2023 Oscars Best Picture Review: American Fiction

Jeffrey Wright portrays a serious African American writer who faces pressure from a white-dominated entertainment society in the comedy American Fiction.

DISCLAIMER: This is from a blog of four reviews I originally posted on March 2, 2024. The original blog has been removed.

Not that often are the Academy Awards friendly to comedy films. American Fiction is just the type of comedy that can do the trick.

Those of you on social media must be very familiar with the #OscarsSoWhite campaign. Despite there being seven acting nominees that are racial minorities this year, we need to have things more consistent over the years. Focusing back on the film, the Oscars and their lack of consistency in making their nominees diverse is just one of the problems with Hollywood and the entertainment system as a whole in dealing with racial minorities. Hollywood is gratefully responsible for this. Those who’ve seen classic films of the past will have seen a negative or mocking depiction of a racial minority. Awareness groups in the last decade have helped to make Hollywood think twice about how racial minorities are depicted in entertainment. Even though they won’t stop an insulting depiction from happening again, they will raise hell when it does and make people think twice.

In this film, it’s very obvious the theme of the film is about African-Americans depicted in all forms of arts and entertainment. It’s not only about how they’re depicted in entertainment. It’s also about an entertainment system where top sales and ratings are the bottom line. African Americans have various personalities and life goals and directions, but it’s always about the images that sell the most. And that’s the problem Thelonious “Monk” Ellison has to deal with. His novels are of excellent quality and good for how they give a good atypical depiction of African American life. Nevertheless there’s the problem of his works not selling. That frustrates him to the point he feels he has to sell out and do a “gangsta” novel. I’m sure many others feel the same pressure.

The film is a humorous look of an African-American author trying to get respect in the literary world which all-too-often seems to favor quantity over quality. It spoofs the whole system and how the white-dominated public treats works from African-Americans from his latest manuscript being rejected for not being “black enough” to his books being sold in the African-American section of a bookstore to his adding clout to his author’s guise as a criminal on the run from the law to a jury of a book festival consisting mostly of white limousine liberals lauding his upcoming novel. It also includes the irony of the one African-American member of the jury, rival author Sintara Golden, panning his novel as pandering. Meanwhile Monk himself finds her novel pandering.

Although the story is obviously about a significant topic, the story also has a lot of personal elements for Monk. This story is also about the author’s difficulty of trying to create and market his breakthrough novel right during a load of sudden complications in his life. He’s put on a sabbatical by his college because of his frequent confrontations with students. While reuniting with his family in Boston, his sister suddenly dies. His mother’s Alzheimer’s worsens and she needs to be placed in a care facility. The maid who he grew up with has to leave her job and eventually marries. His brother is going through a divorce and drug addiction after his wife caught him with another man. In addition, he is developing a relationship with an established lawyer named Coraline but the relationship ends as he disagrees with her about Sintara’s book. Try plugging a breakthrough novel with all this happening!

Top respect should go to director/writer Cord Jefferson. This film is actually based from a 2001 novel Erasure. Jefferson does a great job in satirizing the difficulty of trying to make it as a “black writer” from the difficulty of doing his work his way to the pressure of dropping his artistic integrity and selling out by writing a pandering “gangsta” work to the “liberal elite” (full of mostly white people) taking it as serious literature worthy of acclaim to the media machine building up the hype to Monk taking his pandering further to add to the hype. It’s both funny and smart at the same time. Mixed with its humor, it’s very much an eye opener about the pressures African-Americans go through to make it in arts and entertainment. It pokes fun at the expectations of what African-American literature is expected to be from the elite of the arts who are mostly not African-American and an entertainment industry where top sales have always been the bottom line. It also pokes fun at the “liberal elite” who are mostly of white people who want diversity but are clueless in how to do it right, despite being the ones pulling the strings. Despite the themes, it also includes the human elements like Monk’s connection with his family and love interest and how it helps him understand himself better as a writer and as a person. Even that element of Monk dealing with his ‘genius’ characteristic adds to the story.

Respect should also go to Jeffrey Wright in playing Monk Ellison. It’s not an easy thing to do a comedic performance with intelligence, even though the story does just that. Wright does a great job of a ‘genius’ writer who feels compelled to throw away his dignity as he’s on a sabbatical and just sell out with a pandering novel. At the same time, Wright adds dimension with his role as Monk tries to keep family ties together and tries to start a relationship with Coraline, only for his ‘genius’ characteristics to interfere. That’s quite an effort to do and to keep comedic for the sake of the film. There are some great supporting performances. First is from Sterling K. Brown as the brother dealing with the frustrating addiction and troubling changes in his life. There’s Lessie Uggams as the mother with Alzheimer’s robbing her of her quality of life but also able to say something to help Monk get a better focus of himself. There’s also Erika Alexander as the girlfriend who knows how to draw the line with Monk’s attitude and arrogance. With the musical score of Laura Karpman added in, you have a winning film.

American Fiction is just the intelligent comedy we need right now. It makes the difficulties of African Americans trying to make it in arts mixed with the attitudes of the mostly-white elites in the business look like the circus that it is. At the same time, it makes it as much about the author as a friend and a member of the family and his difficulty with his personality interfering with that. Already I declare this the Comedy Of The Year.

Summer Movie Summary: Comedies

I don’t know about you but live-action comedies didn’t fare so well at the box office this summer. The highest-grossing comedy of the summer was Central Intelligence with just over $127 million. The only other two comedies of the summer to gross over $100 million were Ghostbusters and Bad Moms. Have people lost their sense of humor? For this summary, I will review two movies: Ghostbusters and The Nice Guys.

The Nice Guysthe-nice-guys

I’ll start the focus on one movie I saw all the way back in May. A comedy I was hoping to do well at the box office but didn’t. I saw The Nice Guys because I felt we were long overdue for a crime comedy or a police comedy. I have to say that this was a funny movie and has to be this year’s overlooked gem.

It takes us back to the 1970’s not just to do with the clothes, hair and music but also of a 70’s thing few 70’s-set movies focus on: the abundance of porn. We often forget that the 1970’s was the sexual revolution’s biggest heyday. A decade of free love at its freest and pornography was prevalent even in the movie theatres. It was even okay back then to take a date to a porno.

Here, they make a crime story set in the deliriousness of the porn business. It doesn’t aim for one-liners like so many other comedies resort to. What it does is it makes comedy of the situation. A case of a private eye and an enforcer who become unlikely partners in trying to solve a murder and who is connected to it. Another humorous situation is at the Los Angeles Auto Show where a clip of the porno starring the murder victim is spliced in to the auto show film to the shock of all. The story even has ironies added into it like how the Holly March, daughter of private eye Holland March, is able to help solve some part of the crime with her know-how. Another irony is how a politician who wants to have the crime solve is actually a part of the instrumentation. It all adds up to a humorous story that will have you laughing at the situation.

The film also gives you this summer’s biggest WTH moment. That comes when the police interrogate a neighborhood boy who showed his penis to a neighboring porn director who was killed. That’s sexual abuse, right? When I saw the interrogation happening, I was expecting a scene of a sexual abuse victim. Instead, the boy comes across as excited as if his exposing could open up opportunity in porn in the future. That was so bizarre. Just reminds you that the sexual revolution of the 1970’s was that free.

Director Shane Black takes a break from directing superhero movies like Iron Man 3 by directing this crime comedy he co-wrote with Anthony Bagarozzi. It comes off as very humorous in a dark way. I’d like to think he succeeded. Russell Crowe was the right fit for enforcer Jackson Healy. He possessed the right ruggedness for the role. Doing crime comedy is something new for Ryan Gosling but he did a very good job as Holland March. The scene-stealer was young actress Angourie Rice who played daughter Holly March. She did a good job of going just a simple daughter of Holland to all of a sudden one who can best help trace the case and even help solve it, with providing some action of her own. Also a big surprise is seeing Kim Basinger as the politician. I admit it. Like your typical 80’s kid, I always picture Kim as the bombshell she’s most famous for. It was surprising to see her play a role of an older character. I’m not complaining. I think she did quite well.

