Lee Kirk's ORDINARY WORLD provides a not-so-hot showcase for Billie Joe Armstrong

Character stupidity is a tricky thing. It can be used -- usually is -- for humor in movies, but it's a double-edged sword. A little goes a very long way. Too much stupidity can produce impatience then outright weariness in an audience, and when a character proves inordinately stupid, identification and caring go out the window for good. So it is with ORDINARY WORLD and its main character, a complete idiot named Perry, in the new movie originally known as Geezer from writer/director Lee Kirk (the filmmaker is shown below).

Clearly conceived to be a kind of showcase for the talents of singer/ songwriter Billie Joe Armstrong (shown on poster, above, and often below), the movie presents its hero, Perry, as someone goofy, sweet, appealing -- and one of the all-out stupidest characters to hit the screen in a long, long while. The movie begins well, with a musical evening that takes place some 20 years ago and features a nice opening song (by Armstrong). It ends well, too, with the expected feel-good finale we've been waiting for. In between, however, Perry's behavior regarding his wife, his kids, his brother, his home and his work is near-totally irresponsible and reprehensible in the extreme. All this makes the movie's "happy ending" seem completely unearned.

Perry is having a mid-life crisis, it appears, having given up the musical career he so much wanted to settle down with wife and family. But how he handles all this is beyond the pale.

Mr. Armstrong would appear to be a talented performer with a charming screen presence. And Kirk surrounds him with with class talent on all sides -- Selma Blair (shown above, right), as his wife; Judy Greer as an old girl-friend who suddenly appears in his life; and Fred Armisen and Kevin Corrigan as his band-mates/best friends -- none of  whom possess anything more than cardboard characters.

In fact, the one character who comes across as the most interesting and believable is the highly put-upon hotel concierge (Brian Baumgartner, above, left) from whom our idiot hero rents the poshest suite in the hotel then goes on to behave about as stupidly as possible. Armstrong's Perry literally does not make a single correct decision for the film's entire running time -- until those last ten or fifteen minutes.

Armstrong deserves a better showcase, as do the rest of the fine cast (that includes the always excellent Chris Messina), and audiences deserve a better movie (such as Mr. Kirk's previous one, The Giant Mechanical Man). If you can tolerate Ordinary World for more than the three or four decent songs it offers, well, you're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!

The movie opens today in New York City at the Village East Cinema and in Los Angeles at the Laemmle's Monica Film Center and simultaneously via VOD on all major platforms.

Emmanuelle Bercot's César-winning, nature-nurture coming-of-age drama, STANDING TALL

One of the things TrustMovies likes best about the films of actress/writer/director Emmanuelle Bercot -- Backstage, Student Services, (her episode of) The Players, On My Way and now STANDING TALL -- is how willing Ms Bercot is to simply jump in head first and start swimming until she reaches the other shore. She may not be the most artistic, stylish, realistic or brilliant of filmmakers, but her movies are always worth seeing because she gets the job done. She tackles her subjects honestly, draws excellent performances from her casts, and makes us think hard and consider the many possibilities implicit in the subject matter she chooses to film.

All this is true once again, perhaps even more so, in her latest work, which is all about how a young boy -- we first meet him as an (at least verbally) abused child of around five years old -- grows slowly, very slowly, into a somewhat autonomous young man. Ms Bercot (the filmmaker is shown at left) begins her movie with only dialog heard. When we see visuals, the camera stays out of facial range, as though we should not see the identity of these people because some their behavior regarding a child is so shocking. What we finally view is a little boy who's simply quiet or cowed into submission by a mother accusing him of being a full-out monster.

As with all French films about the law, crime and social services, the job of the "judge" will seem very different from what we have here in the USA. In that initial scene, as identity become clear, we see that the judge is played by French icon Catherine Deneuve, above, who understands her role here as someone who is both the law-giver and final decision-maker but who also acts as a kind of heavy-duty social worker, trying to help her charge into responsible adulthood.

