SO #3: State and Main with Jen D’Angelo
Added 2023-07-17 06:19:35 +0000 UTCSean talks to Jen D’Angelo about the movie State and Main (2000). They discuss the WGA strike, David Mamet, and his portrayal of a writer.
Next week’s episode: Barton Fink (1991)
Comments
This shit rocks
Pelican Grief
2023-07-20 05:30:38 +0000 UTCThis show is awesome!! Really enjoying all of these episodes :)
luke gresback
2023-07-19 03:48:50 +0000 UTCGreat convo, jens great, great ep. Stoked yr doing Fink already.
Sneakaboard
2023-07-19 00:51:12 +0000 UTCVery much looking forward to your conversation about Barton Fink! I trust you'll do Synecdoche New York eventually. And The Savages is a bit less directly tied to writing, but PSH and Laura Linney do both play writers in it so maybe it would be worth a look at some point 😊
Adam Lauver
2023-07-18 23:15:05 +0000 UTCThis show is a good show.
Jacob Stock
2023-07-18 20:45:50 +0000 UTCLove this show! Also love this movie because of and in spite of some of the things they cover in this episode. It's very much flawed but for every one thing that doesn't work, we get a moment like Hoffman holding up the screenplay, or the doctor telling him he should never trust a man in a bow-tie, or Macy yelling "you're very sorry, you passive-aggressive son of a bitch!" re: the topless storyline, all these guys are hellbent on getting the actress to do the scene topless because a) it's in her contract and b) she does it all the time so "what's the big deal". But then they are swayed by the writer's -- very earnest -- reworking of the scene where "breasts represent motherhood". So not only is the writer triumphant over finding a solution which basically amounts to "we shoot her from behind", but the director and co. are actually impressed by this and get on board immediately. As though the thought of blocking a scene to hide the actual nudity is a novel concept to these guys. I always thought this was plainly ridiculous and poking fun of everyone involved. I also like the interpretation that everyone is so focused on their part of the project that they lose sight of a simple workaround, and that it actually takes the writer's appeal to the themes of the story to reveal the obvious. I think it can be both. The whole thing doesn't _work_ work but Hoffman and Macy do sell it. That's really the whole vibe of the movie. It feels really stage-y but maybe because the fact it takes place on a film set, that doesn't really mar it for me. It's a lot like the writing feeling written in that it can elevate what we're seeing, and it can ring flat in the same way as well. There are moments where the stageyness adds something or makes a joke work, and then there are just awkward ones where it seems likely that may just have been the least effed-up take. Like the one where the two people are talking outside the bathroom where the actress locked herself in, and they both take a step forward and one of them checks his mark on the ground before he delivers the line about how the country could draw her tits from memory. They have to take a step because the camera is moving to include the actress stepping out of the bathroom to hear the line. But it's such a deliberate thing. So is that the best take of that scene and Mamet just kept it in? Or is that the way it's supposed to play, in order to draw attention to the construction of the visual joke? Probably not, but I can't really tell. Adding to this is the non-emotive and very direct way many of the townspeople have of speaking, as though they are also just putting something on for the crew's benefit (or ours) but just not being very good at it. This makes Pidgeon's acting weirdly more in line with the rest of the movie than she is in some of Mamet's other movies. Compare this with Heist for example where her blank expression and a couple of weirdly stage-y sets kind of torpedo the whole thing from the get-go. (Heist also has the issue with the writing feeling written and just ringing false, the worst example I think is when someone asks "Don't you want to hear my last words?" My oh my.) Also love the cut-off janitor, and not least because it's the end of a runner in the movie: everyone is always just about to tell the writer something and they keep getting cut off or just wandering off, and then we get this long drawn-out closer at the end. Also also, Joseph Turner White's hit play is called Anguish, which is just perfect. Third also, I would be interested to know if this is indeed the first instance of "so that happened". Sean also mentions "good talk", which is a kind of a runner in the National Lampoon's Vacation movies, but the context is different, where they develop it into being a kind of bow-out line. But here's the kicker:
Björn Unnar
2023-07-18 11:55:34 +0000 UTCWonderful point made by Sean about things “feeling written”
Burt Cardamom
2023-07-18 04:54:06 +0000 UTCReally enjoying these conversations!! 😀
Donald McCoy
2023-07-18 03:52:27 +0000 UTCCan we make requests for this wonderful series, not knowing what's already banked? Would love to see Dan Harmon on here, and it's about time he returned the favor from when the boys ventured to Harmontown. Also "the midwest courtjest," aka "the good-guy-a-wah from Iowa," aka Paul Rust is always insightful about this stuff on his pod. And after you *completely* run out of traditional writing-related movies, 'Henry Fool' is an interesting (albeit fringy) one.
Sean
2023-07-17 08:21:46 +0000 UTC
