349 Kicking and Screaming

[Ted Todorov]

I saw Kicking and Screaming at its NYFF premier and found it mediocre. I can't even say I hated it, because that would give it too much credit for being able to elicit a reaction. I pretty much forgot about it an hour after I saw it. (Nor was the Q&A memorable in any way -- in stark contrast to Q&As with young contemporary CC associated directors such as Wes Anderson, Spike Jonze, P.T. Anderson, D.G. Green etc.)

K&S is not even in the same galaxy as Metropolitan or Dazed & Confused.

[justeleblanc]

Two Things:

One, Kicking and Screaming could have Highball, another film Baumbach did under a pseudonym, around the same time as Kicking and Screaming.

Second, is the reference to Autumn Afternoon in the newsletter hope that that's the next Ozu release?

[justeleblanc]

and Three: All the backlash against Kicking and Screaming or Metropolitan....

I personally don't think these films can compare to most of the 1960s art cinema releases of Criterion, but they are important films and important directors for American cinema and they are a more respectable way for Criterion to make money than say release another Michael Bay or Kevin Smith film.

I also don't follow the DVD producers that much, but can someone tell me if the same producer is working on all the American independants? Is it a new guy?

[backstreetsbackalright]

I just IMDBed Kicking and Screaming. It doesn't look all that great. Just a bunch of college grads talking about what they want to do and not doing anything with their lives. François Truffaut once worked in a factory. He rightfully observed that "people who work in factories all day don't want to go see a movie about how bad it is to work in a factory."

I am a college student who is still trying to figure out what to do in life. This is the case with many of my friends. We often sit around, talk about what we want to do. We make witty remarks as well. This is the case with most college students. Tell me, why would I want to pay $30-$40 to get the same experience I could get for free? Or, could spend that $30-$40 on booze and get an even better experience than the movie could provide?

Is there some creative editing that rivals Eisenstein or Vertov? Some unique mise-en-Scene? Does the camera movements put von Sternberg and Mizoguchi to shame? Does it have stylized violence? Explict sex? What does this movie have that makes it worthy of my money, much less being called a "masterpiece" worthy of the top of the line DVD provider?

Sounds like you aren't encouraged by the description. I'd recommend not seeing it then.

If my memory is to be trusted, K&S was a relatively high-profile early entry in this eventually played-out subgenre. Even though I didn't see it at the time, I remember snickering at trailers for appearing to be K&S knock-offs.

[domino harvey]

good to see such a fine group of open-minded individuals are judging the movie before they've even seen it.

[toiletduck!]

good to see such a fine group of open-minded individuals are judging the movie before they've even seen it.

Fuckin' troll.

I haven't seen Kicking, but The Squid and The Whale is easily in my top three of Aught Five. Yet all this bitching is worrisome. Has Baumbach grown/evolved/changed that much over the last decade, or this going to be right up my alley as well?

-Toilet Dcuk

[domino harvey]

no really, how is me pointing out hypocrisy on this board trolling? I don't understand this message board I guess, is everyone allowed to express an opinion but me?

[bjeggert82]

I just IMDBed Kicking and Screaming. It doesn't look all that great. Just a bunch of college grads talking about what they want to do and not doing anything with their lives. François Truffaut once worked in a factory. He rightfully observed that "people who work in factories all day don't want to go see a movie about how bad it is to work in a factory."

I am a college student who is still trying to figure out what to do in life. This is the case with many of my friends. We often sit around, talk about what we want to do. We make witty remarks as well. This is the case with most college students. Tell me, why would I want to pay $30-$40 to get the same experience I could get for free? Or, could spend that $30-$40 on booze and get an even better experience than the movie could provide?

Is there some creative editing that rivals Eisenstein or Vertov? Some unique mise-en-Scene? Does the camera movements put von Sternberg and Mizoguchi to shame? Does it have stylized violence? Explict sex? What does this movie have that makes it worthy of my money, much less being called a "masterpiece" worthy of the top of the line DVD provider?

If you're rating every movie based on how it compares to the films of directors like Mizoguchi, you're probably not the film fan you think you are.