This has long struck me as an interesting combination, one that might be healthily used here in the America, too. In any case, the next time we see the child, Malony -- played with flaring anger, sadness, dark humor and great neediness by newcomer (and César award-winner for this role), Rod Paradot  -- so prone to explosion and irresponsibility seems Malony that we, like many of the others around him, are often ready to give up.

Ms Deneuve's judge does not, nor do a few of her helpers, including another César-winner for his role, Benoît Magimel (above). Against these two are set Paradot's mom, a long-time loser who has never taken the least responsibility for her own life or actions (played with proper ferocity by Sara Forestier, below). Of course the child wants his mother, rather than a foster home, so back and forth we (and the film) swing, as Malony goes from home to a kind of low-key reform school, to home again, prison, and so forth.

The journey is alternately hopeful and grueling, but it is never boring or unbelievable. What we finally achieve is an understanding of how incredibly difficult it is to nurture a child grow into an autonomous man without help from his immediate family. No matter how much the state may try -- and the workers we see here really do -- to call their job an uphill battle is putting it mildly.

While the ending is what one might call feel-good, Ms Bercot is too smart for merely that. We've seen so much slippage along the way that we know there will probably be more to come. And because the film takes in our current and very dismal economic times, this just adds to the problematic nature of the whole experience. Still, as they say: You gotta have hope.

From Cohen Media Group, in French with English subtitles, and running 119 minutes, Standing Tall opens this Friday in New York City at the Lincoln Plaza Cinema and in Los Angeles at Laemmle's Royal. For other currently scheduled playdates, simply click here.

On DVD/Blu-ray, one of the year's better films: McGehee/Siegel WHAT MAISIE KNEW

Covered at length this past April (that post is here), I'll just add that a second viewing of WHAT MAISIE KNEW, the very good movie from film-making team Scott McGehee (below, right) and David Siegel (below, left), holds up well (and looks even better on Blu-ray). TrustMovies still feels that one good melt-down from the little girl at the center of the film would have been a smart move on the part of the directors and adapters of the Henry James novel (on which the movie is based and has been updated to modern times). God knows this kid deserves one, and seeing her express some genuine anger would have helped balance the slightly too-sweet feeling that builds up as the movie goes along.

Balancing this are the excellent performances (every last one of them), the remarkable capture of events from the child's point of view, and the ferocious anger and narcissistic stupidity exhibited by Maisie's parents, which may set the movie record for bad parenting yet always remain within the realm of reality (no Mommie or Daddy Dearest here, thank you!).

A film to savor and maybe make you feel a little guilty about the family fights to which your own child was privy, What Maisie Knew -- from Millennium Entertainment 
and running 98 minutes -- hits the street Tuesday, August 13, on DVD and Blu-ray, for sale or rental.

Pictured at right is Alexander Skarsgård holding Onata Aprile, who plays Maisie.

Slaughter in high school: Michelle Danner's and John Buffalo Mailer's HELLO HERMAN

Well-intentioned but coming a bit late to the table (after better films such as Elephant, Beautiful Boy and We Need to Talk About Kevin, to name but three), the new movie about yet another high-school massacre -- HELLO HERMAN, written by John Buffalo Mailer (from his play of the same name) and directed by Michelle Danner -- has its moments and, to the credit of the filmmakers, has been opened up enough to not seem stage-bound. Beyond this however, it never quite finds its footing in order to take off far enough to make us understand and/or care about its characters. Or, for that matter, to believe in them much.

Parceling out blame for why the film doesn't work is difficult when you weren't at the shoot itself, but because Mailer's dialog and plot points are interesting enough to command some respect, it may be the manner in which Ms Danner (shown at left) -- a well-known acting teacher here directing her second film (her first was the 2006 rom-com How to Go Out on a Date in Queens) -- has put all this together that seems wanting. There is often a kind of disconnect between dialog, acting, visuals and editing that makes for a result that seems almost constantly just a little "off."

