Um, yeah. So, Gummo sure is a movie. If you got 100 people drunk to the point where they became “philosophers,” and then showed them this film, then allowed them to discuss it with one another, World War III would erupt. People seem to either violently like it or violently hate it.
Gummo implants you in to a town called Xenia, Ohio after a tornado has devastated it, killing a lot of the residents (and their pets according to the half assed narration). We watch several different characters as they meander through life, and I assume dealing with their losses, some more outwardly than others. These people are poor, filthy and some demented, the latter possibly a result of the aftermath of the tornado. The film is a bizarre mix of “home footage,” live action, and some folks even directly addressing the camera. There really is no plot as such; we are simply taken for a ride through this miserable existence, and left to glean whatever we like from it.
The global conflict mentioned in the first paragraph would stem from some people’s inability to derive some kind of entertainment from a movie with no kind of structure. In addition to that, there is a fair amount of depravity and disturbing behavior that some people cannot enjoy. I wouldn’t call it shocking to a seasoned movie goer, but if your idea of a good time is 13 Going on 30, you would be on the “against” side of the war. I get the “point” of this film. Showing us a side of America that is quite uncomfortable in a fashion that attempts to pull you in despite that discomfort is fine. And I was pulled in to an extent, but a lot of things bothered me. I had a huge problem with the multiple methods of shooting I mentioned. The film will switch back and forth from 3 or so small groups of friends or families, but is interrupted by home video footage which I assume was shot before the tornado. Not only that, but some of the characters that we are following address the camera, and some actors actually mistakenly look at the camera. All of this sort of made the documentary feel of the handheld camera less effective. The photography of the film was done quite well. The look of it was just as grimy and dirty as these people’s lives and added that much more depth. There were some scenes that were clearly improvised, but the improv had died and then some awkwardness ensued. Despite this and the questionable acting, if the film had simply been a stream of consciousness thing that did not alternate camera style, I would have enjoyed this film a lot more. Harmony Korine, who wrote and directed this, also wrote Kids. Kids was a fine film and quite shocking. It also, was a glimpse in to a small part of the life of some disturbing characters. It however, stayed on the course it opened with, spanning the events of one day, never leaving the characters and focusing on the narrative as we were following it. While the “point” of that movie was quite a bit more obvious, Gummo would have been far more effective if it followed that same formula. Now, I have no problem with a director doing what was done here. I just don’t think it worked for this movie in particular. This movie had a very relevant story to tell and it was buried in flashy (albeit seamless in some spots) scene transitions. The movie is “good,” but I am also going to have to call it sloppy (who knows, that may have been the point).
There are a ton of people who dislike this movie for it’s subject matter alone. Do not buy in to that shit. If J Lo isn’t in the picture, then those people can’t be bothered to watch it. It is a decent attempt to tell an interesting story, but I feel that it falls just short of the mark.
Gummo implants you in to a town called Xenia, Ohio after a tornado has devastated it, killing a lot of the residents (and their pets according to the half assed narration). We watch several different characters as they meander through life, and I assume dealing with their losses, some more outwardly than others. These people are poor, filthy and some demented, the latter possibly a result of the aftermath of the tornado. The film is a bizarre mix of “home footage,” live action, and some folks even directly addressing the camera. There really is no plot as such; we are simply taken for a ride through this miserable existence, and left to glean whatever we like from it.
The global conflict mentioned in the first paragraph would stem from some people’s inability to derive some kind of entertainment from a movie with no kind of structure. In addition to that, there is a fair amount of depravity and disturbing behavior that some people cannot enjoy. I wouldn’t call it shocking to a seasoned movie goer, but if your idea of a good time is 13 Going on 30, you would be on the “against” side of the war. I get the “point” of this film. Showing us a side of America that is quite uncomfortable in a fashion that attempts to pull you in despite that discomfort is fine. And I was pulled in to an extent, but a lot of things bothered me. I had a huge problem with the multiple methods of shooting I mentioned. The film will switch back and forth from 3 or so small groups of friends or families, but is interrupted by home video footage which I assume was shot before the tornado. Not only that, but some of the characters that we are following address the camera, and some actors actually mistakenly look at the camera. All of this sort of made the documentary feel of the handheld camera less effective. The photography of the film was done quite well. The look of it was just as grimy and dirty as these people’s lives and added that much more depth. There were some scenes that were clearly improvised, but the improv had died and then some awkwardness ensued. Despite this and the questionable acting, if the film had simply been a stream of consciousness thing that did not alternate camera style, I would have enjoyed this film a lot more. Harmony Korine, who wrote and directed this, also wrote Kids. Kids was a fine film and quite shocking. It also, was a glimpse in to a small part of the life of some disturbing characters. It however, stayed on the course it opened with, spanning the events of one day, never leaving the characters and focusing on the narrative as we were following it. While the “point” of that movie was quite a bit more obvious, Gummo would have been far more effective if it followed that same formula. Now, I have no problem with a director doing what was done here. I just don’t think it worked for this movie in particular. This movie had a very relevant story to tell and it was buried in flashy (albeit seamless in some spots) scene transitions. The movie is “good,” but I am also going to have to call it sloppy (who knows, that may have been the point).
There are a ton of people who dislike this movie for it’s subject matter alone. Do not buy in to that shit. If J Lo isn’t in the picture, then those people can’t be bothered to watch it. It is a decent attempt to tell an interesting story, but I feel that it falls just short of the mark.
Comments
Post a Comment