By
Rating:
Director:
Starring: | | |

Storytelling

Country: united_states

Year: 2002

Running time: 87

IMDB: http://us.imdb.com/Details?0250081

Diane says: “For me, STORYTELLING was unfortunately upstaged by the trailer for HAPPINESS that preceded it. What a great movie! At each scene in the trailer, I thought, ‘That’s my favorite scene!’ And Philip Seymour Hoffman–fantastic!

“It was wonderful and startling to see Mike Schank reprise his role from AMERICAN MOVIE.

“Wasn’t it strange to see the inverse of DONNIE DARKO at the end of the film? How did Solondz have time to satirize that so quickly? (Just kidding, I hope.) Anyway, Scooby is like the antithesis of Donnie, which made me appreciate the latter movie once again.

“I agree that the red box scene would have lost nothing and gained much by editing out the shots subject to the red box.

“The way Solondz dealt with attitudes toward African-Americans, Latinos, Jews, and people with physical disabilities was effectively grating. There was very little laughter in the show I went to–a small audience. I tried to extract a few laughs from it, but gave up. If I take the time to reflect more on it, I’ll consider that question of who’s laughing at whom: that tangle of audience, filmmaker, character….” 2 cats.

 

Laura says: “Todd Solondz’ film, WELCOME TO THE DOLLHOUSE, was a near masterpiece of squirm-inducing self recognition while his follow up, HAPPINESS seemed to delight more in making its audience uncomfortable than exploring what made its characters tick (with the exception of its strong pedophile subplot). With his latest, STORYTELLING, Solondz appears to have fallen, over the edge into pretentious, self-referential irony. Solondz may well be the only one laughing at this own joke.” 1 cat

For Laura’s complete review: “http://www.reelingreviews.com/storytelling.htm

 

Michael says: “Todd Solondz, winner of Chlotrudis Awards’s Best Original Screenplay for HAPPINESS, offers his third film, STORYTELLING amidst the usual controversy and fussing by critics and movie viewer alike. Solondz continues with his withering, black humor directed at the misfits and floundering in life that makes the viewer laugh uncomfortably, then wonder why they did.

“In STORYTELLING, Solondz divides his film into two stories, ‘Fiction,’ and ‘Non-Fiction.’ ‘Fiction’ revolves around a short story class, and one student in particular, Vi (Selma Blair). After her boyfriend’s story is skewered cruelly by the Pulitzer-Prize winning, African-American professor, Vi finds herself drawn to? Using? that same professor in an uncomfortable scene involving sex and racial slurs.

“‘Non-Fiction’ sees a struggling, first-time documentary filmmaker (Paul Giamatti) filming a movie about high school students preparing for college. He focuses on one particular student, Scooby (Paul Webber) and his upper middle-class family in a wealthy New Jersey suburb. His resulting film, ‘American Scooby’ throws questions of an artist’s responsibility to his/her subjects squarely into our faces. Add some race and class struggles involving Lupe Ontiveros as the family housekeeper, and STORYTELLING ends up spinning wildly into over-the-top tabloid territory the way each of Solondz earlier films did.

“I’m still unsure of how I feel about STORYTELLING. It was amusing, uncomfortable and thought-provoking, three things I enjoy in a film, yet the stories, particularly ‘Non-Fiction’ seemed so self-referential and defensive, I found myself wondering why Solondz felt he had to present it that way, rather than just telling a story that echoed his feelings/thoughts. For fans of Solondz, I’d say see this film, although for me, it’s clearly the weakest of the three. He’s an interesting filmmaker regardless.” 3 cats

 

Phred says: “I too was disappointed with STORYTELLING, but liked parts of it. The first story had promise. It pushes the viewer to examine topics like a disabled man’s feelings about his disability and his relationship with his girlfriend, stereotypes of black men and white women, what is coercion in sex, etc. I also really appreciate the scenes of the writing class, where students criticize each others’ writing. That was pretty right-on, if exaggerated, and funny. Most of the film didn’t live up to that level.

“The second segment was hurt by weak casting – I thought John Goodman, in particular, was miscast. Most of the other actors were OK at best. Solondz has a knack for casting terrific actors in oddball roles, witness Phillip Seymour Hoffman and others in HAPPINESS, but here it’s largely missing. I did like the college girl and her disabled boyfriend, and to some extent Scooby, but few others excelled.

“The second story was too long, only fairly written and casted, and disappointing.

“One positive note. Did anyone note the use of sweating in the two segments. It’s a subtle but funny point in the second story.”

 

Scot says: “I found the film pretty patchy. The screenplay has some nifty themes running throughout and the film some clever ways of looping back on itself. (Look for Mike Schank, one of the subjects of the documentary AMERICAN MOVIE, as the cameraman who shoots ‘American Scooby.’) Still, I think the only times the film is truly successful is when Solondz pushes the envelope uncomfortably to the point of giggles. I was in guilty hysterics during the conversation between Mikey and Consuelo in her bedroom. When the humor is missing, the story is as embarrassingly flat as Marcus’s (Leo Fitzpatrick) short story.
(And as flat as Fitzpatrick’s performance, for that matter.)

“I *would* recommend the film (the second part, anyway) to Solondz’s fans … but no one else.” 3 cats

 

 

 

Storytelling

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *