This is the
second movie that I've seen by the multi-talented Quentin Dupieux and his
previous one, “Rubber”, I proudly own on DVD so I might be a little biased here
because I already like him going into this.
At the same time though, “Rubber” remains one of my all-time favorite
movies and easily one of the best in the 21st century, so I might also be a
little tougher on this film for that.
It took me a
little while to realize what was going on, but when you stop thinking about
what is happening in this movie and why then it all begins to make sense. We open on a scene of a van engulfed in
flames as a fireman squats in the middle of the road. I initially thought this would be explained
as the movie went on-- that we would come back to this point by the end or so--
but once I realized we weren't going to I quickly sat back, relaxed and just
enjoyed the movie.
The story
revolves around the character Dolph Springer and his quest to find his missing
dog, Paul. The characters he meets
along the way (Most of which he already knew) are just sort of... off. The clock goes from minute marker :59 to :60
right off. People seem to say what they
feel/think instead of cleverly covering up with little lies. And, oh yeah, Dolph Springer continues to go
to his job which he was fired from three months prior and it constantly rains
inside the building for whatever reason.
As with his
prior film though, if nothing else from Quentin Dupieux I have learned that
rather than asking why it is best just to take things as having no reason. This principle of asking why could just as
easily be applied to any movie, as sometimes we just don't know why we do what
we do, and sometimes movies don't have to make sense to be good.
What exists
within these frames of film are just delightful characters with all of their
randomness (Steve Little has a particularly superb performance) a plot wrapped
in mystery, drama, humor and just all around “What did I just watch?” moments
and a plot that makes sense from beginning to end. Though it may not seem it, there is a
specific path that “Wrong” follows, and though it might be the wrong path (if
you'll pardon the pun), it is still nonetheless a path. It's not like things are just happening
randomly and with no purpose, so as just to seem like a series of events strung
together/
Overall, I
really enjoyed “Wrong”, I don't know
how I would compare it with “Rubber” exactly because even though they are both
from the brain of Quentin Dupieux, they also have their differences. It is in this vein that I like to think of
this as being not the film that it is, but rather more closely related to a
sophomore album by a band you enjoy.
It's not necessarily better or worse, and in some ways it's not even the
same, it's just... more.
No comments:
Post a Comment