 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
S1MONE - 8/23/02 - PG-13
- 117m
Al Pacino
Cathrine Keener
Rachel Roberts
Director: Andrew Niccol
JEF'S REVIEW
I would see almost any movie with Al Pacino in it. He's one of
my favorite actors and has been in some great films (Scarface, Scent of
a Woman, Carlito’s Way, to name a few).
I wanted to see Simone mainly because Pacino was in it.
The story line goes like this;
Viktor Taransky (Pacino) is an aging movie director who's finding himself
caught up in the "business" of making movies. There were some
great insights into the making of movies and what goes on a backlot in
Hollywood. One scene in particular that is only seconds into the film,
was a great piece of cinematography. It showed a somewhat blurry image
with multi colors that appear to be shifting around at random. Then the
camera starts to come into focus, and pans back, and we see it's a view
from the underside of a glass bowl of the colorful candy called "Mike
& Ike". Taransky is rooting through the candy bowl picking out
all the cherry flavored pieces because that happens to be one of the many
crazy requests of the actress Nicola Anders (Winona Ryder) he's trying
to swoon to be in his new film. The film then continues to point out many
of the hoops that a director has to jump through in order to get a movie
made, from pleasing the actors/actresses to the executives of the studio.
Somewhere in all of this, the message comes out that Viktor wants to get
his movie making back to what a movie is supposed to be... Art.
Where an actor/actress may decide to drive herself to the set rather than
needing a limo. Where the love of the work, and pouring your heart and
soul into the making of the movie is what makes a good movie.
So in comes "Simone". Through a sort of odd way Viktor comes
into possession of a computer program that even he, who claims to be computer
illiterate, can easily control and manipulate a computer rendered actress
into any scene he wants. The film he makes (Sunrise to Sunset) with this
computer generated actress turns out to be a huge box office smash. The
Crowds love Simone, and the rest of the movie deals with the typical media
hype surrounding any big name movie star.
All in all I enjoyed this movie. Pacino carried the film, although Simone
did well too. There was some interesting commentary on the making of films,
and how the media plays such a huge roll in the making or breaking of
a movie. There was some beautiful cinematography at the beginning, and
several more shots scattered through out the film. My only complaint was
that I felt it was a bit too long. Some of the stories could have been
cut short, because the points had been made several times. There were
a few scenes that bothered me with Pacino's acting as well... Some of
it was over the top. And some was a strange mix, in that with Pacino's
somewhat slurred speech style, and many times in the film, you see him
drinking, the scenes are vague in trying to determine if he's playing
the part of a drunk. Maybe this was intentional.
But these points set aside, I'd say it was a good movie, and worth the
$8 and two hours. Go see it in the theater if possible, or at least rent
it on DVD or Video.
One of the minor characters was a sidekick to the "paparazzi"
... this was Jason Schwartzman, who played a roll as Max in the movie
"Rushmore." I really liked him in that movie and in this movie
even though it was a small role.
Side note: I tend to pick up
on things that many people don't see. I saw one in this movie. I had last
seen Pacino in the movie "Insomnia" with costars Robin Williams
and Hilary Swank. In this movie, it was very clear that Pacino has a problem
with his hands. His fingernails have some sort of discoloration and distorted
fingernails. I don't think it was Arthritis as this mainly effects the
joints of the fingers, but maybe some sort of nail disease. Anyway in
"Insomnia," there were several close up shots of his hands.
It was very intentional, and not meant to hide his hands in anyway. I
even thought it was deliberate to show another side to his character.
So in this movie I was aware of it. It was very well hidden, most of his
scenes you never saw the back of his hands, or were lighted in such a
way as to not draw attention to his nails. But... during a critical point
in the film, Pacino is seen blowing a kiss to Simone. They digitally took
out his nail on his left hand. AND it was a poor touchup job... it was
a very pixely fleshy colored blur over his hand. In a movie where the
main point was talking about the role of technology in film, and what
levels do you go to. I found this scene very ironic. We the viewing public
I think would be willing to overlook a discolored fingernail if the acting
is good. Perhaps it was the fear of the actor being portrayed in the press
with this sort of "handicap" if you want to call it that. Just
a strange choice to be made in this particular movie.
Jef