Ten Statements About....PURPLE RAIN (1984)

"Batgir--no wait, it's just Prince...."

"You wouldn't pass the initiation."
"What initiation?"
"Well, for starters you have to purify yourself in the waters of Lake Minnetonka."

1) Okay, let's put this on the table here....this is a thoroughly plotless little film, with a narrative that boils down to 'I don't wanna do other people's music until my abusive dad almost kills himself, and now I'm willing to do other people's music.' Somehow, this tiny little shred of story is enough to occupy almost two hours of running time!

2) ....and director Albert Magnoli is able to do this by just running through the movie like he's been set on fire. Magnoli utilizes a number of cinematic tricks to conceal how little there is in this film including montage, parallel scenes, audio/visual editing dissonance, and other things obviously influenced by music video language....and the result is a film that should by no means be able to keep up a fast narrative flow flowing extremely quickly.

3) You know what else Magnoli manages to do? He creates a veracity to the world he's created even though pretty much every single character is played by amateurs save for those playing The Kid's parents. It's obvious none of these people can act effectively, and that there are long stretches of the film that is clumsily improvised yet we don't care because Magnoli is able to keep us from dwelling on those acting.

4) One of the things that I love about this film is how it's both a snapshot of a specific era and yet, because the script by William Blinn and Magnoli avoids making any sort of topical-at-the-time reference, it really hasn't dated. If you're ever curious about what a Funk Club was like circa 1984, this is the film you need to see....and you can still enjoy the story without any shock of the film's age jarring you.

5) I resent the fact that we never got our Morris Day/Jerome feature film. These two just steal the film at gunpoint from Prince whenever they're onscreen, and they're the most comfortable of the non-actors in front of the camera. They deserved a much, much bigger movie career then they ended up having.

Appolonia Kotero is about to reveal the true reason
for her casting in this film....

6) Even though she is very easy to look at, Appolonia Kotero is the weakest link of this film. Apparently Apppolonia was added during production after Vanity backed out, and it's not surprising to me; she seems to drift through this film awkwardly and timidly and her line readings are almost uniformly winge-worthy. And on top of all this, her one musical number is easily the most boring of all.

7) And speaking of the musical score....let's be honest here. The songs are good but the smack of a 'greatest hits' package, being pretty disjointed. Hell, I always find it funny that when we get to the big moment when The Kid accepts that he can accept the input of The Revolution and not treat them as a back-up group, the song that represents that transformation....is really only different due to the tempo (it doesn't help that some of the songs prior to the transformation were co-written by Wendy and Lisa). That being said, I do appreciate that Prince is generous enough to let some of his co-stars have some of the highlights, particularly the Time's two numbers.

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise...these two are the true
stars of this film.

8) I wonder how the film would have changed if we got a little bit more of The Kid's parents. I do get the idea that we're seeing these characters only through The Kid's eyes, and usually it's at moments when they're at their worst. I do get that without seeing this harshness we wouldn't get such a strong sense of why The Kid is so protective of his music and is so afraid of becoming his father. But if we got more nuance to both characters, I wonder if we would get a more nuanced version of The Kid....if only by osmosis.

9) I know this is a silly statement, but I really wish they didn't include Morris and Jerome in amongst the people standing there grooving on 'Purple Rain.' It implies a face turn that is neither set up previously or earned by them. It's weird, because I know on some level that this rivalry they have is friendly, but Morris is such a wonderfully delicious villain that I wanted to see some form of comeuppance...even if it is just him getting upset over The Kid's renewed artistry.

10) I almost regret seeing more of Minneapolis than what amounts to one street corner, some railroad tracks and some suburban homes. I say this because what little we see of the outside looks pretty damn interesting--and the areas surrounding the city come off as extremely beautiful.

Overall...a strange little film that maybe shouldn't have worked but does on every level to create a snapshot of a time and place, filled with excellent music and infused with a great energy. And because it hasn't dated even with all the 80's fashion, this is recommended viewing.

Ten Statements About....THE LIFE AND DEATH OF PETER SELLERS (2005)

"I'm looking at the man in the mirror...I'm wishing he'd change
his waaaaays..."