This is particularly true in the scene in which Herman's mom (played by the director) unburdens herself to the protagonist/reporter named Lax (essayed by Norman Reedus, below, right). Solid, genuine points are made here and yet the whole thing comes up a tad phony due to that above-mentioned combo of disconnect. Mailer offers the reporter as a kind of mirror image of the high school assassin (Garrett Backstrom, above, and below, left). Both are severely troubled and have the death of a human being on their hands -- though the kid has 42 to the reporter's one.

Speaking of, how in hell does that kid even know about the reporter's baseball-bat clubbing of an innocent black boy? This is not something this very cagey character Lax would be likely to bandy about. Love interest (unnecessary, considering how little is done with this) is provided by another reporter, played by Martha Higareda (below, right), who was Lax's girfriend back in the day and reconnects with him now. ("He's her ex-lax!" my companion noted with glee, providing the best line of the evening -- even if it wasn't part of the movie.)

Hello Herman wants to spreads its indictments around, and so the media takes its shares of hits via interviews with an crass 'n nasty Republican senator (Christine Dunford) and an asshole TV host who loves to turn up the volume on hate and violence (Rob Estes, below). Bullying gets its share of time, too, taking its place as one of the reasons for the murderous kid's killing spree. So does a fractured family, with Dad missing in action, mom working herself silly and -- in the one truly dumb segment, our anti-hero as a baby-sitter too interested in playing video games (the violence of which is also heavily indicted) to take proper care of his little sister. Oh, yes -- the kid's desire for fame-at-any-price comes into play, as well.

All the ingredients (except maybe a specific plea for gun control) are here to provide the usual recipe for mass-murder. But so what? They don't mix well or truly compel. Set slightly in the future, where our poor, miserable, fame-hungry fellow is to be executed via electric chair on TV in front of the entire nation (sort of a modern-day Keir Dullea in an updated Hoodlum Priest), the movie doesn't go far enough for either sci-fi or satire. It is definitely well-meaning, and just as definitely so-so. For those expecting a lot of blood and gore, be warned: The carnage is suggested then replaced by freeze frames gone to sepia mode. (That's OK: Beautiful Boy left the killings out entirely and still proved a riveting, deeply-felt movie.)

Hello Herman -- from Warner Bros, Gravitas & Freestyle and said to be running 100 minutes (although the version I saw ran only 89) -- opens Friday, June 7, in New York City at the Cinema Village, in the Los Angeles area at Laemmle's Noho 7, in Atlanta at the Plaza Theatre, in Miami at the Palace 18, in Tempe/Phoenix at the Harkins Valley Art, in Cleveland/Mentor at the Great Lakes, in Modesto/
Sacramento area at the Brenden 18, in El Paso at the Premiere 18, in St. Louis at the Jamestown 14, in Florida (in Lake Park at the Mos' Art, in Lake Worth at the Stonzek Theater, in Philadelphia at the Montgomeryville Stadium 12, in Albuquerque at The Guild, in New Jersey (Boonton) at the Darress Theatre and in Louisiana (at Shreveport's The Robinson). Simultaneously, it will be available via Time Warner On-Demand in some 100 million US homes.

Daddy Dearest and his all-American musical kids--FAMILY BAND: THE COWSILLS STORY

You never really know, do you? The family of musical wonders from the 1960s known as The Cowsills --  upon whom the hit TV show The Partridge Family was more-or-less based and who many members of my gener-ation imagined to be a goody-two-shoes band that would maybe take up the mantle of Lawrence Welk -- were actually leading, except for the music that probably saved them, a life of hell-on-earth. This was due, as we quickly discover from the new documentary FAMILY BAND: THE COWSILLS STORY, to their wretched father, Bud Cowsill, a man who should never have had children or, in fact, have married, or, let's just say it, have been born.

If it sounds like I may be exaggerating a bit, wait. As this sad and surprising docu-mentary unfolds, you, too, will come to loathe the actions and behavior of this "Daddy Dearest." While the film seems to have been mostly made at the behest of one of Bud's sons, Bob Cowsill, who, like many of the family members, is still singing and playing his heart out, it appears, according to the press kit on the film, that it was instead the director, Louise Palanker (above), who was a childhood fan of the group, who sought out Bob and then the rest of the family with the request to make a documentary about them. We're glad she did.