Point is, if you really cared, you'd rent it or buy it. If all you're looking at is whether or not a film has explicit sex, or if a film is a "masterpiece" (And what is a masterpiece anyway? It's just some critic's opinion of what a masterpiece is... I assume you're going by what critics and historians call a masterpiece, since you quoted it. You should really define the term for yourself.) then what's the use in ever watching films. They'll never all live up to your expectations. In viewing new films, you'll mostly be disappointed, and it won't be worth it. Open your mind a little and you might just enjoy "Kicking and Screaming". You won't know until you watch it.

I've never seen the film either, but I'll rent it, give it a shot... Sure, it may not have characteristics of some of the most important films ever made, but how many movies do?

[justeleblanc]

no really, how is me pointing out hypocrisy on this board trolling? I don't understand this message board I guess, is everyone allowed to express an opinion but me?

simmer...

I haven't seen K & S, but I saw Mr. Jealousy and for what it was it was good, but it was kinda weak. In comparison, Squid was easily in my top 3 as well and I think it's light years ahead of Jealousy, and my guess ahead of K & S as well. My friend is a huge Baumbach fan and when I told him the news he was like "Why are they releasing that?"

Who knows, maybe the features will be amazing!

[Andre Jurieu]

no really, how is me pointing out hypocrisy on this board trolling? I don't understand this message board I guess, is everyone allowed to express an opinion but me?

Well, I would advise you to read the subject header in Toilet Dcuk!'s post. He's a man who understands sarcasm, irony, facetiousness, and absurdity - like if I were to say that pzman84 is now "dead to me."

Sometimes I'm not sure I understand this message board either, but no one is really saying you can't express your opinion. For what it's worth I agree with you regarding the idiocy of judging a film before you've seen it (but, really, who hasn't done this at some point in our lives - don't I know what's coming when I walk into American Pie 7).

As an aside, I was almost certain that Matt would have picked "Domino Harvey" as his alias. Guess not. Or maybe...

[redbill]

but, really, who hasn't done this at some point in our lives - don't I know what's coming when I walk into American Pie 7

C'mon, you have no idea what bodily substance Stifler will injest...

[domino harvey]

don't be ridiculous, how could American Pie 7 ever live up to the high standard set by American Wedding?

[backstreetsbackalright]

I haven't seen Kicking, but The Squid and The Whale is easily in my top three of Aught Five. Yet all this bitching is worrisome. Has Baumbach grown/evolved/changed that much over the last decade, or this going to be right up my alley as well?

I haven't seen Highball, but it's my opinion that, yes, The Squid And The Whale really does show that much growth when considered alongside Kicking and Screaming. Which isn't to say that I think K&S is a piece of shit, but I do think it's pretty damn green.

[pzman84]

If you're rating every movie based on how it compares to the films of directors like Mizoguchi, you're probably not the film fan you think you are.

Point is, if you really cared, you'd rent it or buy it. If all you're looking at is whether or not a film has explicit sex, or if a film is a "masterpiece" (And what is a masterpiece anyway? It's just some critic's opinion of what a masterpiece is... I assume you're going by what critics and historians call a masterpiece, since you quoted it. You should really define the term for yourself.) then what's the use in ever watching films. They'll never all live up to your expectations. In viewing new films, you'll mostly be disappointed, and it won't be worth it. Open your mind a little and you might just enjoy "Kicking and Screaming". You won't know until you watch it.

I've never seen the film either, but I'll rent it, give it a shot... Sure, it may not have characteristics of some of the most important films ever made, but how many movies do?

I'm just saying "Is it worth $40?" (It probably will cost that much, considering commentary will probably be on it). How is that unreasonable to ask? If it isn't some well respected classic or much talked about contemporary film or even a film with "explicit sex" (for the record I also said stylized violence. Why you guys never bring up that quote is beyond me), why should we pay a lot of money to own it?

So far, no one has challegned my assertion of the claim its a "guy trying to figure out what do in life after college" film. No one has said it has any sort of unique camera movements or creative editing or any of that sort of "cinematic artistry." No one has even stated it has an extraordinary story. It doesn't even have the violence or sex factor you guys like to tease me about bringing up. Should I rent this movie, buy it discount or is it worth paying full price? For all you Kicking and Screaming fans out there, stop bitching about my comments and instead prove me wrong.

BTW, am I really dead to you Andre Jurieu

[rwaits]

I'll try to answer your question if you can answer me the same question regarding Dazed and Confused. Here I am defending Kicking and Screaming, but I felt that I was one of the few on this forum who hasn't been fawning over Dazed for the past 5 or so months.

[toiletduck!]

