ReportWire

Tag: Adria Arjona

  • Zoë Kravitz Aims to Open Eyes With Blink Twice

    Zoë Kravitz Aims to Open Eyes With Blink Twice

    [ad_1]

    As a film whose working title was Pussy Island, it’s to be expected that the subject matter of Blink Twice is “controversial.” That is, if one is “off-put” by the notion that women are still “bitter” about men’s behavior—even after all the supposed progress that’s occurred in the wake of #MeToo. And yes, it’s no coincidence that Zoë Kravitz first started writing the screenplay (with E.T. Feigenbaum, who also wrote an episode of the Kravitz-starring High Fidelity) the same year that the “male backlash” began. Or rather, the appropriate and long overdue response to an abuse of power so entrenched in “the system,” it took ousting many men at the top for anything to start making a difference.

    Some of those men at the top were known for going to Little Saint James Island a.k.a. “Epstein Island.” Like Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and Donald Trump. None of these men ever got quite the smackdown that Harvey Weinstein did, but there was no denying that further ignominy befell their already less than upstanding reputations when it came to being pervy sexual abusers. Something that happens to Blink Twice’s own “Jeffrey Epstein,” Slater King (Channing Tatum). A tech billionaire that someone like Frida (Naomi Ackie) can’t help but lust after and idolize—something we see as she scrolls through her phone and adoringly watches an interview he gives about how he’s a “changed man” now that he’s “taken some time” to “reassess” himself and his priorities on the remote island he currently lives on (and, needless to say, owns). It’s all very familiar-sounding, with no shortage of potential inspirations for Kravitz when it comes to similar rich douchebags from which to mine material.

    As Frida watches the interview on the toilet, transfixed, her drooling is interrupted by her best friend and roommate, Jess (Alia Shawkat). When Frida admits she doesn’t have her portion of the money for the super because she’s invested it in something else for the two of them, Jess is surprisingly chill about it. Almost as if there’s nothing Frida could do that would ever make Jess turn her back. Such is the nature of a truly strong female friendship bond. By the same token, that doesn’t mean that women don’t get in their fair share of contentious spats, one of which arises between Jess and Frida when, while the two are at work (serving as cater waiters—or, for the more misogynistically-inclined, “cocktail waitresses”), Frida accuses Jess of having no self-respect because she keeps going back to the same toxic asshole every time they break up. This, of course, will turn out to be extremely ironic later on, when the biggest twist of Blink Twice comes to light, and viewers see that Frida has been doing exactly the same thing.

    In any case, Frida immediately realizes how harsh she sounds and apologizes right away to Jess as they continue to prep for serving drinks at Slater’s big, fancy event (with their male boss annoyingly telling them, “Don’t forget to smile!”)—presumably something “benefit”-oriented. It doesn’t much matter to Frida, who is so unabashed in her eye-fucking of Slater from afar, that it comes as no surprise when she tells Jess that what she spent all her money on happened to be two gowns for each of them to wear so that they could infiltrate the event as guests rather than servers (though, to be honest, the gowns look more like they’re from Shein than, say, Chanel). Jess, ever the down-ass bitch, complies even though she is not even remotely affected by Slater’s looks or wealth. Eventually making a fool out of herself by tripping in the most visible way possible, Slater takes Frida under his wing at the event and, by the end, the two have such a “connection” that he decides to invite her and Jess back to his island with the entourage he’s been parading.

    If it all sounds somewhat implausible, Kravitz is well-aware of that, stating during an interview with CBS News Sunday Morning, “I like playful filmmaking.” This is made apparent by her use of stark, all-white backdrops (think: Blur’s “The Universal” video, itself an homage to A Clockwork Orange) whenever the audience is in Slater’s world outside of the island, as though to emphasize that, to him, there are no gray areas. Kravitz also added, “I like when the audience has a sense of, ‘It’s a movie,’ you know what I mean? And we’re all in it together and it’s not reality.” But it is, indeed, very true to the reality of how power is so grossly abused by white men with billions (or even just millions) of dollars, finding loopholes for being as disgusting and depraved as they want to be no matter how much cancel culture continues to thrive post-#MeToo. In this case, that loophole is found through the manipulation of the five women on the island’s memory. In addition to Frida and Jess, there’s also Sarah (Adria Arjona), Camilla (Liz Caribel) and Heather (Trew Mullen), all of whom keep spraying themselves with a perfume called Desideria that’s strategically placed in their rooms, just begging them to use it. As Slater says, it’s made from a special “extract” of a flower that can only be found on the island. How convenient for him and his fellow rich white men that it also acts as a kind of super-charged Rohypnol.