TrustMovies doesn't think that the much-used term schadenfreude (pleasure derived from the misfortune of others), though it often does apply to how we look at and feel about celebrities, works very well with this particular family. After watching Family Band, you can only want the best for this crew. Listening to their music now, in their adulthood, may make you, as it did me, feel that we misjudged the group, and that they were a hell of a lot better at what they did than many of us were willing to admit at the time. That's they, above (in the early days, with mother Barbara just right of center) and below, more currently.

The Cowsills' mom and dad, one of their progeny explains early on, "were kids having kids." They married young, and whenever Bud, who was in the military and away much of the year, would return, mom would get pregnant and drop another baby until there were seven children in all. They evidently got their musical talent from mom's side; dad was the driving force behind their success -- and unfortunately also behind their too-early destruction as a group.

The story of how a quartet of the kids hoped to maybe become the new Beatles -- and then were joined by another brother and (much to their horror) by their mom, then finally by their little sister -- is quite a tale. How and why one brother was kept from joining the band and forced into the military is another such -- one that haunts the movie and the family members throughout.

There is plenty of wonderful footage of the early days (appearances on Ed Sullivan, Johnny Carson and the like), a few talking heads (such as mom Partridge -- Shirley Jones, above -- and music folk who helped the kids along, until Dad always got in the way), and reminiscences by the band members (and other family members, some of them quite funny). There are also a number of surprises (you might even call them shocks) along the way; the less said about them, the better, so as not to ruin your movie experience.

Finally -- and despite the experience of growing up with a dreadful dad (at far right, below) and a mom who constantly looked the other way, and even though, as they tell us now, after all that early success, these kids nonetheless began their adult life in debt -- the movie is a hopeful one. This group did love music. And, damn, but they were (and still are) good at it!

Family Band: The Cowsills Story, running just under 90 minutes, has been picked up by Showtime and will make its premiere on the cable network this Wednesday, March 6.

A BAG OF HAMMERS, from Brian Crano & Jake Sandvig, is an original worth seeing

What makes an original? Certainly not the subject matter, for what hasn't been done already, time and again? What makes A BAG OF HAMMERS original is how its filmmakers treat the tried-and-true -- charming con artists, men who don't grow up, a lonely little boy with an unemployed mom, the homeless, mismatched lovers (all stuff we've seen countless times). But never like this. What writer/director Brian Crano (shown below) and writer/actor (he has one of the leads) Jake Sandvig have achieved with their really special new film is to give us something missing from so much that we see nowadays: surprise. (For more on this subject, see the interview with Mr. Crano at the end of this post.)

The filmmakers take their subjects and events (and the dialog that wraps around them) and treat it, first, realistically (I don't think there's a dishonest moment in the movie) and then quirkily, humorously, sadly, and sometimes just amazedly. They -- and their actors -- spin on a dime, and so we, the audience can never be fully prepared for what will happen. Yet when it does, we buy it. (Not for nothing is the movie about a pair of con men -- but sporting "decent streaks" a mile wide.)

The movie is almost constantly -- yet quietly and below its delightful surface -- raising the question of morality in the actions we see. Who's right? Who's wrong? The answers are not so easily found, and this is part of the movie's great strength. It deals with some of life's most primal themes, often humorously, and doesn't give us easy answers, even as it does entertain us quite well.

How did the director bring together such a semi-starry cast (even Amanda Seyfried turns up here!) to involve themselves in a very small-budget movie? I guess it's, as usual, who you know that counts. And thanks be that Crano and his casting director Brad Gilmore know some attractive and unusually gifted actors. Britain's Rebecca Hall (above), sporting a fine America accent, as she often does,  just keeps amazing us over and over again -- from Starter for 10 and Red Riding through The Town, Please Give and Everything Must Go. This actress is a continual treat to watch, and here, as the waitress at a waffle-themed diner, she's once again... well, everything you could ask for.