I'm sorry, I thought you were half joking the first time.

Unique camera movements? Explicit sex? Stylized violence (happy?)? Those are the types of things that make a movie worthwhile to you? Yeah, so the story isn't new. What story is? Love is old, therefore romances suck. Fear is old, therefore horror sucks. Laughter is old, therefore comedy sucks. But unique camera movements... hot damn!

I really don't mean to beat you over the head with it, but I'm still in a bit of shock that you were stone-faced serious.

Is it worth $40? Maybe, maybe not -- rent/borrow it when it comes out, decide for yourself. But if it's not, explicit sex and unique camera movements won't do the trick.

-Toilet Dcuk

[toiletduck!]

interesting stories

Nail on the head, sir. I really dig emotions, too. Sex and violence can be fun, but are low on the list. Unique camera movements and creative editing? Parlor tricks unless there's something else to complement them.

But it's a case by case basis. And while I take recommendations based on the people here, I in no way would pass my official judgment on a film until I've seen it, no matter what these bastards say.

-Toilet Dcuk

[Mental Mike]

I am a fan of Dazed and Kicking, but not of The Squid and The Whale...

...I just did not think that Squid was funny...I hated Jeff Daniel's character and that goes for pretty much everyone else in the movie...

...for a movie set in the realm of academia and writerly people, no one was really that intelligent...I do not believe in finding humour in how pathetic people are...the movie seemed mean spirited to me...

It was not really the fillet of current independent cinema

[Antoine Doinel]

I for one am really happy that Criterion is venturing forth with Dazed & Confused and Kicking & Screaming this summer. The level of film snobbery among some of the users here is fairly incredible.

Hey pzma84, I will knock your assertion that Kicking & Screaming is "just guy trying to figure out what do in life after college" movie by saying aren't all the Antoine Doinel films capturing that same sort of ennui? I love those films to death, but great movies don't necessarily have to make BIG STATEMENTS.

I think Criterion needs to cater ocassionally to younger and more mainstream audiences. I think we're forgetting that the kid who buys the deluxe Dazed & Confused or Kicking & Screaming might then venture into the rest of the Criterion Collection perhaps to find the films that inspired those filmmakers.

[carax09]

All you people that are blasting this film (and it's inclusion in CC) should really cool your jets and give it a chance. I found it to be FAR FAR more charming than Metropolitan, and even more affecting than the Squid and the Whale. You're all like a bunch of cowardly snipers firing away from your Ivory Towers. Come on down and get in a knife fight with this thing. You may be pleasantly surprised...

[stroszeck]

I've seen this film. It is not that great. I do not feel that it deserves the criterion treatment. As MANY of you are apparently great fans of Roger Ebert, read his review, which he gave the film 3 stars. Also, you might want to check the Rottentomatoes website, where the movie received 52% fresh (if ratings such as those interest you).
The original reason why I protested the introduction of Dazed and Confused was for this reason: Criterion will now probably venture out into the American Independent Film scene and introduce crap from the 90s that does not need to be released on DVD in general, let alone by Criterion. Just because Baumbach made a great, subtle and emotionally exhaustive film in Squid and Whale, doesn't make his early efforts worth watching. I have so far lost hope of this year being as great as last year's releases, but I'm glad I got Murmur of the Heart and Late Spring.

[Gregory]

I have a few comments about the charge that it's just a film about a "guy trying to figure out what do in life after college." First, there are a number of different characters central to the film. Some of them are still in school. There may be one main character but much of it is still written as an ensemble film.
Second, it is possible to make a compelling, lively film about students/graduates grappling with where they're headed. It doesn't really matter whether the film came early in the cycle (as this one did) or late; it matters what the filmmaker has to say, how it is said, and the quality of the collaboration with the actors. Let's not be too jaded to appreciate those qualities.
Third, I don't really understand pzman's assertion that because we have experienced something in our own lives we don't need to waste our time/money watching a film about it, but it did remind me of the final line from Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, so thanks.
Finally, of course it won't sound all that interesting if one tries to sum it up in a single sentence like that.

