ROVIN' AND RAVIN' WITH MIKE
The Many Hearts of "Playing by Heart"
Copyright (c) 1999 by Michael Segers
-All rights reserved-
Last week, I closed my remarks on "The Thin Red Line" by
saying that it was a three hour movie which should have been over
in two hours. A friend responded that I had written a three page
review which should have been over in two pages.
So, to the point. Directorwriter Willard Carroll's "Playing
by Heart" is funny (very funny), it's sad, it's a pleasure to
watch, and it's even a pleasure to think about, to remember, and
to anticipate seeing again. The film is a web of hearts,
sometimes linking, sometimes not, an anthology of six stories
that bump into each other in unexpected ways. It is also a
showcase for some of our best actors.
Sean Connery and Gena Rowlands play an affluent couple
dealing with forty years of marriage, her success as a television
chef, his brain tumor, and their memories of his infidelities
twenty-five years earlier. Their sparring includes the funniest
lines in this funny film, delivered with perfect timing. Connery
and Rowlands look fabulous, even "fah-bulous," and their por-
trayal of the film's oldest couple is hot, erotic--two definitely
sexy senior citizens. By the way, although in other plots un-
dressed couples end up in bed together, the sheets always stay in
place. No anatomy lessons here, but don't let that keep you away.
Dennis Quaid plays a man of a thousand faces, at least
stories, hanging out in bars, with a new pickup line for each new
woman. In the background or at the taxi stand, however, the same
woman shadows him from persona to persona. Which is the real
one? The envelope, please...
Ellen Burstyn and Jay Mohr, in the film's most poignant
moments, play mother and son dealing with his impending death and
her memories of a loveless marriage. They have never known each
other--through no fault of hers or his either. Their attempts to
build a new relationship are as uncertain as the first steps that
any of the lovers take in their relationships. By the way, it is
THAT Jay Mohr! And, if you have never seen the great work of the
great Ellen Burstyn, then, as they say, run--don't walk--to your
nearest video store and grab "The Spitfire Grill." With her
experience in theater more so than in film, she fills out every
square inch of a characterization, all twenty-seven acres of a
characterization in her case.
In each of the remaining plots, a young woman (Madeleine
Stowe, Angelina Jolie, and Gillian Anderson) deals with the prom-
ise, the possibility, or the threat of a relationship with a
young man (Anthony Edwards, Ryan Phillippe, Jon Stewart). Each
of these plots is set in an emotional mine field. He wants her,
but she doesn't want him, because... because she does want him
(AndersonStewart). She wants him, he wants her, but he can't
want her (JoliePhillippe). Or, they are married, just not to
each other (Stowe, Edwards).
At least since the great, sprawling French film "La Ronde"
by Max Ophuls (1950) through Robert Altman's "Nashville" (1975)
and "Short Cuts" (1993) and Wayne Wang's "Smoke" (1995), this
kind of film, weaving several plots into a sometimes rather bumpy
tapestry, has attracted and challenged filmmakers. This film,
much as I enjoyed it, much as I want to see it again, shows the
weaknesses as well as the strengths inherent in the form. There
is an opportunity for the director to flex his cinematic muscles
with characters, situations, and settings. In fact, this film's
richly detailed ambiance, sometimes at the expense of intimacy of
camera work, suggests Ophuls's work.
On the other hand, while we may want to know, need to know
more, perhaps we are cheated by not seeing the characters fully.
We see things from many different points of view, just not in
great detail. There is an unsettling sense that the whole enter-
prise is made up of short cuts, as insubstantial as smoke. The
greatest problem with this film is that while we don't see much
of the characters, we do hear them, and hear them, and hear them.
The film begins with a line that we hear later in context,
"Talking about love is like dancing about architecture." Then,
let's subtitle this film, "Pirouettin' about Frank Lloyd Wright."
At times, the only way that we know that the characters are in
love (or not) is because they tell us, adding new meaning to the
term talking pictures.
Yet, it is a sparklingly funny film that within its own
limits pleases. Different lines elicited laughs from different
corners of the theater; some of the more subtle witticisms
brought laughter that moved in a wave, as some of us slower wits
took longer to figure them out. While I'm subtitling this roman-
tic comedy, I might add "Four Relationships and a Funeral."
A request. One of many eruptions in the RowlandsConnery
plot involves his giving away the ending of a film that she is
watching, and another character refers to "The Crying Game," Neil
Jordan's 1992 film. When it was released, a major television
network's evening news (NBC, I think) ran a feature on how fans
of the film so scrupulously kept quiet about the film's crucial
plot twist. Willard Carroll must have chuckled as he penned
those lines. So, I shall keep quiet, and I ask you not to give
away the punch line, either.
All I shall say is that the film, like Shakespeare's come-
dies, ends with couples dancing together--while earlier two of
the characters danced alone. They connect, only connect, but
that is perhaps what we are here for, all we are here for. And,
with varying degrees of success, they connect with us as well.
You can check the film out at www.miramax.com, but why both-
er? A site that I find very useful in preparing my reviews is
www.imdb.com; that's Internet Movie Data Base, and it's one of
those sites that are addictive. Hmmm, what was the name of that
film, the one with Rip Torn and Michael J. Fox?
Till next time, let me hear from you. Keep your feet dry
(the better for dancing), your heart full of noble thoughts,
and... to she-who-knows-who-she-is, this is coming in just under
two pages!