    It is the memory loss element of Blink Twice that most closely aligns it with Jordan Peele’s own seminal psychological thriller, Get Out. For the loss of each woman’s memories of the particularly traumatic events that happen to them during the night are what make them trapped inside a kind of “sunken place” during the day. Thus, prone to chirpily answering, almost Stepford wife-style, “I’m having a great time!” whenever Slater asks, “Are you having a good time?” Their muddled memory—almost tantamount to being lobotomized—makes it retroactively all the more cruel when they first arrive and a Polaroid is taken of the group as Vic (Christian Slater), Slater’s “right- and left-hand man,” shouts, “Everybody say, ‘Makin’ memories!’” The irony being, of course, that the women on the island will have no ability to recall what’s going on. What horrors are being wrought upon their bodies when night falls.

    At one point, Slater promises a fellow rich man named, what else, Rich (Kyle MacLachlan) that he can do whatever he wants because: it’s like the more traumatic the event, the more readily they forget. And it is true—women’s minds are extremely adept at that form of self-protection, mainly because dealings with men in any sphere tend to be violating in some way or another, so “blotting out” becomes a kind of automatic coping mechanism. And in the world of rich men, violation is merely the rule, not the exception.

    Of course, in these “polite” times, men like Slater feign going along with the “new world order.” For example, when the group arrives on the island and Stacy (Geena Davis, in a kind of Ghislaine Maxwell role) starts collecting everyone’s phone into a bag, Slater assures, “You don’t have to do anything that you don’t wanna do.” But, of course, the pressure to oblige him—one that is perennially ingrained within women—gets the better even of Jess. Even though it is she who is the one to be hit much more quickly with the revelation, “Did we just jet off to a billionaire’s island with a bunch of strangers?” For the number one rule learned by every millennial as a child was: don’t talk to or go anywhere with strangers. Frida insists, “He’s not a stranger. He’s Slater King.” Such is the danger of 1) parasocial relationships being intensely nurtured in a social media age and 2) the automatic carte blanche that powerful people—nay, powerful men—are given when it comes to trust. Despite all long-running evidence that suggests only inherent distrust ought to be placed in them.

    It doesn’t take long for Frida and Jess to fall into the “routine” of the island. Which goes something like: wake up, get high, swim, start drinking, eat a dinner prepared by Cody (Simon Rex), another alpha male (though there are also beta males like Tom [Haley Joel Osment] and Lucas [Levon Hawke, a fellow nepo baby like Kravitz), get so trashed you “black out,” repeat. Soon enough, the days and nights all meld into one, with Frida and the others long ago losing track of what day it is or even how long they’ve been on the island. At one point, Frida asks Slater, “When are we leaving?” He shrugs, “Whenever you want.” Naturally, that’s not true, nor is it really an answer. Besides, he knows Frida will soon forget, informing her during one of their “intimate walks,” “Forgetting is a gift.”

    Indeed, one would think that the female gender does have collective amnesia sometimes when considering how willing they are to “forgive” men for all their transgressions. And this, too, is another key theme of Blink Twice, which essentially posits the Carrie Bradshaw-penned question: “Can you ever really forgive, if you can’t forget?” As Slater will tell Frida during their final showdown, the answer is definitely no, resulting in an Oscar clip-type performance as he angrily repeats, “I’m sorry” to her and then demands if she forgives him yet. “No?,” he says when she doesn’t reply. Of course not.

    Nor does she seem likely to ever forgive a woman like Stacy, who is not only complicit in what’s happening on the island, but also prefers the “ignorance is bliss” philosophy that Slater keeps promoting through Desideria. That Davis is involved in the film is also especially significant considering she runs the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, which “advocates for equal representation of women and men.” Blink Twice certainly has plenty of that. Though perhaps the most memorable character out of anyone is the woman billed as “Badass Maid” (María Elena Olivares). Tasked primarily with catching the snakes on the island that, according to Slater, have become a blight, it is she who will become the savior of the oppressed in this fucked-up situation.

