I Love You Phillip Morris (2009, Europa Corp.)
It is fairly safe to say that Carrey has never been a star who has been involved in what Richard Dyer would consider the personification of roles. He is an actor who has constantly tried to defy expectations, whether confounding fans of his earlier madcap roles by playing tragic comic figure Andy Kaufman, or delving into bizarre mathematical premonitions in The Number 23 (although it is suspected that this role was maybe not his own choice.) It has become more and more convoluted to know what to expect of a role that Carrey takes. Here, his Steven Russell has once again contrasted opinions - some have likened this to another Eternal Sunshine, or Man on the Moon. Others, such as yours truly, believe that the blackness of the comedy in the film show the twisted, subversive Carrey of his earlier work.
McGregor is much easier to understand.
Aside from his turn as the legendary Obi Wan Kenobi, McGregor has always been, in one way or another, a PRETTY actor. Even when playing the drugged up Renton in Trainspotting, McGregor was at the forefront of the I-D 'Heroin Chic'. So it makes much more sense for him to step into the role of a damsel-in-distress, an object of to-be-looked-at-ness.
Wait. A male actor fulfilling Mulvey's femenist theory? Or is this more symptomatic of New Queer Theory?
Perhaps his role is not so simple.
What stands out (apart from one particular sequence to be discussed later) is a dreamy gaze shot of a blonde, Life Less Ordinary-esque McGregor looking down upon the camera with the sun framing a sort of halo around him. It's clear that he is represented in a manner once afforded to only female characters in Classic Hollywood films, and as one (female) colleague of mine mentioned, he has to reduce his character to that of the simplistic 'damsel in distress'. It's an interesting concept, in that it works, and an audience, gay or straight, can see something romantic, and desirable in Morris' representation.
So what is most striking about I Love You... is that it's not a comedy that makes fun of the concept of 'gay.' Carrey's role is amusing because it is not his 'gay-ness' that is being laughed at, but his flamboyancy, his selfish, materialistic nature. Without wanting to run the risk that Tom Ford met with his response to A Single Man as 'not a gay film', this is certainly a comedy that can appeal to gay or straight alike, as the central concept is something that any person can relate to - unrequited love.
So what of that humour then? Once again, it may be wise to warn of spoilers, in as much as an (albeit twisted) biopic can contain spoilers.
The big taboo of the film is its AIDS moment. Is it still unacceptable to laugh at AIDS? It certainly seemed to be so in the cinema, and some critics have called the moment 'questionable.'
Some context.
Played entirely seriously is a sequence where the audience is firstly introduced to a horrendously gaunt Russell (Carrey - via The Machinist), lying down for effect to show his topless torso. It's a shocking moment to be sure. The audience is then subjected to a protracted sequence involving a touching phone call between Russell and Morris, non diegetic piano playing as Morris tells Russell he still loves him, a single tear rolling down Carrey's cheek.
The death is offscreen, Morris' reaction to it telling the audience all they need.
And it's a lie.
In voiceover, Russell then explains to the audience how, exactly, to fake one's death via AIDS. And it's shockingly funny. Knuckles were bit in an attempt to not give in, but when Carrey deliberately misses a wheelchair in order to slowly fall to the ground, the taboo was breached, and high pitched giggles emitted.
There are two real concerns with this sequence. In 2010, Springtime For Hitler has been around for forty odd years. Sure, Team America used 'Everyone Has AIDS' as a song, but this was more a dig at Rent, and its 'social relevance.' AIDS has not been used, to this reviewer's knowledge as a source of comedy, and it felt like a real barrier was crossed. The other problem is that the real Russell ACTUALLY DID THIS. How else to portray this in filmic terms? How to show the depths to which a man without any morals will actually descend? The only answer is to laugh.
Looking back upon this writing, it seems as though I'm actually heralding I Love You Phillip Morris as some sort of turning point that will be studied in later years. Perhaps it will be mentioned, as part of the new gay cinema that is FINALLY being accepted by mainstream audiences, but it will never be as important as the work of others such as John Waters or Wong Kar Wai.
It is really funny, though.
Interesting stuff, definitely want to see this.
ReplyDeleteReally like the idea of typical "Beautiful Lady" tropes being used on a gay character.
hey Tempy - Yes, it's really quite interesting. No doubt some theorists such as Mulvey would argue that the subjective gaze can NEVER be the same with a man, but I definitely felt that McGregor was the 'eye candy' in the film. As I said, that lingering shot on him worked really well in representing him as honest and ideal, like a real lady-to-be-saved.
ReplyDeleteIt's intriguing because it shows that the 'eye candy' has become mundane - and, perhaps, is becoming unjustifiable - for a female lead but it is pretty (excuse the pun) challenging for a male actor to perfect. This new role makes McG instantly less forgettable than your usual female co-star which is interesting because he therefore elevates this role beyond its traditional constraints; he is not as marginalised. But. He is a gay man being objectified which ticks the box too. Is this new or is it that we find it to be new because we are used to McG playing a sensitive male and here he is being so inherently female...?
ReplyDelete