[FilmFanSea]

Haven't seen it, so I'll reserve judgement. However, one of the film's champions is none other than Jonathan Rosenbaum, who writes in his capsule review:

Superficially, this first feature by 25-year-old writer-director Noah Baumbach (1995)--a comedy about four male college graduates who find themselves unable to leave campus and start their lives--calls to mind Bodies, Rest & Motion and Reality Bites (both of which shared this movie's producer, Joel Castleberg) as well as the two brittle and literate features of Whit Stillman, Metropolitan and Barcelona (both sharing actor Chris Eigeman). But part of what makes this effort more soulful and sustaining than any of those reference points is the curiosity and alertness of Baumbach's direction of his actors--Eigeman, Josh Hamilton, Jason Wiles, Carlos Jacott, Eric Stoltz, Olivia d'Abo, Elliott Gould, Cara Buono, and Parker Posey. There's plenty of wit on the surface, but the pain of paralysis comes through loud and clear. Check this one out.

While acknowledging his professional relationship and friendship with Noah Baumbach's mother, Georgia Brown (former film critic for the Village Voice), J. Hoberman writes, "[t]he precocious Kicking and Screaming remains a notable evocation of postgraduate angst"

I have no qualms about seeing a young indie talent like Richard Linklater in the CC. As for the films of Whit Stillman and Noah Baumbach, I'll at least give them a rental, and hope they sell like hotcakes (in order to finance the films I really wanna see in the collection).

[John Cope]

It's impossible for me to even attempt to be objective about this one. It was a very significant picture for my friends and I, especially as it was released while we were all still in college. So there was that quality of relating to it (and, for what it's worth, I found it all too relatable), but it's also just damn funny on its own terms. There's more quotable lines and moments in this than virtually anything I've ever seen. Now maybe this is once again related to its importance to me but I'd like to think I can make a fair assessment of K&S's merits. I saw it in the theater upon its initial release and it's the only time I can recall in which I actually feared that I might be thrown out of the theater, such was the level of laughter induced rowdiness it prompted in my viewing party.

Beyond the humor though, it is a very moving, subtle and honest look at the tentativeness of the immediate post college experience and the kinds of relationships you make in youth which you hope will last while all the time realizing cannot. It's part of what makes those relationships so special--they represent a rare moment that allows for nurturing the precious fragility of the experience and simultaneously languishing in Instant Nostalgia. Chris Eigeman's character even says as much:
"I'm nostalgic for conversations I had yesterday. I've begun reminiscing events before they even occur. I'm reminiscing this right now. I can't go to the bar because I've already looked back on it in my memory and I didn't have a good time."

The performances are beautifully tuned throughout to this melancholy situation, never over selling it or failing to tap into the noxious potentials of each character. These are very flawed, often weak and pathetic people, whom Baumbach never makes fun of but observes with discreet affection. The central love story between Josh Hamilton and Olivia d'Abo is carefully handled, not drowning in Reality Bites style uber-cool. The flashback structure is a rudimentary one but it builds this relationship within a series of sensitive asides that complement the main action. It's not super sophisticated but it does not need to be, and, in fact, should not be. As I said, nothing is ever over stressed and this is part of what makes the ending so profoundly touching (I am often moved to tears by it). Baumbach does not sentimentalize what happens but we understand in those final moments the monumentality of Grover's quiet gesture, just how much has been foregone and just how significant a moment, a brief window of opportunity we allow ourselves, can be. I am utterly amazed that someone could watch those scenes and find them emotionally insufficient.

That goes for the comedy too, of course. Few scenes are as hysterically dead on as Video Planet manager Dean Cameron waxing philosophical about how he plans to make a movie and how cool it will be to watch it on the TV monitors in the store while he continues to work there. Or the half hearted attempt at a book club Eric Stoltz and Carlos Jacott try to establish. Or Eigeman suddenly realizing his youthful date has just turned seventeen years old and acknowledging this with a curt, "Well now you can read Seventeen Magazine and get the references". Or the warning notice placed on a pile of glass in lieu of cleaning it up. The examples are endless.

I am excited as hell to see this movie released by Criterion. It was one of those things I always hoped for in the back of my mind but never expected to have happen. It is absolutely deserving and, though it may be "green", it is more accurate and heartfelt than most movies with more obvious flash and polished skill. Now just to get Stillman's Last Days of Disco out there again so I don't have to pay two hundred bucks for a copy off of Amazon.

[tavernier]

I must've missed something. I still remember this as the single worst movie I 've sat through at the 18 NY Film Festivals I've attended. I thought at the time that it was mere nepotism that got it a coveted fest slot, and nothing Baumbach has done since has erased that belief.