Nick: Tusk is the latest film by Kevin Smith, who seems to be enjoying a recent affair with the horror genre (Red State), about a self-loving podcaster (Justin Long) kidnapped by one of the odd characters he likes to interview for his show. This odd character is Howard Howe (Michael Parks) who has many interesting stories and quite the affinity for walruses.
J: I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. I am a huge Kevin Smith fan even though he makes some missteps but Tusk is his best film in quite a while. It’s not scary, but it’s billed as a horror movie though it’s more disturbing than anything. Think of Human Centipede with walruses… walrusi(?) It’s not entirely a horror movie, but it’s not entirely a comedy. It’s that weird in between gray area. It starts off as a comedy, then goes for very disturbing and right when you think it’s about to take a very dark path BOOM.. Johnny Depp with a french canadian accent, then it gets funny.. then dark again, then more odd than anything.
NK: Although the movie was very enjoyable, one of its many poor aspects was the shifting of tone. As you said it keeps going back between odd, funny and horror. The scenes with Haley Joel Osment, Genesis Rodriguez and Guy Lapointe (Johnny Depp) seem out of place and by the end of the movie the characters don’t really affect anything. These scenes ruin the tempo set by the scenes prior and make the scenes after create the tempo all over again. That being said I did like the character Lapointe but I believe that character was wasted with what he was given to do.
J: We need an entire La Pointe movie. He could be the Inspector Clouseau of the Great White North. The scenes with Haley Joel Osment (I see doughnuts), the lovely Genesis and La Pointe seemed out of place, but yet it’s their quest to find Wally Walrus. It’s an odd catalyst. I mean I could watch Michael Parks wax philosophic all day, and the scene with him and Justin Long are wonderful, but without them (Genesis and Osment) looking for Long, would we even care what happened to him?
NK: Depp is actually coming out with a movie (Mortdecai) where he plays a character that seems inspired by Clouseau. It looks horrible. In Tusk, Long’s character never reached a depth to made me have any sympathy for him. While my problems with the secondary characters is not that there are secondary characters but what their goal ultimately ended at. There are quite a few scenes of Genesis, Osment and Lapointe and in every single one Lapointe tells them of what he knows about this serial killer. By the end of the film, they don’t affect anyone outside of the three of them which as a whole keeps them out of the overall story. They don’t stop the bad guy nor do they affect any detail in the plot. The characters do all this work on screen but serve to burst in, look at Long, then screech. Which right after that, there is one more scene which serves the same purpose. Once again, its not the characters, it’s their overall progression throughout the story which ends up being fruitless that I have a hard time dealing with.
J: They might have seemed fruitless (SPOILERS) because they lose. The good guys failed. The ultimate goal of Michael Parks was to make a human go full walrus, that sounds silly even when typing it. And he achieved it. Long’s character could never go back from full walrus.
NK: It’s not that. If they put Long out of his misery then they affect the story. They would be the ones who end his troubled existence. I would want to be killed if I was in his position. Yet the characters run in there with guns (after the killer is presumably dead), look at Long and they cry and shriek. Then Lapointe runs in and pulls his gun out as if to shoot Long then the screen goes black. At that moment I was still okay. Then the scene that bothers me is the very last where Genesis and Osment pay a visit to Long at his “new home”. Some friends! So what happened between the shot of Lapointe pulling his gun and the decision to keep a human alive that has been transformed into a walrus and then to keep him in a seemingly deserted zoo? It all seems rather pointless.
J: Hahah. You’re right. They were shitty friends, but I think thats also the point. They were just as selfish on the inside as Long’s character was (in the beginning) on the outside. They couldn't put him out of his misery and then sent him to the crappiest place in Canada. That makes Long’s fate even worse. That is what would make him suffer. His friends showing up and giving the walrus a brief remembrance of a former life, of what is is to be human, then to walk away while leaving him stuck in his sub par Seaworld. It’s not a happy ending.
NK: My favorite part of the movie which was also the thing that kept me intrigued was Michael Parks as Howard Howe. Every scene and every line that he delivered made me both comfortable and frightened. He had the same affect on me when he played the pimp in Kill Bill Vol. 2. He is an actor that should be in more films. Speaking of actors, it was nice to see Haley Joel Osment back although I believe he was miscast in the film. His character doesn’t do enough to where I can see past the fact that its just a more robust HJO. If his character was more fleshed out then it would not have been an issue.