Jason Ritter, above, another fine upcoming young actor who was wasted in last week's The Perfect Family, is a standout here as one of our two troubled heroes. His scene with a lovely actress named Barb Rossmeisl is a stunner and a keeper, and his explanation to young Chandler Canterbury (below, in red, and one of our best current child actors) about what has just happened is simply sterling (that's where the film's title is put to use).

Ditto Mr. Sandvig (above, right) who takes -- perhaps because he wrote it himself -- the less showy role, but still grounds it with gravity and charm. Maybe its Carrie Preston (below), however, who walks away with the dramatic crown. She is simply so good, so real, making us, by turns, root for her and then hate her. Ms Preston, shown below, is largely responsible for the movie's success at keeping us off-balance -- and loving it.

I'll not go into plot. You deserve the surprises that Crano and Sandvig have up their sleeves. A Bag of Hammers, from MPI Media Group and running (on my screener, at least) only 75 minutes, opens this Friday, May 11, in New York City at the Village East Cinema, and in Los Angeles on Friday, May 18, at Laemmle's Music Hall 3. Other playdates around the country, I hope, will follow, as well as VOD and eventual DVD.

*******************

We had time for only a short phone interview with co-writer/director Brian Crano, below, so we tried to make the most of it. (Note: there are some spoilers in this interview, so for the sake of the "surprise" that's so important to the film, see it first and then come back to the interview.) In the below conversation, TrustMovies appears in boldface and Mr. Crano in standard type:

First off: is it pronounced Craaaano or Crano?

Long a -- as midwestern as you can make it.

What I loved best about the movie is how original it is. It strikes me as a real original. It takes stuff that we’ve seen countless times -- the abandoned kid, the mom who can’t find a job, the scam artists who need to grow up, hell, even suicide – and works it all into something surprisingly real and “felt.” And funny and odd. Did you mean it to accomplish all this?

Without being lofty about it -- yeah, absolutely. For me the thing missing most in my movie-going experience is surprise. So I am trying to find out a way to make this happen. That’s my job as a filmmaker, as I see it. To find something emotionally true or something funny, but something that the audience doesn’t see coming, that undercuts their expectations. This movie gave us a lot of opportunities to set up red herrings. We did that time and time again in the film.

The dialog is excellent -- always believable but also often funny, witty, caustic. How was it to collaborate with someone. How did that go?

It was very easy. In writing the first draft of the movie, Jake Sandvig and I would basically just play out the scene between the us. That proved really useful. If you have to say something out loud, that will tell you if it's a good thing to say – or not. When you actually hear it, then you know when something’s funny or true. The whole movie was sort of “written out loud.”

It does occur to me that the initial set-up is pretty fake. Stealing cars is grand theft auto, right? If they’re doing this kind of thing all in the L.A. area, the police would quickly be onto their scam and arrest them. (But this didn’t bother me during the movie – only after.)

Yeah – this came up sometimes to me, too. But to me it wasn’t such a big deal. There is a certain kind of “movie logic” operating here that you kind of have to give in to, to enjoy the movie. And, actually, if you look at the L.A. police statistics, the percentage of crimes that are prosecuted are extremely low.

The end credit sequences are pretty jokey and quite fun, but they tend to distract from any “moved” feelings the viewer might have. Did you want audiences to end up saying – oh, it’s just a movie, or it’s just a good joke?

The end credits piece –because the last quarter of the movie is pretty heavy -- gave us an opportunity to leave em laughing again. As serious as the film is at points, it's still a comedy and I didn't want it at any point to be a labor. This is just like giving you your dessert at the end of the meal, like after a steak dinner.

I get it. The end stuff certainly wasn’t like the usual “outtakes” that you often see at the end of films.

These definitely were not outtakes. These are scenes that were written for this purpose.

Where did you get such a terrific cast (well, Jake Sandvig co-wrote it, so you knew him) but the others: Jason Ritter, Rebecca Hall, Carrie Preston (who is really good!), Amanda Seyfried, Canterbury, Todd Louiso (shown above), Sally Kirkland, etc. But especially Rebecca. She is one my favorite actresses.

