A film epiphany and Waitress review
October 26th 2007 07:58
While watching the millions of trailers and adverts before Death at a Funeral started, I had an epiphany. I didn’t work out how to save the planet or anything critical like that, but nonetheless it stood out to me. The revelation was that surroundings can affect a viewing experience. That sounds rather like a government warning that could be placed on a DVD doesn’t it? Anyway, I’ll explain what I mean.
On our flight from London (which was delayed by 10 hrs and has nothing to do with the story other than the inconvenience), I discovered a film called Waitress on the in-flight entertainment that I hadn’t heard of and liked the look of. I had just watched This is London, which was heavy-going in some parts, so I decided I needed something a bit lighter, maybe even fluffy.
I did have some doubts that it could be a film about a bunch of moaning women in a dull country town with an overemphasis on pies, which I really didn’t like the look of most of the time. The camera kept zooming in on them and I felt rather queasy. I decided to give it ten minutes (aren’t I tolerant?) before giving it the flick. After all, there were at least twelve other channels I had the choice of watching. Well, I discovered that I was getting into it, mainly because Jenna is an engaging lead character with whom it was difficult not to empathise with, so I continued to watch.
Jenna (Kerri Russel) is a small-town waitress at a diner, where she is famous for her unusual, quirky pie creations. Jenna is married to a controlling, manipulative man, Earl (Jeremy Sisto), whom she wants to leave, but then discovers she's pregnant. This thwarts her plan to leave and she resents her baby. She begins an affair with her handsome, married gynaecologist (Nathan Fillion) that gives her confidence and an attempt at happiness while saving money to leave her husband.
The general tone of Waitress is mostly a movement between subtle comedy and light drama, the exception only being when Earl is around. He’s a cruel, controlling character, there's nothing redeeming or human about him. The scenes where he emotionally and physically abuses Jenna are not graphic but they are distressing nonetheless. I couldn’t help but be drawn into this world, urging for Jenna to find a way to get of her unhappy life.
Well, about half an hour before the end of the film, the pilot declared that it was time to start descending. Hmm, such inconvenient timing. I also had another revelation, that passengers should still be able to watch telly until the plane grounds, because if I’m going to die on a plane, I might as well do it watching a good film. To make it even more annoying, I had forgotten the name of the film and it wasn’t in the in-flight crappy magazine. So all I could think of doing was googling a pie-eating film and hoping it might come up with something.
Anyhoo, it turned out that on our next flight, I was able to finish seeing it, plus retain its title all before the pilot decided to descend. Unfortunately, I was disappointed with the ending; it was clichéd with far too much of a simplistic ending flavour. With unyielding generosity I decided that as it was a plane film, it wasn’t too bad a film and it had definitely kept me entertained when I felt like I was the only person awake on the plane (and of course the pilot).
Back to the cinema, when the trailer came on, I was disappointed in the film's portrayal. Unfortunately it was quite abysmal. If I had seen that trailer before seeing the film, I wouldn’t have seen the film. It didn’t catch the spirit of Jenna’s character, its quirkiness, it looked weak and flimsy and the pie element just made it look completely naff. It looked like another a predictably syrupy feel-good film with little essence, complete with that annoying voice-over and soppy music. I was embarrassed to tell my friend I had seen it. Here it is, courtesy of Metacafe:
Waitress Trailer - The most popular videos are here
So, I learnt a couple of things. The circumstances of where we see a film can make a difference. I was reasonably satisfied with the film on the plane, yet in real life I doubt if I would have bothered. As I said in my Death at a Funeral blurb, to me, seeing a film in a cinema gives me a difference experience to seeing a film alone. In the cinema, one of the things I love is the response/atmosphere of the audience. When I’ve seen films in more unusual places such as the Open Air Cinema or the Moonlight Cinema, much of my enjoyment of the event is heightened through the surroundings and the blend of the film and surroundings remain strong in my mind. I saw Baraka at the Moonlight Cinema and that was an unforgettable experience. The film and surroundings moulded perfectly. Thus, I will return to my initial revelation that our surroundings can effect how we feel about a film.
| 103 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by katyzzz
Photography Tips
Health Focus
MS Paint Art
katyzzz...I guess I had an epiphany.
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
I'm glad you had an epiphany too, seems like it's contagious.
Yes, some parts of the film were good fun. Jenna is an alluring character.
Thanks for popping in, good to see you as always,
Tracy
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
QUOTE ME NO QUOTES!
In my own weird way, I was into creating a heightened enviroment for the audience. For an opera I wrote the libretto for, directed and designed....don't ask...a nightmare well past thank heavens...I used a huge 3D projection screen suspended over the stage, the audience wore polarised lenses, and hands stretched 30 feet and more out of the screen at times, and lots of other cool stuff.
I also had a concept for a stage show, many years ago, where the proscenium arch was in fact false and collapsible on wires, (I thought of this in 1980...) falling down at the climax of the show, stopping feet above their heads.
