Jeff, Who Lives at Home (2012) – Review

Review: Jeff, Who Lives at Home is funny and dramatic, and while it is a non-secular dramedy it seemingly plays as almost a spiritual piece. The film is about Jeff, a slacker who lives in his mom’s basement thing to figure out what his purpose in life is. He gets a wrong number call in the morning that sets him off on a journey following what he believes to be signs from the universe pertaining to his purpose. He runs into his brother Pat who suspects his wife is cheating on him, and Jeff and Pat merge their efforts (not to give too much away). Before delving into the narrative too much, the visual style that writer-directors Jay and Mark Duplass employ adds nothing to the film, and if anything is distracting and annoying (though, here, it is nowhere near as prevalent or awful as with their last film Cyrus). The constant quick zooms in or out, simulating some sort of amateurish documentary style greatly detract from everything else going on in the film (i.e. the performances, the tone, the other aesthetics; and while I am not certain, they even look as though they were added in post). It is one thing to implement an aesthetic touch that serves the narrative or tone of the film; it is another to just do it because that is your style regardless of narrative or tone, serving nothing, contributing nothing and being pointless. The Duplass Brothers’ visual style feels pointless and hurts their films. That tangent aside, the Duplass Brothers seem to approach the character of Jeff and his journey of self-discovery from almost a spiritual place. Without pegging any one set of beliefs, Jeff seems to believe he is given signs from the universe telling him where to go, but the Duplass Brothers make it a point that Jeff still has to make the decisions once he gets their – as if the universe is nudging him in a certain direction, but Jeff must choose how to act. And through this journey, Jeff to some degree finds himself, but more so he helps others around him (the basketball player, his brother Pat and his wife Linda, his mother, and Kevin). The Duplass Brothers easily could have wound up with something that felt very hooky, but they writer Jeff to be warm and likable (also this is due to Jason Segel’s great performance) which makes his actions and motivations feel real. The audience likes Jeff and thus is behind him on his journey. Jeff’s warmth stands out as well as the other characters are all disillusioned, disheartened and disenchanted – basically, they are stuck in neutral just plodding forward void of true connection or meaning. They need someone to jumpstart them, and this is where Jeff comes in (though, as a slacker 30-year old who lives in his mother’s basement, Jeff seems the unlikely hero). Jeff, Who Lives at Home is a feel good film that makes the audience care about its characters and may even have them thinking about their own lives and what they are doing with them, but it is tripped up a bit by some of the Duplass Brother’s pointless visual aesthetics and some slow pacing (even though the film is only 82 minutes long).

Technical, aesthetic and acting achievements: I thought the Duplass Brothers would realize that their quick zooms only detract from their films after Cyrus, I was wrong. They are otherwise good directors and I have to believe will outgrow it. Producer Jason Reitman’s influence is felt on the film, as Jeff’s narrative journey feels aligned with his own work, being one of self-discovery, while still seemingly left largely unchanged at the end. The work of composer Michael Andrews, cinematographer Jas Shelton and production designer Chris Spellman all essentially places the narrative in the real world – unflashy, just average and normal. Jeff, Who Lives at Home is built on its performances and dialogue. Rae Dawn Chong, much like Segel’s performance, brings a lot of warmth to the film. She is another entity that tries to insight change in the mundane live of Sharon (Jeff’s mother). Susan Sarandon is very good as Sharon. She seemingly has completely given up hope and yet desperately wants to be rescued from her own life. Judy Greer plays Linda as someone fed up, grasping at anything to feel something. It is another good small supporting performance from her (as she was also great in The Descendants in 2011). Ed Helms plays Pat as sort of a darker version of his The Office character Andy. Pat is a bit clueless; and much like Linda, he just wants to feel something again. Segel gives the best performance of the film. His opening monologue is some of his best work to date – emotionally intense but still with an overtone of this likable average relaxed cool guy.

Summary & score: Jeff, Who Lives at Home offers its audience a few laughs, some good dramatic moments and maybe even something profound. 7/10 

At the Movies – March 2012 – Part 3: This Month’s Best Films

Must-See of the Month:

The Hunger Games (Gary Ross) – Action – Mar 23

Summary: Each year a young boy and girl are chosen from each of the twelve districts to fight to the death on live television. In the latest match, Katniss Everdeen’s little sister is selected, but Katniss volunteers to take her place. Now she must survive to get back to her family. Filmmakers: Writer-director Gary Ross takes on the popular teen novels by Suzanne Collins (who also worked on the screenplay). Ross is an odd choice to take on the material (I think, at least) as he is known for his films Pleasantville and Seabiscuit (which was overly sappy and Hollywoodized to the extent that it was repellant; but I do like Pleasantville). Neither is tonally or stylistically like The Hunger Games. However, he has assembled a good group to work with him: excellent composers T-Bone Burnett (O Brother, Where Art Thou?) and James Newton Howard (Green Lantern), cinematographer Tom Stern (all Clint Eastwood’s films since 2002), and production designer Philip Messina (Ocean’s Eleven). Cast: Lionsgate and Ross did a wonderful job casting the lead with Jennifer Lawrence (coming off her Oscar nomination for Winter’s Bone). She is joined by a decent supporting cast including: Josh Hutcherson, Elizabeth Banks, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Alexander Ludwig, Wes Bentley, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland, Toby Jones, and Lenny Kravitz (and a bunch of young newcomers). Expectations: As a big fan of dystopian literature and film, I am very much looking forward to this. I however do have some reservations about Gary Ross directing, as I think he is probably the wrong choice for the project. That said, I have liked everything I have seen so far, and hope to be proved wrong by a good film. Ross will get the drama right and do good character work (which is more important than the action), but we will see how he does with the action, tone and style. It will not be as violent as Battle Royale, but hopefully Ross abandons his glossy style and shoots this to be a little more gritty and authentic. Among dedicated fans to the novels, this has a huge following comparable to the Twilight Saga (though, I expect these films to be much better than those in the Twilight Series). This is the must-see of March because it is both the most anticipated film of the month and looks like it could capture its audience with a little bit of everything (action/drama/romance/comedy/thrills). Trailer: Here. Review.

Worth Checking Out:

Jeff Who Lives at Home (Jay & Mark Duplass) – Comedy – Mar 16 [limited]

Summary: Jeff is a thirty-year old man who still lives with his mom. However when he is sent on an errand to help his brother Pat track down his potentially cheating wife Linda, Jeff might actually grow up. Filmmakers: Writer-directors Jay & Mark Duplass are back for their fourth feature film. Their last film was Cyrus. They are working with producer Jason Reitman (director of Juno, Up in the Air and Young Adult), composer Michael Andrews, cinematographer Jas Shelton (both of whom worked on Cyrus), and production designer Chris L. Spellman (Observe and Report). Cast: The film has a great comedic cast with leads Jason Segel and Ed Helms, and Judy Greer, Susan Surandon, Rae Dawn Chong, and Katie Aselton in support. Expectations: I think the Duplass Brothers’ material is very funny and I otherwise liked Cyrus a lot, but their aesthetic style is kind of terrible (a pseudo-documentary style for no reason that goes out of its way to be distracting and poor with awful framing and constant random zooming). I hope this will keep their sense of humor intact but lose the style (as it really did ruin Cyrus). The cast is fantastic for this type of dramedy story. Trailer: Here. Review.

Cyrus (2010) – Review

Cyrus is a tale of two movies, one is funny and well acted and the other is awfully directed and shot. Sadly, these are the same movie. The film is very awkward and will makes some viewers feel as uncomfortable as its characters, but this humor works well in the story and with the characters presented. They are all a bit off center in their own ways (but aren’t we all). The scenes that work the best are those that are meant to play as comedy. The more serious scenes do not play as well, partially due to the tone of the piece but mostly due to the director’s inability to visually connect the audience with the characters. The directorial style is so clumsy and goes so far out of its way to be ‘indy’ and noticeable that it works against the rest of the film. The viewer must like the film in spite of its visual style. While some directors can make very stylistic movies that are overly noticeable to viewer that completely succeed in connecting with the audience (like Wes Anderson or Steven Soderbergh for example), here the style just looks amateurish and so unpolished that is really takes away from the good film underneath. The director’s sole job is to connect the film to its intended viewers, the Duplass brothers have failed to do that utterly (unless the intended audience is only the select few that enjoy a certain ‘indy’ style of filmmaking that breaks filmmaking rules merely for the sake of it, rather than for the emotional impact that some of these techniques can add to the piece, this film uses them to no effect and to no emotional need or gain, purely because it can). Aside from the visual style, the film does work well and has a number of good scenes, which is a credit to the fine work of the actors. This is what makes the visuals more infuriating. It is not like they ruin some already bad film. They ruin what could have been a very good film. But alas, a film is the combination of everything seen and heard and here they do not compliment each other, rather they conflict. Jay and Mark Duplass do not add anything to the film as directors; they do provide a good script to start, but they must be able to hone their skills visually if they are to succeed as quality filmmakers going forward. The primary production team did not do great work here either, possible hampered by the style set forth by the Duplass brothers. Jas Shelton’s cinematography looks like it was shot with an iPhone camera and really brings nothing to the film. Annie Spitz’s production design does a good job making the viewer believe they are just watching average people living their average lives in average places. Michael Andrews’s score is mostly in the background and does not play a prominent role in the film, which is too bad as the right music could have helped viewers emotionally connect despite the style (and he has done good work in the past). But, the score is in line, like the rest, with the overall style, so the main complaint for the film is on style and with the directors. However, they were able to garner fine performances from their cast. John C. Reilly gives a great performance in the film and his interplay with Jonah Hill creates some of the most funny and best stuff. The film is saved in terms of being enjoyable by his work. Marisa Tomei and Catherine Keener are also good in their roles, but it is Reilly’s movie. Cyrus is disappointing because there is a lot to like, but the film’s style alienates its viewers and leaves them feeling empty. 6/10