criterionforum.org

The Ruby Sparks trailer is weird - it smacks of the worst kind of young adult male type of wish fulfillment screenplay, except it was written by a woman and is co-directed by a woman. I'm curious to see the film proper to see how this all plays out.

mfunk9786 wrote:The Ruby Sparks trailer is weird - it smacks of the worst kind of young adult male type of wish fulfillment screenplay, except it was written by a woman and is co-directed by a woman. I'm curious to see the film proper to see how this all plays out.

Yeah, I can't tell if it's having fun with the whole Manic Pixie Dream Girl thing or shamelessly indulging in it.

Brian C wrote:I was thinking about Dano the other day, actually, after seeing the Ruby Sparks trailer. And it occurred to me that I think he's a very annoying actor, full of forced tics and seemingly random exagerrated emotional outbursts. But I also thought that, I'll be damned if he's not convincing and even affecting in every role I've seen him in. It's a strange dynamic he has going on, kind of Pacino-esque in a way.

I think I kind of understand and agreed with what you're saying (though I might have misinterpreted a little). While I'm watching him, Dano strikes me as the type of actor I usually can't stand in that he really draws a great deal attention to the fact that he's putting on a distinctive/unique performance, featuring plenty of unusual expressions, strange mannerisms, and odd cadence to his line-deliveries ... and yet I'm never really all that irritated by these choices while watching him on-screen and he's fairly believable in his roles, despite his softened affectations and quirks. Maybe it's not acting with a capital "A", but I guess it's kind of like acting with an italicized "a"?

Yeah, I can't tell if it's having fun with the whole Manic Pixie Dream Girl thing or shamelessly indulging in it.

Based on that trailer, I'm going with "indulging it."

The entire film is a meta-textual critique of the idea of the manic pixie dream girl. But that doesn't change the fact that it's insufferable.

I caught a sneak preview of Ruby Sparks tonight at Lincoln Center with Valerie Faris, Jonathan Dayton, Paul Dano, and Zoe Kazan in attendance (Scott Foundas hosted the Q&A). Having not been a fan of the directors' Little Miss Sunshine, I was surprised by how much this film won me over. The film never falls victim to being an insipid manic-pixie dream girl screwball comedy as the trailer suggests. The second half becomes a darker relationship drama with Dano becoming the domineering boyfriend wanting his imaginary girlfriend to never be her own person, only the character who lives for him. What first comes to mind is The Purple Rose of Cairo and how that transitions from silly to serious once the main characters face the realities of living with a fantasy. It's a surprisingly strong script from first-timer Kazan and she has written a wonderful performance for Dano. I hope to hear more reactions once this opens in two weeks.

great to hear, love the trailer and like you hated Little Miss Sunshine and I've hated Zoe Kazan in everything she's done too but she looks great in this and I'm intrigued by its scenario.

Off-topic Scott Foundas is the best, he always gave my bands great writeups in LA Weekly, glad to hear he's doing well in NYC

On the subject of flipping the scenario on the Manic Pixie Dream Girl, Louie just did it in 22 minutes with the latest episode and from what I can tell he hits all the themes of Ruby Sparks. It's one of the most beautifully directed things I've seen all year and it's so good to see Parker Posey batting a .1000

Do you mean batting 1.000? Batting .1000 would be one hit in ten ups.

Of course. Typing on my phone. Apologies. I'll let it stand.
She's excellent.

So Ruby Sparks is neither the disaster nor the fresh take it could be. Cribbing liberally from works that did this sort of thing better-- the brilliant It Had to Be You, episodes of the Star and the Story, the Twilight Zone and Tales From the Crypt as well-- Zoe Kazan's script approaches the familiar tale without adding enough to justify this as much more than a glorified star vehicle for the lumpiest-looking pair of unlikely leading actors this side of Mumblecore. Everpresent NYC staple Chris Messina gives a decent supporting performance as Paul Dano's emotive brother, but Dano and Kazan are the listless central couple living out the mediocre Freshman Comp outline that somehow made it on-screen. Kazan got a lot of credit for approaching the story from a "woman's perspective," whatever the hell that means, but she still focuses all action on the male creator. Showing creation behavior to be dickish takes about five minutes tops. Same for the reduction of easy bedding to tiresome masturbation. Why does she still devote most of the time to the part any audience could write themselves and not do the novel thing and focus on her own cypher's response to discovering her artificiality instead of relying on the easy POV of Dano's writer? Because Kazan's feeding into the same thing she's decrying, indignant interviews to the contrary notwithstanding.

Absolutely loved it. It's a shame that this movie was shunned and forgotten. But granted Fox under-promoted it.

I saw the trailer approximately 500 times.

manicsounds wrote:But granted Fox under-promoted it.

I agree, seems like Fox brushed it aside once it was clear Beasts of the Southern Wild was taking off. Don't recall seeing this previewed much in theatres last year, unlike the Paul Dano-plays-a-writer film Being Flynn which appeared on every trailer reel during that winter.

I looked at Box Office Mojo and the most it played was about 200 theaters. That's some underpromoting.
It was released in Japan in December, but I never saw a single commercial for it. It came and completely disappeared.