"You see, I don't really have any personality of my own. There used to be a me behind the mask, but I had it surgically removed."

1) How do you do a biopic about a man who was such a great actor because he saw himself as someone without personality? You make the artifice that is central to his life a central part of the film itself. This is a highly creative movie that uses frequent cinematic tricks--inspired by the movies that Sellers makes throughout the film's running time--to give us insight into Sellers' psychological make-up...

2) ....although all the tricks in the world wouldn't work if it wasn't for Geoffrey Rush's central performance as Sellers. There are long stretches where it's hard to see Rush as Sellers at all. It's a marvelous, unflinching performance, made even more amazing when as a reflection of Sellers' ability to take on multiple roles, Rush does these transitionary monologues as different personages in Sellers' life. Sure, the one where he plays his mother is goofy, but the ones where Rush does dead-on impersonations of the actors portraying Stanley Kubrick and his father are uncanny.

3) And speaking of Stanley Kubrick, I want my Kubrick biopic with Stanley Tucci playing the director. Even though Kubrick's role is not as big or as pivotal as John Lithgow's Blake Edwards, Tucci's performance just draws you to him while revealing nothing.

4) The other great performance as a living personage? Charlize Theron as Britt Eklund. Not just because Charlize Theron makes me feel all wobbly, but because--just like Rush and Tucci--there's very little Theron on the surface....

If the only reason Rush took this tole is because he gets to
molest a Swiging-60's-dolled-up Charlize Theron...
I understand, I understand.

Okay, maybe a lot because Charlize Theron makes me all wobbly, but she's really, really good.

5) I really appreciated how director Stephen Hopkins makes the major phases of Sellers life reflect the movies associated for it. Thus, the sequence depicting Sellers' affair and marriage to Eklund has the same sort of hazy, multiple exposured and overtly mannered look of that parody-that-no-one-laughs-at travesty Casino Royale, while the sequences set during Sellers' filming of Dr. Strangelove (my favorite film of all time) alternates between black and white and color shots, with the color being faded and washed out.

6) However....this is not a perfect film. The script by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeeley cherry picks Sellers' career too much, chosing to focus on a very few highlights while neglecting others. This is most obvious during the sequences involving Kubrick and Edwards. I was particularly puzzled as to why there is no reference to Sellers and Kubrick'sprior collaboration on Lolita during the Dr. Strangelove sequence.

7) While I am not as taken with Lithgow's Edwards--unlike with Rush, Theron and Tucci, you never forget that this is Lithgow in tinted glasses--I do give him credit for successfully conveying his very ambivilant feelings towards Sellers. It's another blind spot in the film's chronology that we don't see Edwards more, especially give the one key moment where Sellers proclaims 'No one gets me more than you!' to Edwards.

Geoffrey Rush is wearing pink pants while playing an oversized
novelty sitar.  Your argument is no longer valid.

8) And while the script wisely makes a large portion of its third act Sellers' obsession with making Being There--and equally wisely makes a connection between his greatest role and how he saw himself--the actual sequence seems sketchy and ill-formed. We see him struggle to get financing, we see him shooting a scene, but where's that key moment where he does get the go ahead? Where's his reaction to being nominated for an Academy Award for this personal project?

9) While I thoroughly understand the usage of former Goon Show members Spike Milligan and Harry Secombe, who appear in the background as key scenes as silent witnesses to Peter's life, I really wish we got a better sense of them, and Peter in relation to them, to give their frequent pop ups more heft.

10) Similarly, I wish the script blended Sellers' darker elements better. There's a weird stuttery feel to the way it handles Sellers' tantrums and outbursts. Since it ties into the film's central conceit that Sellers acted the way he did because he never quite grew into emotional and psychological adulthood, the long stretches without addressing those moments is...odd.

Overall...even with its flaws, this is an exceptional biopic of one of my favorite actors that works. It would make a great double bill with the Milos Foreman/Jim Carrey biopic of Andy Kaufman, Man In The Moon.