Rebecca is the best you can find. She is really top shelf. It is helpful that she and I have been friends for such a long time. We met during when we were just both out of drama school period. We started making each other laugh and have not stopped, pretty much ever since then.

She seems so willing to do so many different things, take on so many different roles in big films and small films…. And what a fabulous American accent she has! 

She is totally fearless. She has no typical “actor's pride,” like, “’Oh, I won’t do this! It's too risky,” or "what If I'm perceived incorrectly." Carrie Preston is the same way. Everything they do, they are doing this for the right reasons, and when you watch them, you can tell that right away. Same goes for the boys: Ritter and Sandvig (shown at left) -- and Chandler, as well.

You filmed in L.A., right? But you live in NY? And you’re from Michigan….

I just moved to NYC a month ago; right now, in fact, I am waiting for our mattress to be delivered. For 10-12 years prior to this, I lived in L.A. -- pretty much since drama school in England.

I want to see your short films. Where/how can I see Rubberheart?

I’ll send you a copy. Rubberheart has Rebecca in it, it's based off of a short story she wrote. My hobby is kind of making comedic, satirical shorts. The other short I made that you can see on my web site – Official Selection -- is my response to the thousand of short films I had to watch while Rubberheart was playing at various festivals. It is sort of a pastiche of art films. I also do a web series with my boyfriend called Simply Plimpton, where he portrays a version of actress Martha Plimpton.

The scene with the homeless woman is just terrific – one of the best I’ve ever seen on this subject. How/why did that come about? (Did you see Monday Morning? That’s another film about the homeless, which has only opened in L.A. at this point.)

No, I didn’t get to it.

It also covers the homeless in a very different manner. But back to your scene with the homeless woman. It is particularly moving and real.

It was written almost as an interstitial scene. That is, it could have quite easily been skimmed over when reading. But our great casting director, Brad Gilmore, found this incredible actress, Barb Rossmeisl. She and Jason hit it off so well and were so good together. They both understood what was needed and how this was kind of the whole movie’s message in a single scene. The film is about connecting with things you're afraid of -- and connections that might not necessarily seem ”normal.” This is one of my favorite moments in the film.

The big question: did the guys raise the kid while grifting and scamming, and did Kelsey help them? And if so, what the fuck does that mean?

For me -- I was at a talk-back the other night and a woman asked a question like that, laid out her take on the film and then asked if I agreed with her interpretation. She wanted me to agree with her response. But I told her, no, that I'm much more interested in her response and that it would be much more interesting than mine. In that, there’s not going to be a test. No one will get a gold star here. What did the movie make you feel? That’s the right answer.

Generally, I see the criminality in the movie is a metaphor for any kind of damage. Or any kind of thing that we, as a society, have decided is morally questionable. The heart of the movie is about how to make an untraditional family. So many children now are being raised by single parents, grandparents, whatever. There is no more nuclear family that means anything. So our point was to try to make a movie about that -- without making it a polemic or waving a flag. That is where we were going.

You certainly got there. What’s next for you?

I am just starting another movie that I wrote by myself this time. It’s called Retrace Your Steps, and that is about all I can say about it right now. Except it’s set in a Canadian forest.

Can you talk about the music in the film?

The score for this movie was done by Johnny Flynn, a British musician. I wanted him to make something different – a series of songs that was like a companion to the movie but not necessarily a traditional score. Meaning that the music in the film, I didn't want it to be emotionally prescriptive. Rather just be Johnny's interpretation of what's going on.

Lastly, Brian: Is there any question you’ve always wanted to be asked about your movie but never have been. Now’s the time. I’ll ask it and you can answer.

(He thinks a couple of seconds…) I can’t think of anything. I’ve spent six years on this movie, and have talked to so many people and fielded so many questions….

…that you’ve probably, at this point, heard them all? Well, thank you, Brian, and I wish you great good luck with this film, which really is a wonderful and original piece of moviemaking.