Sunshine Cleaning

Sunshine Cleaning was blatantly advertised as a replica of Little Miss Sunshine. They use "From the Producers of LMS" and I believe the theme song from the film. But I find Sunshine Cleaning extremely different - more dramatic, less family-based quirky comedy - and that makes it that much better.

According to Roger Ebert, Sunshine Cleaning

But not this film that compromises on everything it implies, because it wants to be cheerful about people who don't have much to be cheerful about. How can you make a feel-good movie about murder-scene clean-ups?

Who said it was a film that wanted to be cheerful about people who have nothing to be happy about? Did the director say that? Because I missed it. Roger, where is your explanation of this? Perhaps you felt that it was the comedy that drove its desire to be "cheerful," and I understand that. However, it is wrong to suggest this because the film decreases the "cheerful" material throughout. Thus, it becomes less comedic and more dramatic, a technique that I felt worked to its benefit.

Todd McCarthy at Variety makes a valid point in Alan Arkin's performance:

Arkin does nearly the identical blunt-talking, lovably cranky shtick he performed to such effect in "Little Miss Sunshine," as he tries to instruct young Oscar in the ways of the mercantile world.

Arkin's performance not only was identical to his in LMS but it was also less-effective. It seemed that he came in as a fill-in for a plot that didn't focus on the two protagonists. We see glimpses of him tackling a small business plan for selling shrimp and yelling out snarky lines toward his daughters. These instances pop up very rarely and are insignificant to the overall story.

The problem that this film presents is through its advertising. Because it is promoted as "another" Little Miss Sunshine, audiences go in expecting a cute little girl and a dark comedy about a quirky family and their inability to get along. And this is where I feel Sunshine Cleaning succeeds. It differentiates itself from LMS by placing more drama in the story and deteriorating the comedy as it goes along. Because, of course, the plot becomes more dramatic as the sisters battle the tough business in which they seemingly progress at the start.

Where critics state the film lacks in its comedy and therefore lacks in its power, I argue that the film is enhanced by this lack of comedy. Had the film not been advertised as a mirror image of LMS it would have succeeded in its reviews. However, I seem to be one of the few that praise the film for its dramatic content and power.

The performances in this film are astonishingly perfect. Emily Blunt and Amy Adams are unbelievable as sisters, biting at each other with quick dialogue and simple body language. The love-hate relationship between the sisters was incredibly strong and kept the film in tact. I also enjoyed the performance of Clifton Collins Jr., a who plays Winston, a one-armed hardware store clerk.

Sometimes, Mr. Ebert, I whole-heartedly agree with your reviews (The Fall, for example, was given an immense amount of praise from myself and you), but this time you just don't seem to get it. Sunshine Cleaning is an effective comedy/drama with two strong female characters and a story that intertwines every small detail in an effect, full-circle manner. You won't get as much comedy as is advertised, and that's why you will enjoy it more.

Duplicity

Duplicity was released quite a few weeks ago, but I haven't been able to catch a film in theaters since (hopefully that will change this weekend with Sunshine Cleaning and/or State of Play). What did the critics say?

According to Roger Ebert,

Claire and Ray seem to have hollow hearts. Can they, in their trade, sincerely love anyone? Knowing all the tricks, they know the other one knows them, too.

This removes some of the romantic risk from the story, replacing it with a plot so ingenious that at the end, we know more or less what happened, but mostly less. That's fun, but it deprives Roberts of her most winning note, which is lovability.

The fact that Claire and Ray seem to have hollow hearts is completely the point. It is only "seemingly" because we have seen them fall in love and we have observed their close relationship. So, is the romantic risk really removed from the story? I believe it makes it more intense. It seems that they have hollow hearts, because we know it is an act; it keeps us guessing. I also think part of the point of the ending is to be confused. We know more or less what happened, just as Claire and Ray know more or less what happened. We, like the protagonists of the story, are left pondering the strategies of the schemers.

Nick Schager at Cinematical also involves a collection of poor remarks in his review of Duplicity.

The only thing at risk is money, which, in terms of caring about these two ace swindlers, isn't enough.

Wait a minute. Wasn't there a small plot line involving romantic ties between Claire and Ray? Weren't they risking their relationship with each other? Or maybe that was another plot line you considered too complicated.

In a comment following Cinematical's review of the film, "pola" states:

Thanks for looking beyond the razzle-dazzle in this film and seeing what's underneath, which isn't much after you look past watching two pretty people get frisky in luxe surroundings. Even the dialogue is nothing special. The reviews have been glowing and I don't get it.

"Glowing," really? As I've pointed out, both Roger Ebert and Cinematical place the film in mixed light. In addition to these two, Lisa Schwarzbaum at Entertainment Weekly gives the film the grade of a B. Sure, a B is scores higher than what it could have received, but the woman offers a fair amount of complaints.
It seems that my review of the film could be taken directly from the pages of Variety, stating the film is "ultra-sophisticated" and "smart, droll, and dazzling."

If you enjoyed Michael Clayton (which earned a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for much-deserved Tilda Swinton), you will enjoy Duplicity. Tony Gilroy is back with a complicated screenplay with interesting, witty (and of course, attractive) characters played by two of the best leading actors in Hollywood (whether you like Julia Roberts or not). This time, however, the film is more fun, maybe even more complex, and just as visually entertaining and witty with its dialogue.

Don't listen to them. Listen to me.

Welcome.

Blogs to come when I don't have so much school work.