Director: Larry Clark
in English
102 minutes
Festivals: Venice, Toronto, Rotterdam
Before the movie there were two introductions by Gayle Lake, the Sydney Film Festival director, both intros instructing sensitive viewers to walk away and watch other films in the Festival featured at the same time in other cinemas, similar to the 30 seconds warning in I Stand Alone, due to the film's violent nature and excessive drug use. In both introductions, it is also suggested that the rest of the audience remain will be delivered some 'tender moments' by Mrs. Lippy, Melanie Griffiths. So, I joined the ride and played "spot the violent bits" and "spot the tender moments" games. I lost both. Apparently I've seen too many violent films, so none of the bang-bangs shocked me, not even a small jerk on my shoulders. Yup, sure too much violence I've seen in the cinemas these days... This is yet another film about dealing drugs, stealing, getting beaten up into pulp, shooting some folks and having a heist gone wrong. 'Gasp, what a surprise, this is totally new to me!'
In 'spot the tender moments' game, Melanie Griffiths is supposed to offer some motherly tenderness or such, but it seems that only moment is just when she holds the hopeless, desperate girl who is trapped in the web of crime, an attempt to comfort her, yet it is not moving enough. Mrs. Banderas offers more lips than any other characters in the film, and when she gets a close-up, her lips fill the whole screen... eww, gross! Drug addiction is still understandable in terms of this film, but collagen overdose? Mrs. Banderas is addicted to collagen and doesn't know when to stop? Near the end, when James Woods goes ballistic, I thought he was going to blow her into bits with his trigger-happy fingers and those lips were going to be left unscathed, sticking on the windscreen of the car. He doesn't shoot her, instead just punches her in the face, so her lips clings tight onto her face, thank God. Tenderness is not evoked here, tenderness is contained in Sid, Melanie Griffiths' character, and more often than not it bursts out as too-kind bubliness and desperate fun-lovingness instead.
In relevance to the introductions, it is a rather violent movie, but it has to be so, because the theme here is drugs and crime. The film promises tenderness and poignancy, but it has to do so, because otherwise it will be just another senseless whack-and-shoot movie. Similar to Larry Clark's previous feature Kids, this film takes on the subject matter of teenage delinquency related to drug abuse, however, this is not as provocative at all and the promises don't deliver. In fact, this film resembles Gus Van Sant's drugs drama Drugstore Cowboy (a pre-Trainspotting drugsfilm!). Nevertheless, if the censorship fiesta in Australia gets out of control, we can actually expect this film to be banned due to its excessive nicotine use (or abuse) by all of the characters, especially the kids who are 'just old enough'.
Maybe Godard is right, all you need to make a movie is a girl and a gun. Maybe in this film a better game to play is 'spot the needle marks on people's arms' or 'count the cigarettes'. Maybe I'm too insensitive or desensitised. Or maybe the drugs just don't work... And oh yeah, I much prefer Trainspotting!
natalia laban
comments? email the author
read a review of Another Day in Paradise by adam rivett, who walked out of the film
return to Sydney Film Festival 1999 index
Get Yourself Some Cheap Mags and Support Us at the same time!