    As for Frida’s past history with Slater (which she, of course, forgot), it begs the question: are people—particularly women—doomed to repeatedly gravitate toward the same toxic situation so long as it “feels good” enough of the time to forget, so to speak, about how bad it is overall? The conclusion of the film would like to make viewers believe otherwise, ending on a “hopeful” even if “sweet revenge” note.

    As for changing the name from Pussy Island to Blink Twice, it wasn’t just because marketing the film was going to be nothing short of an ordeal with the MPA’s censorship limitations, but also because, as Kravitz found, “Interestingly enough, after researching it, women were offended by the word, and women seeing the title were saying, ‘I don’t want to see that movie,’ which is part of the reason I wanted to try and use the word, which is trying to reclaim the word, and not make it something that we’re so uncomfortable using. But we’re not there yet. And I think that’s something I have the responsibility as a filmmaker to listen to.”

    Perhaps if women had taken the word in the spirit intended when it refers to callow men, there might have been more acceptance. However, regardless of the title change, Blink Twice will undoubtedly still come across as “hardcore” to plenty of filmgoers. Mainly the ones who don’t like to see a mirror held up to a society run by soulless, amoral, bacchanalian knaves. Post-#MeToo or not.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Hit Man: No Fake Friends, Just Fake Identities

    Hit Man: No Fake Friends, Just Fake Identities

    [ad_1]

    For those who missed Richard Linklater’s last movie, Apollo 10 1/2: A Space Age Childhood, despite how well-received it was by critics, Hit Man is a welcome reintroduction to the writer-director. And yes, Linklater has been flirting with the mainstream of late, albeit with his own brand of “kook” thrown in. Case in point, 2019’s Where’d You Go, Bernadette?, an adaptation from the novel of the same name. Hit Man, too, is from specific source material. In this case, an article by Skip Hollandsworth called “The Hit Man Who Works for the Cops,” which appeared in a 2001 issue of Texas Monthly. Considering Linklater’s ties to the Lone Star State, it wouldn’t be a surprise if he had filed away this article for years before finally coming back to it (especially since it took place in Linklater’s native Houston). And, although it is said that the craziest shit tends to happen in Florida, Texas is practically neck and neck for that title. The story of Gary Johnson (played by Glen Powell, who also co-wrote the script) is just such an example. 

    Of course, it wouldn’t be a movie “based on a true story” if some of the facts weren’t stretched ever so slightly beyond recognition. This extends, for a start, to changing the setting of the narrative from Houston to New Orleans. Hence, opening the film with Jelly Roll Morton’s “New Orleans Bump” (and yes, there was a Jelly Roll before the current one that has weirdly captured the heart of America). But one thing that remains undeniably the same is the “mild-mannered” nature of Gary. His appearance, his personality, the very essence of his aura. And yet, this is exactly why Linklater commences the movie with a teaching scene (always requisite in any movie about a teacher) centered on Friedrich Nietzsche. At first, the message from Nietzsche that Gary wants to impart to his students is a “seize the day” one (believe it or not, Nietzsche wasn’t all nihilistic aphorisms), quoting the line, “…the secret for harvesting from existence the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment is: to live dangerously!” 

    Alas, “Mr. Johnson’s” urging to carpe diem (à la John Keating or Cher Horowitz) is met with nothing but eye rolls and snarky comments, including, “Says the guy driving the Civic.” Ah, no insult as timeless (in postmodernism) as the shade thrown at Hondas. The point being that no one, least of all his students, would ever deign to take life advice from somebody as banal as Gary. To emphasize that banality right afterward, Linklater shows the audience Gary in his natural habitat, sitting alone in a pristine apartment with two cats named Ego and Id (the two cats, named as such in real life, are mentioned in the article, too). It’s all part and parcel of his decidedly “vanilla” lifestyle. One that he seems destined to shirk when an opportunity arises to take the place of an undercover cop named Jasper (Austin Amelio), who has been placed on a mandatory leave of absence after what he deems to be a result of “cancel culture” bullshit (a.k.a. beating up some teenagers on video). 

