Showing posts with label Mark Duplass. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Duplass. Show all posts

Thursday, March 5, 2015

The Lazarus Effect



**Spoiler Alert**

Director: David Gelb/Starring: Mark Duplass, Olivia Wilde, Sarah Bolger, Evan Peters and Donald Glover

It's hard to square the film The Lazarus Effect; a yawner of a horror flick which strains itself (but not too much) to be scary, with director David Gelb's terrific, 2011 documentary, Jiro Dreams of Sushi. What could the two films possibly have in common? Not much, save for Gelb's direction. While the documentary is a fascinating look at a sushi chef who pursues perfection, The Lazarus Effect is a story about a group of young scientists who resurrect a doggie and a great looking chick, with what should be horrifying results. No, they don't try to resurrect sushi but I wish they had.

Gelb's feature film debut is a bit of a clunker but it didn't start off that way.
Mark Duplass and the lovely Olivia Wilde play corporate-funded, university scientists (who are also engaged) Frank and Zoe; who have developed something known as the Lazarus Serum. When said serum is injected into the brain of a deceased recipient and stimulated with electricity, the subject is miraculously brought back from the dead.

When the film begins, Frank and Zoe, along with their student assistants, Clay (Evan Peters) and Niko (Donald Glover) and a student documentarian Eva (Sarah Bolger), have recently tested the serum on a dog. As the dead pooch rests on a table, the serum is injected into his brain while voltage is applied. At first the experiment seems a failure until the dog violently spasms into life. Though the group toasts one another for their dramatic success, the audience is left wondering how and who would fund such an insane project. Though Frank explains in Eva's documentary how the serum has practical applications--something about helping EMTs' do their jobs--the idea that a group of scientists would abandon their original project to pursue something so wacky and without corporate or academic oversight seems more than just a little preposterous. But Duplass and Wilde do their level best to give the story credibility and they do pretty well, considering.

But of course all horror films about the hubris of science and scientists playing God will inevitably become cautionary tales and this movie is no exception.

The dog soon shows abnormal behavior, like appetite loss and sudden, violent, rage-filled outbursts which unnerve the group. But other than a scene where the dog stands menacingly over Zoe while she sleeps, he doesn't do much else to terrify the crew other than wrecking the lab kitchen. I think an intervention by dog whisperer Cesar Millan might have been in order but I don't think he handles doggie un-dead.

The project suffers a major setback when the company that supplies the groups research grant is bought out by a rival. Operatives of the new company invade the lab, seizing all data relating to the project. Desperate to retain ownership of the Lazarus serum and all rights pertaining to its creation, the group breaks into the lab to recreate the experiment on film. While another dog rests on the table (how and where the scientists appropriate dead dogs is never explained), the experiment proceeds but in applying voltage, Zoe is accidentally electrocuted. While futile efforts are made to resuscitate her, a desperate Frank decides to use the serum on his fiancee, much to the horror of his assistants and Eva. When the experiment works, Zoe, like the dog, begins to show signs of not being quite right. She anticipates what people say and her fingers begin to show signs of something resembling necrosis. She also stares creepily at one of the assistants.

And sure enough, some sort of power failure keeps the group imprisoned in the lab (a lab wouldn't have fail-safe escapes in case of fire or other disasters?), which means Zoe, who has now become the chick version of the undead, begins attacking the group.

Earlier in the film, we learned Zoe is tormented by nightmares about a traumatic childhood incident involving her inability to free neighbors from their burning apartment. After her resurrection, the nightmares attain verisimilitude as the filmmaker Eva finds herself projected into in the burning hallway of Zoe's childhood memory. We also learn that Zoe's soul may not have made the transition to the afterlife, which is supposed to explain her wraith-like condition. But how can the dog's predicament, which is identical to Zoe's, be explained? Does he suffer from some sort of doggie guilt from an incident in his past? A time he mauled a mailman's leg perhaps?

Ultimately, as the audience may have guessed from the trailer, Zoe goes on a rampage that doesn't spare anyone (save the dog). A frail attempt at a plot twist comes at the end but by then, I was too bored and un-scared to care much about the outcome.

Of course science and scientists are scapegoated (yet again) in a movie while religious notions about the afterlife and tunnels of bright light are given credence. In Hollywood movies, scientists are never to be trusted while anyone espousing any religious, quasi-rational view about the here-after is to be perceived as level-headed. That may never change. But, it shouldn't take the intellect of research scientists to know resurrecting one from death is a knuckle-headed idea. It's disturbing to consider that someday someone may actually fund such a project.

I think Duplass and Wilde are talented actors who deserve a better movie. In time, they will no doubt find more inspired scripts and director David Gelb will surely find better material to showcase his talents.

I'm sorry to say The Lazarus Effect has nary a scare in its short running time.

But hold on, what happened to the dog? Was that ever explained?

Wait a minute, I see him...there he is...he's in my yard! No...go away...nice doggie...please...I'm sorry I said that stuff about the mailman...No, not my throat...please, let me live to see the sequel...AAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGGG!

Thursday, February 12, 2015

Omniflick Twins: The One I Love and Honeymoon



**Spoiler Alert**

The One I Love/Director: Charlie McDowell/Starring: Mark Duplass, Elizabeth Moss and Ted Danson**Honeymoon: Director: Leigh Janiak/Starring: Rose Leslie and Harry Treadaway

I recently had the very good fortune to see two 2014 films at the local cinema that didn't get the attention--or the distribution--they really deserved. Both are terrific and coincidentally, they both deal with young couples in various stages of marriage. One couple's relationship (The One I Love) is in rapid free-fall while the other (Honeymoon), having only just begun, is threatened by an insidious alien entity. While the former is odd, surreal and sometimes humorously nuanced, the latter is terrifying, creepy and visceral.