J: More fleshed out. A robust HJO. That gave me the giggles. I see fat people. HJO needed more things to do than bray at Long’s jokes and sex-up his girl. And I think we can both agree that Michael Parks is a Damn National Treasure.
One thing that was ridiculous but later grew on me was the walrus suit. It looked goofy and seemed weird to me, but then I thought about it later on and it became ‘endearing’. It was like and old Godzilla movie, where this guy is in a big rubber suit and makes you believe he is a giant monster destroying Tokyo. This movie is about a guy in a rubber suit making you believe he is a walrus monster who is having his soul and humanity destroyed.
NK: I loved the suit right when it appeared. Probably because it never occurred to me that they meant for it to look realistic. While the body and tail were silly the face was frightening. The fact that his tusks are made from his femur bones was something I couldn’t get out of my head. Though I was still in hysterics laughing so hard every time the walrus appeared.
One thing about the movie which I was pleasantly surprised was that the film never went for what Hostel and Human Centipede did which was to disturb someone with gore alone. While I like a good and silly gory film, like Dead Alive, its nice to see a film that doesn’t go that far. There are no scenes of Long’s body being cut up, vast amounts of blood being spilled, nor sounds that make one cringe. It was a refreshing change of pace.
J: I love gore. Especially when it’s done right and if there’s a purpose. Though it WAS good to see it not take the same route as Hostel/HC. Sometimes gore for gore’s sake is a waste. That was all Kevin Smith. he is a storyteller from the start. He spins yarns like there is no tomorrow. He didn't rely on the blood and violence to disturb you. He let the story, and Michael parks do that. Yes this movie could have EASILY became Human Walruspede, but it didn’t and became a story on what it meant to be a walrus.
NK: Kevin Smith can be a fantastic writer and we have been treated to some really good films that he has written but something Smith has not gotten any better at since Clerks is directing. Framing, wardrobe, editing, lighting and knowing when to let a scene go is not his strength. His scenes lack depth which is something most directors know how to create. Michael Bay, for all his shittiness, is fantastic at creating depth within the frame. Most shots within the film are straight on with a dead background and lighting that is just there so you can at least see what is happening. There was a fantastic shot which was when Long finds out that Mr. Howe can walk. Everything about that shot was great but to pinpoint one shot as a good shot is not necessarily a good thing. Now a scene that should have been either scrapped or shortened is when Guy Lapointe happens on the serial killer in a flashback. This scene was very long and long-winded. It was two characters talking without saying anything pertinent. This is something that is normally Kevin Smith’s bread and butter but in that one scene it made me ponder on whether or not this film would have been more fulfilling with a different director at the helm.
J: Such blasphemy! This was Kevin Smith’s think baby. It could not have had a different director. The way it came to be, from his podcast, to being fund raised, to making it happen is an awesome thing. As for the scene with Park and La Pointe, we will have to agree to disagree. I thought it was funny and odd. Out of place? Yes, but it was a good scene. Kevin Smith is a better director than you seem to think. There is an incredible amount of detail put in each scene and if there is nothing but a blank wall, it’s to make the focus on the character or the words they speak. While some of his movies are not the best (i’m looking at you Cop Out), he gives it his all and everything is there for some reason or another.
NK: I know he gives his all and is extremely passionate towards the things he cares about. But sometimes you need someone there who disagrees and helps guide you in the direction that will make the film better. Every writer’s work is their think baby but are often directed by other people. Smith’s directing works when it is just two people conversing. Which is why films like Clerks and Chasing Amy are never chastised about the directing because the writing is so fantastic to the point that it doesn’t truly matter how its captured. I just felt that the scenes with Long and Parks could have been captured by another director who can create drama by just adjusting the camera a little bit.
J: Special guest director: Quentin Tarantino!
NK: Totes! I was thinking Edgar Wright.
J: That would be good too. Just not Frank Miller or Eli Roth.
NK: What?! You didn’t like the Spirit? (sarcasm)
No comments:
Post a Comment