    Caught in a bind, Claudette (the always glorious Retta) and Phil (Sanjay Rao), Jasper’s fellow officers, call on Gary, who already happens to be in the van, to fill the role at the last minute. Accustomed to merely handling the “tech side” of the audio recordings, Gary is expectedly apprehensive, but, like everyone else, he’s quickly surprised to find how much of a natural he is at “being” a hit man. Or at least pretending to be. At the same time, it’s not that shocking at all, considering he spends his life studying the classic texts of psychology (Jung, Nietzsche, etc.)—studies and philosophies meant to give some insight into the human mind. None of which say anything all that favorable. Indeed, Gary finds his worldview about humanity shockingly confirmed via these encounters with the so-called dregs of society. Many of which, contrary to stereotypes, also happen to be middle- and upper-class folk. Take, for example, “Society Lady” (Jo-Ann Robinson). Based on one of Johnson’s highest profile “clients,” Lynn Kilroy (an ironic last name, needless to say), she, too, is a rich woman who wants to stay rich by killing her husband instead of getting divorced. She also tries to make a move on Gary while she’s at it. 

    But even someone as “well-to-do” as her isn’t immune to the long arm of the law. For, just the same as police can arrest people if they catch someone in the act of soliciting sex, the same goes for being caught in the act of soliciting murder. Even if the lawyers defending the “criminals” insist what Gary is doing constitutes entrapment. Fortunately for Gary and the NOPD, many juries don’t agree based on what they hear in the voices on the recordings: bona fide murderous venom. 

    The question on everyone’s mind in the film and in real life, though, is: “How, I wanted to know, does the cat-loving, garden-tending Johnson manage to convince people that he is their one best hope for a better life?” Gary’s take in the article? “‘What I’m really there to do is assist people in their communication skills. That’s all my job is—to help people open up, to get them to say what they really want, to reveal to me their deepest desires.” Or, as Madonna put it, “A lot of people are afraid to say what they want. That’s why they don’t get what they want.” Then again, they don’t get what they want when they say it out loud to Gary either. 

    The candor we hear in Gary’s voice in the article translates easily to Powell’s voiceovers in the film. For example, Gary musing to the audience, “People feel almost disappointed to learn that hitmen don’t really exist. This idea that there are people out there at a retail level you can just hire to eliminate your worst relationship issues, or facilitate some money scheme, or the usual combination of both. It’s a total pop culture fantasy. But because hitmen have been a staple of books, movies and TV for the last fifty years, good luck getting anyone to believe their existence is all a myth.” 

    In the article version of that voiceover, Hollandsworth and Johnson acknowledge that, yes, technically there are hitmen (usually only for the mafia), but they’re not as pervasive or “well-studied” as the masses have been led to believe. He writes, “Although the professional hit man is a staple of detective fiction, no one is really certain if there is someone in this country who makes a living as a hired gun. Organized crime families and drug syndicates have employees who will do whatever their bosses tell them to do, which often includes firing machine guns at certain rivals or burying them in cement. And there are the occasional wannabe mercenaries who take out ads in the backs of military magazines claiming that they will do anything asked of them. But they almost always turn out to be frauds. If there are highly qualified triggermen making their talents available to ordinary citizens, says Johnson, ‘then they don’t advertise very well. They certainly aren’t advertising in Houston. I’ve never heard of such a person.’”

    Certain other painstaking details from the Hollandsworth article are incorporated into the film as well. Including a book of Gandhi’s philosophies situated on Johnson’s nightstand. This little flourish is extrapolated from Hollandsworth’s description, “He reads Shakespeare, psychiatrist Carl Jung and Gandhi. He even keeps a book of Gandhi’s quotations on his coffee table. One of his favorites is ‘Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.’”

    In addition, Linklater is committed to playing up the comicality of Johnson’s acting brilliance. How no one ever saw this guy coming precisely because of the talent he had never unlocked out in the open. As Hollandsworth says, “Although plenty of cops have pretended to be hit men in undercover murder-for-hire investigations, Johnson is the Laurence Olivier of the field. In law enforcement circles, he is considered to be one of the greatest actors of his generation, so talented that he can perform on any stage and with any kind of script. If he is meeting a client who lives in one of Houston’s more exclusive neighborhoods, he can put on the polished demeanor of a sleek, skilled assassin who will not sniff at a job for less than six figures. If he is meeting a client who lives in a working-class neighborhood, he can come across like a wily country boy, willing to whack anyone at any time for whatever money he can get.” In short, “everything to everyone.”