It is too bad to see that it didn’t make too much at the box office: $57.3 million. There was a time a while back where crime comedies or dark crime dramas were a big hit. I remember the 1990’s were capable of churning out one such movie per year that would be a classic like 1994’s Pulp Fiction, 1995’s The Usual Suspects, 1996’s Fargo and 1997’s L.A. Confidential. Since then, it cooled down. I was hoping this movie would revive some interest in it and rediscover the humor of the crime comedy. Also I feel there’s another message being sent with the lack of success of the film. The 70’s retro in movies has now faded. I know it was very active from the 90’s carried into the 2000’s and showed some muscle at the beginning of this decade but it’s obvious 70’s retro has faded with time.

The Nice Guys is an overlooked comedy from the summer. It’s worth seeing if you have the chance.

Ghostbusters: Answer The Call

ghostbusters-1

From retro 70’s to retro 80’s: the retro phenomenon that still has the most muscle despite retro 90’s encroaching. Now news last year of a Ghostbusters remake featuring an all-female ensemble of Ghostbusters seemed unorthodox at the time. One conservative filmmaker went as far as saying ‘My childhood is ruined.’ However I was willing to give it a chance. I mean this is 2016.

In order to differentiate itself from the original 1984 Ghostbusters, it gave itself the subtitle Answer The Call. Now the big challenge was to decide whether the film was a case of the ghostbusters starting up together or whether these four women were filling the shoes of the men before them. It was decided to be a story where the ghostbusters start fresh. It’s very tempting to compare it to the first Ghostbusters. Actually there’s no escaping it. If you compare the two side-by-side, you will notice a lot of differences. And not just simply the change of genders of the cast. The first is the humor. The new film has humor and lines that are more irreverent that the humor and jokes in the first. The second is the Ghostbuster-wannabe characters. One thing about the first is that the addition of nerd Louis Tully added to the humor of the film. Of course Rick Moranis always specialized in nerdy characters. Having a bimboy character who’s their receptionist play the Ghostbuster wannabe here didn’t fit as well. Plus he wasn’t even that funny. Another is the possessed character scene. I’m sure those of you would agree that the possession of Dana Barrett worked better than the possession of Abby Yates. Even the line “No Dana, only Zuul.” is way more memorable.

Despite the first Ghostbusters being better than the new one in many ways, the second one does have elements that are better than in the first one. The first and most obvious is the better special effects. The film was able to create better and more eye-catching ghosts than they were in the first one. Computer technology has made that big of advances over the years. Another was the rock concert scene. If there was one plus to the movie, it was that where the foursome have to battle a ghost while a rock band was performing. That added to the humor and made it enjoyable.

It’s clear from the start this is a group effort between Paul Feig, Katie Dippold and Melissa McCarthy. This is the third collaboration with the threesome where Feig directs and co-writes, Dippold co-writes and McCarthy acts in. Its often questionable who was the main lead role of the film: whether it was Kristen Wiig’s Erin Gilbert or if it was Melissa McCarthy’s Abby Yates. I know McCarthy’s star has grown bigger over the years. The addition of two other Saturday Night Live talents Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones make for a good mix of humor.

One thing to note is that personnel of the original Ghostbusters gladly came back for the revamp. There’s Ivan Reitman who’s the co-producer this time around. There’s Bill Murray who makes a cameo as a skeptic to the busters. Dan Aykroyd makes a cameo as a taxi driver, Annie Potts makes a cameo as a crabby hotel clerk, Ernie Hudson appears as Patty’s uncle Bill, even Sigourney Weaver makes a cameo appearance.

Ghostbusters: Answer The Call may not compare to the original. It’s either the freshness or the magic of the first that’s not there. Nevertheless it is enjoyable and does make for some good laughs.

And there’s my summary of the summer’s comedic movies with focus on the two. Hopefully the studios should be able to find the right funny stuff to get the live-action comedy back to being a summer hit next summer.