post some day.

I saw Seven Pounds in the company of former Fox News entertainment guy and stand-up comedian Bill McCuddy. We were sitting maybe three feet apart in the 7th floor Sony screening room with no one else around, but just for fun we began texting each other with impressions as the film went along and got worse and worse. About 45 minutes in McCuddy wrote, "If only Smith could save this movie."

Always be suspicious when a big movie star plays a nice guy looking to help people who need it. Especially if the good guy is played by a guy with perfect white teeth who writes checks for Scientology. Double-especially if the fictional do-gooder has decided to limit his largesse to a specific number of recipients (which automatically indicates an overly schematic and precious mentality), in this case seven. And triple-especially if the doer of good things has chosen the recipients based on a judgment call -- upon his personal reckoning that they "deserve" it.

I've always disliked the word "deserve." Nobody ever deserves anything except for the fee or salary that they've earned with good respectable work. But nobody deserves anything in the greater sense of the term -- to live or die, to become rich or not, to have a pleasant or unpleasant life. Life has always happened without moral rhyme or reason or any sense of justice or fairness, certainly without a cosmic entity deciding that this or that should or shouldn't happen because the people involved "deserve" their fate.

The characters who've been chosen to receive Smith's help, according to the Seven Pounds merit-badge system, are in their own way centered, fair-minded, even-mannered -- people with kindly, positive, compassionate attitudes who -- I can certainly reveal this much -- are between a rock and a hard place health-wise.

I don't agree with arbitrary decisions about this or that person's moral, humanistic worth. As long as Smith is playing a guy engaged in a kind of Christ-like endeavor (despite his motive being primarily about self-redemption), why not adopt Christ's attitude during his time on earth about spending time with the sinners on the theory that they need his help more than the morally disciplined? This movie would have a lot better if Smith had gone this route and decided to help only scumbags, criminals, drug users and the like.

McCuddy wrote me a day after the screening with this thought: "Think how much better Seven Pounds might might might have been without Smith's baggage. For once the well-oiled Smith machine actually takes away from what could have perhaps been a gut-wrenching little indie starring a bunch of unknowns."

McCuddy also came up with the title of this piece -- "Organ Grinder."

N.Y. Times critic A.O. Scott was truly feeling his oats when he wrote this pan. Read and enjoy -- it's pretty damn delicious.

Release Me<< previous | next >>Fate

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on December 19, 2008 at 11:16 AM

comment #1

Joshua Mooney says ...

Lemme guess--Will is giving away his organs to the sick ones: 1)eyes 2)liver 3) and 4) kidneys 5) heart 6) lungs 7)a baby's arm holding an apple.

Posted by Joshua Mooney at December 19, 2008 1:27 PM

comment #2

George Prager says ...

Another movie about movie stars, as John Gregory Dunne would've said.

Posted by George Prager at December 19, 2008 1:28 PM

comment #3

John Cocktosten says ...

This is telenovela fodder. It's truly awful, and intellectually insulting. Not to mention ridiculous, pretentious, and a serious blow to Will Smith's reservoir of good will. It starts hitting the unintentional comedy scale with a large mallet in the last act though. But, alas, I still can't recommend it even for mocking/shadenfreude.

Posted by John Cocktosten at December 19, 2008 1:29 PM

comment #4

George Prager says ...

WIll Smith plays identical septuplets.

Posted by George Prager at December 19, 2008 1:31 PM

comment #5

Rich S. says ...

Scott's review is priceless and really, really makes me want to see it.

DO NOT TOUCH THE JELLYFISH! Seriously. Just don't.

Posted by Rich S. at December 19, 2008 1:32 PM

comment #6

MilkMan says ...

Seven Pounds” is rated PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned). Swearing. SOULFUL SEX BY CANDLELIGHT. Car accident. Eggplant parmesan.

Is there any kind of sex in Hollywood films other than Soulful Sex by Candlelight? No, there isn't. Always with the finger clasping and orgasm inducing chest kisses. That's why the Brown Bunny was so awesome. A straight up blow job, in service of the story no less, although I'm sure there are plenty of people who disagree with me, even though that blow job is the most honest portrayal of male psychosexual pathology I've seen in a long time. A guy misses his girlfriend so he thinks about her and what does he think about? What it would be like to get a blowjob from her one last time. Brilliant.

If you need to be told not to see Seven Pounds then you deserve to have to sit through it at least three times.

Posted by MilkMan at December 19, 2008 1:43 PM

comment #7

ZayTonday says ...

AWW HELL NAW

Posted by ZayTonday at December 19, 2008 1:48 PM

comment #8

Geoff says ...

I know I should hate this film, but I find myself agreeing with Poland and Ebert.

I didn't love it, but I thought it was well done. It's absolutely true that without Will Smith, with less money and even in another language...this film would receive better reviews.

I kept thinking self-loathing instead of redemption the whole time through.....but I don't even feel like defending it.

