Day: August 21, 2011

In an 8.20 interview with Le Figaro‘s Jean-Paul Chaillet, Sean Penn basically threw up his hands and said “what the eff?” in a comment about The Tree of Life and the creative workings of Terrence Malick.

“I didn’t at all find on the screen the emotion of the script, which is the most magnificent one that I’ve ever read,” Penn said. “A clearer and more conventional narrative would have helped the film without, in my opinion, lessening its beauty and its impact. Frankly, I’m still trying to figure out what I’m doing there and what I was supposed to add in that context! What’s more, Terry himself never managed to explain it to me clearly.”

In short, whatever Penn had responded to or become excited about as an actor was “there” in the script, but then Mr. Intuitive Light of God started tossing the lettuce leaves around during filming and definitely in the cutting and hey, that’s the Malick process. “Lean” and “lucid” and “straight-shooting” are never the ultimate result.

I said a vaguely similar thing in a 6.29.11 riff about Malick’s 10.1.96 draft of The Thin Red Line. “It was tight and true and straight to the point, and it had no alligators sinking into swamps or shots of tree branches or pretty leaves or that South Sea native AWOL section or any of that languid and meditative ‘why do we vie with ourselves?’ and ‘why is there such strife in our hearts?’ stuff.

Remember also what I wrote during last May’s Cannes Film Festival, which was that there was once a much-longer cut of The Tree of Life and that Penn’s character had all kinds of dialogue on this version with a character arc and everything.

“I heard from a trusted source yesterday that Penn’s part in The Tree of Life, which is barely there with maybe ten lines of dialogue, if that, was fairly substantial in earlier cuts,” I wrote. “But like Adrien Brody‘s character in The Thin Red Line, it was gradually cut down to nothing. Penn is here but didn’t attend the Tree of Life press conference because…ask him.”

Tree of Life cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezski, remember, told Cahiers du Cinema that Malick was working on a six-hour cut of The Tree of Life.

A couple of nights ago I popped in a Bluray of Get Shorty (’95). For old times’ sake or whatever. Sixteen years ago and it feels like…I don’t know, six or seven years ago. And it hit me as I watched that most of the people who costarred in this thing are kind of done now, and they were so hot and kicking and on their game back then, or so it seemed. Savor the moment because it doesn’t last long.

The only two cast members who are still happening are John Travolta and James Gandolfini. And you could argue that Gandolfini’s career is more vital and/or necessary than Travolta’s these days, especially considering reports about Travolta intending to costar with Sylvester Stallone in Expendables 2. There’s no way Gandolfini would even flirt with a film like that.

Rene Russo fell off the map about five or six years ago (her last big score was ’99’s The Thomas Crown Affair), although she played Odin’s wife in Thor. Gene Hackman has retired. Danny DeVito used to be “Danny DeVito” — now he’s “Danny DeVito on TV.” I think most of us suspected he was over theatrically when he costarred with Parker Posey in The Oh in Ohio (’06). The last time I took notice of Delroy Lindo was when he was in Domino six years ago. Bette Midler has her musical career but movie-wise she pretty much stopped mattering after The First Wives Club (’96), and her last role of any consequence was the titular character in Drowning Mona (’00). David Paymer…what’s he doing?

I’m not faulting any of these people, mind. They’re fine talents, etc. I’ve enjoyed their best performances as much as the next guy or gal. I’m just saying “it sure gets away from you.” Your life and career can feel right and high-throttle and the sky’s the limit, and then you turn around and it all turns to ether.

But I am sure am glad that Barry Sonnenfeld is no longer a directorial force to be reckoned with.

Yesterday afternoon I posted some commentary — 95 words, to be exact — along with the latest trailer for Vera Farmiga‘s Higher Ground (Sony Classics, 8.26), which I’ll finally see Monday night. What I said was fairly dismissive about the concept of “God”, believers in Christian theology and/or those who live life in search of divine guidance. An hour or two after the post (which I called “God Is A Drag”) appeared, it un-posted itself and refused to appear.

The reason, I naturally and immediately assumed, was that some sort of cosmic force had decided to intervene. So let’s give it another go, shall we? I’m also going to re-post the nine responses from HE readers.

“People whose lives are, in their minds, basically about finding spiritual fulfillment and deliverance after they’re dead are ridiculous figures,” I wrote. “They’re certainly appalling. The only reason religions are good for society is that they keep the nutters (i.e. those who would otherwise be seeking solace in alcohol or drugs or in the ravings of some antisocial cult leader) in line, and they instill a sense of moral order and temperance among people who lack the intelligence or drive or hunger to seek spiritual satori on their own.”