Alas my tutors thought my idea a little too extreme and more likely bound for law suits from heart attack victims than plaudits from the press.
Sensaround was popular for some years, a massive speaker system with computer designed "movement" of sound effects around the auditorium and 'smellaround', many many years ago, long before I was born, in the USA. Didn't catch on, one theatre did it, piping odours, suggested in the film, towards the audience's faces from a tube on the back of the seat.
Dear...I am waffling today...I admit it...sorry..
cheers
fog
Comment by Krystal
feelings
Crystal
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
Hello Fog
Your aims for creating varying environments fascinated me, this is incredible:
How did the audience react? Wow..
How long ago was it that you came up with the ideas? It surprises me that your tutors thought they were as too extreme...
Your ideas remind me of Bertolt Brecht's perception of audiences and their role. He believed that the audience was not separate from the stage, that both the actors and the audience knew this and acted accordingly. The aim being there was no division between theatre and reality, they were intertwined. This concept has always intrigued me.
Thanks for your comments, there was no waffle in there at all...you got my brain cogs moving...
Tracy
Comment by Michaelie
Flick Wit
That girl is very natural-looking. Nice.
Michaelie
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
Yes, Kerri Russell is very pretty. I actually looked her up as all the way through the film, she felt familiar. She was in that comedy Felicity which I vaguely remember.
I think being a waitress would be hard work, but I guess you would get to meet all sorts of people. She definitely made the most of her pie talents in her job.
Tracy
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
How are you? I definitely agree:
I think this is a DVD film, it has some quirky, funny bits but it’s not a full-price cinema trip.
Byeee
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
QUOTE ME NO QUOTES!
My opera was staged in Melbourne, in 1998. I also used UV paint on the costumes and in the makeup, as I used two powerful ultraviolet flood lights, to keep the stage lighting down and reduce halation on the screen (washing the screen image out by reflected light).
The set was mostly black, but a few objects were UV paint treated. This was to add to the isolation effect, when I only used UV lighting, and also as another aid for the screen.
The effect on the audience was profound at times. I used the screen as part of the set, to place the time of day and the set, like the breakfast table. I also used it to connote the inner desires and fears of the main protagonists.
Each protagonist, the husband and wife, had an anima, (the inner voice, or preconscious thought), and a chorus each, representing the universal subconscious thinking.
It was about denying the healing quality of forgiveness, within the structure of a marital breakdown.
It was reviewed, by a so-called opera journalist, he was actually filling in for the opera expert who was away on holidays, and he just didn't get it at all. The first half of his review was raving on about 3D being old hat, and the seemingly irrelevant images on the screen.
It never occurred to him that this was the first time in opera theatre history that 3D was used in performance, (and only one other 3D attempt, and badly done, I saw it, by a drama-esque show just before mine went on; a bit suss, as he was a member of my 3D expert's club...and we had worked on the concept for a year previously...).
Anyway, one of the cast's kids saw it, and even though they were only 8 and 10, both got what the opera was on about! And, I was bouyed by the many people saying it was better than the Hand Made Orchestra's show, which was getting main press coverage and plaudits!
Not one Festival head would come and see it, and the two I asked I knew personally, which was even more insulting, and after being the most financially successful show the Melbourne company had allowed staged in one of their theatres, it disappeared into oblivion after its final performance. I had people sitting in the aisles!
Anyway, that was nine years ago now...it nearly killed me putting it on too, which is why I have not rushed back to staging one of my works I guess. I didn't have enough good technical support in production, so I had to rule over everything...too much...too much...
cheers
fog
Comment by Sonya 1
Writing Words
I remember seeing the trailer.Iit didn't make me want to watch the film, despite the fact that I love Nathan Fillion. After reading your review, I might actually watch it - it doesn't sound half bad.
Sonya
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
Nice to see you. The acting in this film was good, in particular Kerri Russell and Nathan Fillion. Nathan was excellent and not to mention pretty good-looking. Yeppie, it's an enjoyable lazy afternoon film.
Byeee
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
Thanks for coming back and telling me all it. The techniques you used were incredible and innovative. This bit really stood out to me:
It was about denying the healing quality of forgiveness, within the structure of a marital breakdown.
Surely an important life thought for us all? Whether a marriage, friendship, whatever.
When I was reading, I kept wondering what it would be like if it was staged in this era where there are more interactive and experimental productions happening (I was thinking of Cirque du Soleil).
I can understand why you would hesitate to do it again, that was a massive task. But definitely one to be proud of, even if some people didn’t get the underlying themes.
This is such a pity:
Despite some disappointing responses, congratulations on your achievement, Fog.
Tracy
Comment by Miswanderlust
Killer Beats
Ramble On
Hipnotherapy
I never thought about how much cinematic environment affects our enjoyment of the movie. I actually enjoyed this movie. Thank you for the well written review!
Mis
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
Thanks for your comments, it's good to see you. It's also interesting to hear what you thought of the film. Jenna is very charismatic isn't she?
Have a great weekend,
Tracy