Director: Damien Chazelle
Writer: Damien Chazelle
Cast: Emma Stone, Ryan Gosling, J. K. Simmons
Runtime: 128 mins.
2016
There's really nothing to the story of La La Land. An aspiring actress named Mia (Emma Stone) and a passionate jazz musician named Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) have several chance encounters, fall in love, and encourage each other to follow their dreams. In fact, if you were to sum up all that this movie has on its mind, it would amount to nothing more than that feverish exclamation: "Follow your dreams!" It's unabashedly boilerplate. That extends to the personalities, too. Supporting characters are one-note at best, no-note at worst, and only show up briefly to present vague obstacles before disappearing from the movie forever. Even our heroes lack depth, content to be ciphers who are only passionate about one thing.
None of that keeps La La Land from being extraordinary. Damien Chazelle, fresh off the intense Whiplash, sets about presenting us with a beast thought to be extinct: a contemporary high profile Hollywood musical not based on any preexisting material. Being entirely illiterate regarding the era and genre Chazelle is homaging, I couldn't begin to tell you about the references to the golden age of movie musicals that Chazelle litters throughout the film. But I do know enough about the era to point out that oftentimes the characters in these films were purposefully blank, written only as vessels for the great movie stars of the age to embody. La La Land follows that pattern, which makes its narrative simplicity entirely forgivable--sometimes all we need is to watch Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone sing, dance, and fall in love.
So it is that complaining about La La Land's lack of complexity falls apart as a criticism, amounting only to the tautologous argument: "La La Land lacks complexity because it isn't complex enough." A more pertinent argument would be that the simple narrative threads are often messy. They don't quite add up to sensible arcs, leaving us less engaged than we could have been with stronger writing. Regardless, the film stands as a simultaneous homage and enactment of the glorious purity of cinema. La La Land has oodles of complexity where it counts: production design, cinematography, lighting, you name it.
Every new scene brings with it some tasty cinematic treat. I could rave about the bravura one-take LA traffic song and dance number (Linus Sandgren), or the exuberant colors of the costume design (Mary Zophres), or the tempered realism of the production design (David Wasco), or the neverending beauty of perfect lighting choices. Or the bombastic climactic song and dance (Justin Hurwitz). Or the slow dissolve to a black background that accompanies heightened musical moments. Only passion and talent combined can produce something so beautiful.
It's a grand thing that Gosling and Stone happen to be quite high on the list of passionate and talented actors working today. Although this isn't a career best for either of them, they are as close a thing we have to classical movie stars, and they pull off the classic movie star thing with aplomb. They're just so damn watchable. Gosling has time and again proven himself to be one of the most committed actors of his generation, but it's Stone who gets the finest moment in a film filled with fine, fine moments--an aesthetically pared down song that justifies everything about La La Land with its sheer emotional impact.
Making cliches fresh again is a monumental task. Chazelle has succeeded. La La Land is one of maybe two movies this year to make me tear up. It may not be intellectually satisfying, or dramatically tight, but there is joy and sadness running deep through its veins. During the hard times, we need simple movies that remind us to dream.
3 / 5 BLOBS
No comments:
Post a Comment