Posted by Geoff at December 19, 2008 1:48 PM

comment #9

Radewart says ...

I'm sorry but I don't trust this review, because Wells obviously hates Will Smith so much, I don't think he can accuratly review the film. He went into the screening with percieved notions based on Smith's celebrity and was looking to attack the film. It's should be no small suprise that Wells is friends with Bill McCuddy. I remember seeing that guy on Fox News, what a smug asshole.

Posted by Radewart at December 19, 2008 2:00 PM

comment #10

BurmaShave says ...

Yay texting in a movie theater. Always cool.

Posted by BurmaShave at December 19, 2008 2:38 PM

comment #11

erniesouchak says ...

I'm glad you two were alone, Jeff. People who text during movies (even press screenings) should be shot.

Posted by erniesouchak at December 19, 2008 3:15 PM

comment #12

rgmax99 says ...

The entire plot, spoilers and all, has been on Wikipedia for more than a few days.

SPOLIER! SPOILER! SPOILER!

Just wondering, since I won't be wasting my time on this, I'm curious about the big surprise. After Smith takes a bath with the jellyfish, how did he manage to get his organs to all those people he picked? Did he have Post-It notes on his heart, liver, etc. or something? "This heart goes to Rosario...this liver goes to..."

Posted by rgmax99 at December 19, 2008 3:16 PM

comment #13

MindlessObamaton says ...

MM, FTW.

Posted by MindlessObamaton at December 19, 2008 3:17 PM

comment #14

televisiontears says ...

Ditto to erniesouchack. Yeah, I'm sure the movie's garbage, but texting in a theater is unprofessional, disrespectful, and childish - regardless of context. Not only this, but Wells seems to boast about it when he should be downright ashamed.

Posted by televisiontears at December 19, 2008 3:32 PM

comment #15

televisiontears says ...

It is a bit funny to think about, though:

Wells: this movie sux ballz lol
McCuddy: 4realz. does dawson show some b00b?
Wells: nope pg-13
McCuddy: that is teh suck
Wells: 4realz

Posted by televisiontears at December 19, 2008 3:42 PM

comment #16

Renfield says ...

Here's a surefire way to get a douche to stop texting during a movie. I've done it twice and have had fantastic results both times.

When he/she starts texting, lean over, making yourself completely obvious, and look at what they're typing.

You're sure to get a strange look but it stops them in their tracks.

The second time, I got a. "Can I help you?".

I replied, "Oh! I just wanted to see what you thought of the movie."

Anyone who texts during a film is complete jackass who has no love for film or consideration for others.

Posted by Renfield at December 19, 2008 3:49 PM

comment #17

bfm says ...

Renfield, I love that. Must try it next time.

Posted by bfm at December 19, 2008 5:14 PM

comment #18

Chase Kahn says ...

I can't stand Rosario Dawson, I wanted Kurt Russell to strap her to his car and T-Bone the shit out of her in DEATH PROOF...

Posted by Chase Kahn at December 19, 2008 5:23 PM

comment #19

Admiral82 says ...

MilkMan: Thank you! That is a spot on analysis of The Brown Bunny. What a subtle, beautiful film about loneliness and despair. I remember hearing about the scene you described and thought "Hell yeah! I gotta see this." Then when I got to the cinema and actually saw it, I was broadsided! And you're absolutely right, the scene was necessary to further the story. I'm sure alot of people have alot to say about Vincent Gallo, but the man has huge balls! (No pun intended) What did you think of Buffalo '66?

I digress, I can't wait to NOT see Seven Pounds! I shouldn't be like that...

It just really bugs me when I can smell a stinker all the way from the trailer.

Posted by Admiral82 at December 19, 2008 5:28 PM

comment #20

deadre says ...

the movie looks awful, the story is awful and i hate the producers so I'm thrilled, beyond thrilled at the reviews and i hope it gets a Razzy.........

Posted by deadre at December 19, 2008 5:29 PM

comment #21

Daniel Tayag says ...

Wells, texting throughout the film? It looks like you're turning into Benny Boy Lyons without all the starfucking.

Posted by Daniel Tayag at December 19, 2008 5:55 PM

comment #22

MilkMan says ...

I think Buffalo '66 is one of the top five American films of the last twenty years. That's what I think. I think Vincent Gallo is a very innovative, sensitive filmmaker who has made two uber-personal films that lead me to believe that one day his body of work, however small, will rival that of a Cassavetes or Eustache. Buffalo '66's framing and compostions and use of color tell me that Gallo is a real artist. Along with Bruno Dumont and Jonathan Glazer and Travis Wilkerson, Gallo is the filmmaker whose next film I look forward to the most.

Posted by MilkMan at December 19, 2008 5:59 PM

comment #23

MilkMan says ...

Admiral 82: I also forgot to mention Gaspar Noe and Claire Denis. These are the filmmakers I group Gallo with. I think he's that good.

Noe's next film is going to be amazing.

Posted by MilkMan at December 19, 2008 6:03 PM

comment #24

MilkMan says ...

