DON'T THINK TWICE: You Only Laugh Once

Director: Mike Birbiglia
Writer: Mike Birbiglia
Cast: Keegan-Michael Key, Gillian Jacobs, Mike Birbiglia, Kate Micucci, Chris Gethard, Tami Sagher
Runtime: 92 mins.
2016

I expected Don't Think Twice to be a goofy little movie. It's a film about improv, so I anticipated a lot of funny jokes and a fair amount of charisma. What I did not expect was for this film to be emotionally devastating.

The story follows six comedians who together make up a successful improv troupe called The Commune. Unfortunately, their venue is closing down, so The Commune as they know it will either have to adapt or die. This means something different to each of the characters, as they all have their own personal drama to contend with. Jack (Keegan Michael-Key) is driven to transcend the improv community by becoming a member of Weekend Live, a transitional process which alienates him from his friends. Sam (Gillian Jacobs) has the potential to be on the same trajectory as Jack, whom she has been dating for a while, but she is in danger of squandering that potential because she feels uncertain about her path. Miles (Mike Birbiglia), on the other hand, does not have that same potential, and refuses to admit it to himself despite continuous failed attempts to rise up in the comedy world. Bill (Chris Gethard) is mourning the death of his father and trying to find renewed meaning in life. Allison (Kate Micucci) dreams of publishing graphic novels, but fears appraisal of her work. And Lindsay (Tami Sagher), whose wealthy parents preclude her from ever having to work a real job, is in a weed-scented rut.

Alone, any one of these narratives would make for a functional if not original film about artistic aspirations. Birbiglia is careful about showing us, sometimes subtly and sometimes not, every step of these characters' journeys, and every arc is dramatically sound. But the real beauty of the film comes from the intertwining of these arcs. Everyone's personal drama feeds back into the group dynamic and significantly affects the way that The Commune, the seventh character, develops. With each character's personal baggage influencing the trajectory of the group, it almost feels like a low-stakes Avengers movie, except that Don't Think Twice is so personal and earnest that the stakes feel far higher than any superhero shenanigans.

BRIDGE OF SPIES: Caught Red Handed

Bridge of Spies puts the cap on my grand Spielberg retrospective. To see the reviews go here.

Director: Steven Spielberg
Writers: Matt Charman, Joel & Ethan Coen
Cast: Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance, Alan Alda, Amy Ryan, Austin Stowell, Sebastian Koch
Runtime: 141 mins.
2015

Bridge of Spies reaffirms my suspicion that Spielberg is the most sneakily subversive mainstream filmmaker in the business. The story, as penned by Matt Charman and the Coen brothers, follows insurance lawyer James P. Donovan (Tom Hanks) as he is tasked with defending the most reviled man in the country--a suspected Russian spy--during the height of the Cold War. Nobody ever has any doubt about the truth of this accusation. We see him doing spy stuff in the furtively filmed opening sequence. But that isn't the issue at hand. Donovan believes that as an attorney it is his job to give the defendant Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) the most capable representation possible, and for this the entire country begins to resent him, too.

I won't reveal how, but around the halfway point the movie takes an abrupt turn into more intrigue and Cold War spy business. It's a great twist, and Spielberg's grip remains tight on the narrative, though I personally preferred the front half. Sure, it was the dull courtroom drama part, but as I hinted above there is some brilliant subversive commentary about fear, media, and American culture.

AMISTAD: Save the Slaves

Every other day leading up to the release of his new movie Bridge of Spies, we will be dissecting a film in Steven Spielberg's oeuvre. I've picked ten movies spanning the length of Spielberg's career, five of which I have seen and five of which I haven't. Amistad is Spielberg's attempt to deliver a meaningful film about slavery that isn't packed with stereotypes and fetishism.

Other Reviews in this Series: Duel, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 1941, Empire of the Sun, A.I. Artificial Intelligence, Catch Me If You Can, War of the Worlds, Munich, Lincoln

Other Spielberg Reviews: Jaws, Jurassic Park, The Lost World, Bridge of Spies

(If you haven't already, check out my new archive in the corner ---->)

Director: Steven Spielberg
Writer: David Franzoni
Cast: Djimon Hounsou, Matthew McConaughey, Morgan Freeman, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgard, Pete Postlethwaite, Nigel Hawthorne, David Paymer, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Anna Paquin
Runtime: 155 mins
1997

In the year 1839, a group of captured African slaves broke free from captivity, revolted, and killed most of the crew of a Spanish slaving ship called the Amistad. They were ultimately captured by the American navy and brought to America for trial. Contrary to what you might think, the trial had less to do with the brutal murder of the crew and more to do with the ownership of the African men--the surviving slavers, the Queen of Spain, and the American ideal of freedom all made claims. This case ultimately made it to the Supreme Court, where the slaves were defended in grand fashion by former president John Quincy Adams. This is the story of Spielberg's Amistad.

Yet Amistad feels like it is more than just one story. It feels like two movies nesting within each other. One is anchored in the perspective of the slaves, and kicks off the movie with one of the most harrowing opening sequences I've ever seen: the revolt. Spielberg pulls no punches; the violence is wretched and brutal, the slaves bloodthirsty, the captors merciless. The camerawork is an orchestra of disorienting close-ups, lit hectically by lightning and lanternlight, punctuated with desperation. Then it is over, and we follow the journey of these Africans whose language and customs we do not understand, but whose plight is already all too familiar to us. The camera swings up and reveals the breathtaking stars, the captives' only guide home.

The other movie is anchored in the perspective of white members of the political and legal behemoth that is the United States' judicial system. This perspective supersedes the other, taking up most of the runtime. It is more visually and structurally typical, with dialogue-driven courtroom scenes and earnest pleas for help and justice. This movie is less artful but just as competent as the other.

The true identity of Amistad isn't either of these movies, but the thing that exists where these two movies clash. As this recent Birth.Movies.Death essay articulates, Spielberg and co. are clearly aware of the pitfalls that movies about slavery are liable to fall into: the Noble Savage, the White Savior, Brutality Fetish, etc. These are tropes are not only lazy and played out, but they undermine the very purpose of the movies that contain them. If you want to show how bad slavery is, why are you whitewashing the black protagonist? If you want to show that people of color deserve equality and independence, why can they accomplish nothing without the help of the generous white man? Does it give you pleasure to linger so on the pain of minorities?