    But Linklater veers the film into other thematic territory, too—mainly the question of whether committing murder (or not) is a matter of “morality” (usually a social construct) or survival. Simply helping humanity “be the best it can be” (God knows Hitler and other “racial purgers” throughout the centuries have tried to use that defense). Gary, in one of the final lessons to his students, has half of the class decide on a murderer’s punishment based on a modern judicial system and the other half based on “caveman law.” Or lack thereof. Telling one group of students they’re simply a nomadic community living in Paleolithic times, he paints the picture that their leader is “unhinged” and poses an “existential threat.” So what do they—what can they—do? Without a modern judicial system in place, the answer is effectively: whatever they want. Including kill. This giving rise to a larger reminder that the creeds humanity lives by are all tenuously in place so as to prevent people from tapping into their “long-dormant” “savagery.” But, as most know, human savagery is hardly dormant at all in the present, even in spite of the innumerable restrictive and oppressive laws currently in place. 

    In Hollandsworth’s article, the underlying theme is actually something that’s more in keeping with an average Linklater movie: the moral decay of a population conditioned to believe in the so-called “values” hammered into their heads (specifically, those heads that are living in the United States). That is to say, instant gratification extends to any and everything. Hence, Hollandsworth quoting Johnson’s assessment, “…they have developed such a frustration with their place in the world that they think they have no other option but to eliminate whoever is causing their frustration. They are all looking for the quick fix, which has become the American way. Today people can pay to get their televisions fixed and their garbage picked up, so why can’t they pay me, a hit man, to fix their lives?” 

    The message Linklater wishes to impart, however, is less about American sociopathy and more about the very essence of “identity” itself. Or rather, if there is truly such a thing at all, or if we only delude ourselves into thinking there is. For no one can claim they have a sole identity. It’s entirely dependent on whatever situation or point in their life they’re in. As Angela Chase phrased it in My So-Called Life, “What I, like, dread is when people who know you in completely different ways end up in the same area. And you have to develop this, like, combination ‘you’ on the spot.” And that’s what Gary comes to realize/grapple with as he starts to embody all these different personalities, merely conforming to the person he believes these would-be clients “need” him to project. 

    As for Madison Figueroa Masters (Adria Arjona), Gary’s ramped-up love interest in the movie version of events, she’s a composite loosely based on an unnamed woman in the article and Kathy Scott, who wanted to hire “Mike Caine” to kill her husband of four months. As Hollandsworth states of Scott’s motives, “She felt she deserved better. It is also possible that she felt she deserved the $50,000 insurance policy, $47,000 in retirement benefits and two houses worth an estimated $175,000 that would go to her if her husband died.” Kathy, unlike Madison, isn’t spared the ramifications of being so honest and open with her “hit man.” While Movie Gary decided to dissuade Madison from saying explicitly that she wanted her husband dead merely because of their “sexual chemistry,” described as “instant” in the source material, Real Gary can’t be emotionally budged. Instead, “Mike” got the solicitation out of her and she was sentenced to eighty years in prison. So here’s the part where Linklater saw the opportunity for a “zany” rom-com where there otherwise wasn’t. Especially when Hollandsworth added another “romance option” at the end of the article: “[Gary] learned that [the potential client] really was the victim of abuse, regularly battered by her boyfriend, too terrified to leave him because of her fear of what he might do if he found her. Instead of setting up a sting to catch the woman and send her off to jail, he decided to help her. He referred her to social service agencies and a therapist to make sure she got proper help so she could leave her boyfriend and get into a women’s shelter.” And thus, two different women gave birth to the character of Madison. 