Oh: and Reygadas. Love, LOVE his films. Battle in Heaven is just too lovely for words. So is Anapola Mushkadiz.

Posted by MilkMan at December 19, 2008 6:09 PM

comment #25

actionman says ...

What is Noe's next film? Irreversible is still the most fucked up film I've ever seen.

Posted by actionman at December 19, 2008 7:11 PM

comment #26

smiley says ...

Texting in a theatre? Really? The personal attacks on Will Smith are a nice touch as well. I'm amazed awardsdaily links back to this dung.

Posted by smiley at December 19, 2008 7:36 PM

comment #27

Ray says ...

A jellyfish could shit out a better plot - and could surely direct a better movie with one of its flailing, randomly-directed tentacles - than anyone involved in this piece of garbage.

Unbelievable. It might be the worst film of the year by anyone semi-competent.

Posted by Ray at December 19, 2008 7:41 PM

comment #28

dobbsy says ...

Put my name on the petition next to Poland, Ebert, Honeycutt et al who gave POUNDS a fair shake.

Overwrought, sure.

But here's the rub: there are, by my last count, about a half dozen completely overwrought films contending for top honors this award season. And most of them are less ambitious, less interesting than this well-crafted tale of a bright man who does something so deadly stupid that he takes all his powers of intellect and invention and applies them to a method of penance that can satisfy his own pride and demanding nature.

More interesting than the slams are any theories in circulation about what is behind them. Please don't bother with a simple THE MOVIE SUCKS. Sucky movies find love all the time. Something about this movie has pushed buttons way beyond the admitted shortcomings of the film.

The pack mentality that Jeffrey regularly decries here (QUOTE: "WHY IS EVERYONE VOTING FOR SLUMDOG AND WALL E????") seems very much in evidence. Like Jeffrey, I always grate at the baying of the pack whether it be in lockstep over a "masterpiece" or some so-called "complete mess."

I also listened to the pans of GRAN TORINO after the first LA screening and the total dismissal and outright venomous contempt for the film that appeared to be the consensus made Dargis's impassioned defense of the film all the more charming. Happily, a lot of really smart critics and filmmakers are giving that film the fair shake that's missing here.

As for the folks who've ripped POUNDS to shreds, I will be counting the days until they overpraise some incompetent, pretentious overripe piece of tripe that somehow matches the stripes on their cashmere sweaters. And I will be back with their names and serial numbers.

Posted by dobbsy at December 20, 2008 12:47 AM

comment #29

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Wells to televisiontears, daniel tayag and others who've ragged on me for texting through the last 60% of Seven Pounds: One, there was no one in our vicinity at all -- we were in the rear seats, and the other two guys in the theatre were several rows in front of us. Two, sitting impassively and open-pored while watching Seven Pounds was not an option. If it had been even a semi-absorbing, half-tolerable film, it would have been boorish and unacceptable to text...but we HAD to do something. It was Will Smith and Gabriele Muccino vs. poor little Jeffrey Wells and Bill McCuddy -- we HAD to fight back and respond WHILE THE FILM WAS PLAYING. It demanded immediate action. If anyone had been remotely near us, or if there was the slightest chance that our text screens might have provided even the slightest distraction for anyone, I would just sat there and taken it and suffered silently.

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at December 20, 2008 6:04 AM

comment #30

The Hoyk says ...

I've heard of movie studios politely asking critics not to reveal plot details in a review, but I think this is the first time I've heard of them actually demanding it; you're not the only critic I've read who has said they are not allowed to discuss the plot point. I suppose much like breaking street date on a review, the penalties would involve bans from future screenings and restriction of access to cast and crew for interviews. It seems all so draconian. But then, that's Sony; yet another reason why I hate them with the fuel of a thousand suns.

Posted by The Hoyk at December 20, 2008 6:37 AM

comment #31

rgmax99 says ...

Dittos to all re Gallo!

The Brown Bunny is -- and I don't give a crap what anyone says -- a brilliant film.

I could've ridden along with his character in that van for four more hours.

Posted by rgmax99 at December 20, 2008 8:57 AM

comment #32

smiley says ...

"If it had been even a semi-absorbing, half-tolerable film, it would have been boorish and unacceptable to text...but we HAD to do something." - Wells

Yeah. You could've acted like a professional reviewer and saved your criticisms for this blog. Instead you acted like an absolutely boorish filmgoer that you yourself have actively called for their deaths.

Posted by smiley at December 20, 2008 11:17 AM

comment #33

penis buyutucu says ...

Posted by penis buyutucu at November 8, 2010 8:41 AM

comment #34

Tivali says ...

Thank you for this useful information
Lancel
Lanvin
Loewe
Manolo Blahnik
Marc Jacobs
Marni
Miu Miu

Posted by Tivali at December 16, 2010 3:47 PM

comment #35

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability systems

Posted by janee at May 19, 2011 5:06 AM

comment #36