Posts Tagged Hal Hartley

Henry Fool

First thing to say: this is one load of primary bollocks. Which is nothing unsual for a Hal Hartley film.

Simon Grim is a stick-thin bespectacled garbage collector. Who also happens to be a Nobel Prize winning poet in the making. Which is where Henry Fool comes in. To make him.

Henry Fool is not a Nobel Prize winning writer. Although he want to be. Or thinks he already is.

Simon Grim has a slutty sister called Faye. She wants to be fucked. Often. She’s got her slutty eye on Henry. But the Fool fucks catatonic mom on the sofa instead.

Henry Fool wears a 3-piece charcoal suit, has foppish locks, talks in sonorous tones like a academic of Literary Theory: “The relativity of cadence in relationship to the readability of form” he opines. But he looks like a thuggish street-dealer. And goes around impregnating various fawning females. “Beast! Fiend! Rapist!” He fucks Faye eventually. Gives her is progeny.

Henry has jumped parole. “What did you do?” asks Simon. “I got caught” says Henry. Got caught screwing a 13 year old girl. Got 7 years. So, not a literary genius – a paedophile.

Mom is playing piano. “That was nice”. “Yes, it was nice – but it was unmemorable” “Does that matter?” “Yes it does”. Mom puts down piano lid. She reads Simons pornographic poem. Slits her wrists. That was memorable enough.

Simon gets his poem published. Becomes a literary sensation. Becomes feted, awarded, rewarded. Becomes the famously respected genius Henry Fool will never be. Henry Fool is just a schmuck. Just a notoriety. Just a kiddie-fucker. A good for nothing drunk. A deluded pretentious twat.

On the scale of pretentious twatism this film wins hands down.

All the characters seem like they’re seriously disassociated from the normal range of human feeling. Like they might be suffering from mild to severe variations of Aspergers syndrome.

I used to be more tolerant, even indulgent, of this po-mo kind of stuff 20 years ago.

But not anymore.

Dir: Hal Hartley, USA

5/10

Leave a Comment

Simple Men (1992)

The Deadpan Po-Mo School of film-making. That’s where Hal Hartley belongs, along with directors like Jim Jarmusch, Aki Kaurismaki

Oddly punctuated dialogue, peculiar pauses; as if characters are talking with comic book style speech bubbles hanging ironically over their heads.

It’s all deliberately contrived to be cod-philosophical, cod-comical.

Mocking serious pretension with knowingly mockingly serious pretension.

There’s no such thing as adventure or romance. There’s only trouble and desire. And the funny thing is when you desire something you immediately get in trouble. And when you’re in trouble you don’t desire anything at all

Says Robert Burke. Is that meaningful? Or is it simply something clever to say? Or is it something so clever it’s winking at itself with inverted commas at how “meaningful” it’s supposed to be being?.

Who knows. The characters seem to be saying things that might be meant to be meaning something else. Fraught with implications. Or maybe just fraught for the sake of being fraught (cus its a film, and films are meant to be “at you”)

It’s contrived melodrama shorn of melodramatic cliches or clinches, but also drained dry of plausible emotional engagement by virtue of this deliberated deadpan detachment.

There’s a funny oddball dance about an hour in (in the pic above); i can imagine film graduate oddball-wannabes dancing it in a line in the living room when they’re getting warmly pissed together on wet communal Saturday afternoons.

Its cool man. We’re taking the piss out of bad dancing. But there’s no need for an exclamation mark. We know we’re cool. We’re deconstructing our idiosyncrasies.

You have to be in the mood – or a mood – for this kind of film. A mood of sincere bullshitlessness.

Dir: Hal Hartley, USA

7/10

Leave a Comment