    Unluckily (or luckily, depending on one’s level of misanthropy) for the real Gary, he seemed to remain a lone wolf through it all. But Movie Gary gets the Hollywood treatment (even though Linklater tends to constantly rail against “those kinds” of films). Ergo, the presaging dialogue between him and his ex-wife, Alicia (Molly Bernard), when he insists, “I’ve accepted the idea a normal relationship isn’t in my cards.” Alicia balks, “No. What is normal? I mean, look at this way, everyone is at least a little fucked up. You just need to find someone who is a little fucked up in a way that you like. Or at least, I don’t know, in a way that complements your own fucked upness.” And so the stage is set for Madison to enter the picture, complete with her dog-loving personality designed to “complement” Gary’s cat-loving one. The only problem is, he’s not convinced she would fall for “Gary,” since he’s been presenting as “Ron.” Ergo, a classic, Shakespearean storytelling device of deliberately mistaken identity. Which means, inevitably, a big blow-up of conflict will ensue. The question is, will Madison’s reaction result in Gary’s assessment of what all these “solicitations for capital murder” are about: “A lot of it is seeing how love has just curdled into hate…and murder is just the best way out.”

    But Gary’s love for Madison refuses to curdle, even when shit really hits the fan and her ex (you know, the one she wanted to have killed) reenters the picture. This, coupled with the various identities he’s tasked with keeping from certain people (mainly his coworkers) and parading to others (mainly Madison), leads to the assured-in-its-fraughtness denouement. 

    A finale that is much different from what Hollandsworth presents in “The Hit Man Who Works for the Cops.” Wherein we understand that Gary’s hyper-independent nature is cemented by “the long-range psychological effect on a person who continues to do something that gives him, as Johnson himself puts it, ‘a rather depressing outlook on the human condition.’” Hollandsworth continues, “One day I ask Johnson if he thinks his hit man job has anything to do with the fact that he doesn’t have long-term relationships. ‘Doing what you do,’ I say, ‘it’s sort of hard to trust people, isn’t it?’ He pauses. ‘I think it would be fair to say that I don’t let many people get too close,’ he tells me in a masterpiece of understatement.”

    Linklater, astonishing viewers with his sentimental rom-com side (as opposed to the more depressing/cerebral one we’re accustomed to seeing in the Before series), decides that there is a version of Gary—an alter ego, as it were—that might allow at least one person to get close to him romantically. Apart from that major personality detail, Linklater remains largely faithful to the article, including some of the most minor specifics. For instance, the “secret code” Johnson devises in the movie is also taken from one of his real life encounters. In the movie, the “client” must ask, “How’s the pie?,” whereas in the article, the code is developed by a “client” who approaches Gary with the observation, “That looks like good pie.” In both versions, Gary’s reply is the same: “All pie is good pie.” A phrase that itself relates to a certain ability to be everything to everyone, to offer “something for everybody.”

    To that point, Gary’s own cipher-like nature is perhaps what makes him so perfect for embodying an array of different “characters” (or “flavors,” to keep going with the pie metaphor). This foretold in one of his teaching scenes when he asks the class, “What if your ‘self’ is a construction? An illusion, an act, a role you’ve been playing every day since you can remember?” If that’s the case, then Gary is determined to jettison all previous ideas he had about his identity every time he walks into a restaurant (his preferred was Denny’s) to project a particular persona for a “client.”

    In addition to the philosophical musings on identity and how it’s not as “fixed” or “real” as we think it is, Linklater also highlights the ersatz rules society has put in place to make people believe there is a genuine “barrier” that prevents humans from killing other humans. But, as Gary mentions during another session with his class (this time an outdoor one), “…killings actually play a larger part in our social evolution than previously thought. The impulse to weed out those destabilizing forces is likely a dark thread in our historical DNA. These killings were thought to have served a twofold purpose: they not only protected social coherence and norms, but also eliminated a certain kind of abusive and uncooperative person from the gene pool.” So there you have it, the ability to murder without some sort of societally made-up comeuppance is part of the reason why humanity isn’t ten times more fucked up. 

    It’s something that both Gary and Madison seem to understand, thus achieving what Gary’s ex-wife had wanted for him all along: finding someone whose fucked upness is the kind he likes and appreciates. As for the real Gary, before the credits roll, Linklater dedicates the movie to him (calling out his death at age seventy-five in 2022), followed by a series of pictures of the fake hit man in different “guises,” exhibiting different “identities,” if you will. Which one represents the “real” version of him? Well, that’s a query one could pose of themselves, too.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link