And while both films have disparate messages about the state of marriage, one can easily conclude that both share cynical views about one of the world's oldest institutions. Both films also examine marriage through sci-fi-like stories; eschewing realism to tell compelling stories.

The One I Love opens with couple Ethan and Sophie (Mark Duplass and Elizabeth Moss, respectively) sitting before marriage therapist (Ted Danson). Their marriage has hit the skids and in an attempt to rehabilitate it, the therapist suggests they spend some time at a country retreat, which has had positive therapeutic effects on other couples having marital difficulties. Ethan and Sophie accept the therapist's offer and after arriving at said getaway, they find it to be quite charming. As they settle into the retreat, they find the place also features a guest house, of which they avail themselves of shortly thereafter.

But in the days following, Ethan and Sophie begin to notice strange goings on. They find doppelgangers of themselves on the premises. And fThe couple discovers that the their doubles can only occupy one house at time, individually, depending on whether Ethan or Sophie happen to be in said house.

As the situation becomes more bizarre, Ethan and Sophie find their alternate selves are their idealized selves or their better selves at one time in their marriage. Sophie finds the alternate Ethan to be more humorous and fun-loving and begins to prefer him to the "real" Ethan, who is more than unhappy with the situation. Unfortunately for Ethan, he finds Sophie's Other to be a little too accommodating, though some aspects of her eagerness to please, like preparing bacon his wife would normally refuse him, appeals greatly to him.

As time at the retreat passes, discord between Ethan and Sophie continues until it becomes clear that she prefers Ethan's alternate while he would like nothing more than to stay with his wife and work out the more troublesome failings in their marriage.

In the end, a clever, O. Henry-esque ending settles their marriage crisis in an almost perversely humorous way.
The One I Love is director Charlie McDowell's (son of actor Malcolm McDowell) film debut and he demonstrates exceptional skill, keeping what is essentially a chamber-piece moving nicely and coaxing terrific performances from his small cast. Though both actors handle the material beautifully, Elizbeth Moss is particularly good; leaving one wondering why she hasn't successfully made the transition from T.V. to film.

What perspective do McDowell and first-feature screenwriter Justin Lader have on marriage, or at least Ethan and Sophie's relationship? Their message may be that couples have an irrational need for immutability in their relationships; an insistence their significant others remain the same and unchanged. It is Ethan that seems more rational about the realities of marriage, as his willingness to maintain his troubled marriage, with its myriad shortcomings is preferable to taking up with a pleasant imposter. Sophie has no qualms about being with the Ethan double, which tells us that maybe men have more realistic expectations about marriage than women. This is hardly a sexist notion, just one that squares with reality.

Honeymoon has a decidedly different take on marriage; one that is cynical and maybe more feminist. Made by another first-time director, Leigh Janiak, the film makes its point in the horror genre and in a powerfully frightening manner.

Newly married young couple Paul (Harry Treadaway) and Bea (Rose Leslie) have chosen a cabin in the woods for their honeymoon escape. During their stay, they come upon a shabby restaurant near their cabin. The proprietor forcefully demands that they leave. Before the couple depart, Bea recognizes him as someone she's known from childhood. From the way she greets him, we're able to glean that some kind of romance or crush was involved, which irks Paul and sets the couple briefly at odds. But more ominous is the man's distraught wife, who warns them away from the place. The woman's strange behavior, leads Bea and Paul to conjecture about spousal abuse.

Back at their cabin, all is relatively well until Paul notices Bea's strange, absent-minded breakfast preparations (Breakfast figures prominently in both films, I guess), where she forgets to add coffee to the hot water and how to make french toast. This follows a strange, nighttime episode where Paul finds Bea has somnambulated in the forest.

The honeymoon begins to fall apart when Bea begins to show signs of not being herself and Paul finds strange wounds on her inner thighs, which she vehemently tries to hide from her husband. Paul also begins to notice strange lights shining through the bedroom window. Though Paul begins to suspect the man Bea once knew, it becomes increasingly clear to the audience that she has made contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence; one that means to inhabit her body and visit unpleasantness on Paul. How the remainder of the story unfolds is mildly disturbing but riveting.

Like Charlie McDowell, Leigh Janiak shows a precocious, directorial flair for interpreting the story with precocious expertise. And she shows she can scare the wits out of an audience; foregoing gore for psychological and atmospheric dread. As impressive are the performances. UK actors Treadaway and Bea intensify the story with whiz-bang performances. It is to Janiak's credit that she is able to craft such a spellbinding film with a relatively miniscule budget.

It is interesting to note that the woman Bea and Paul met in the restaurant also becomes a victim of the alien entities. Why the women were specifically targeted is never divulged but serves as interesting symbolism. The fact the men both become expendable says something about Janiak's take on marriage. Where The One I Love addresses the notion of expectations, Honeymoon says something about female empowerment in the 21st century. The timeworn convention that a woman must have a man for self-validation is metaphorically of disposed here.

The films would make a fascinating double bill, if such screenings still played on contemporary screens. It is too bad both films didn't get more attention. The One I Love and Honeymoon would have certainly made my favorite films of 2014 list had I been able to see them in theaters last year.

Keep your eyes on Charlie McDowell and Leigh Janiak; if film companies can pull their respective heads out of their respective fannies, they might better promote their next films. Since I can't suggest that one see the films at the local theater, I recommend catching them on Netflix.

Honeymoon
The One I Love