I first saw Mike White’s directorial debut in the week I had moved into my current home (which is the first place I have owned) so I was a rather reflective mood. I eventually brought the DVD a year or so later.
I showed this film to a couple of women and they both made very telling remarks along the lines that they thought that this film was going to be a lot more ‘girlie’
The film follows Peggy (Molly Shannon), a mild natured thirty something office worker. We see her interact with her colleagues, namely her boss Robin (Joss Pais) and her desk neighbour/friend Layla (Regina King) and her brother Pier and sister-in-law Bret (Tom McCarthy and Laura Dern). White deliberately has Peggy say very little for the first 15 minutes or so. He has her listen and react to what others are telling her. Peggy at this point is defined by her relationships with others. Peggy acts to reassure her boss when he thinks he is not being given the respect he deserves in the company, reassures Layla she is a good catch after an argument with her boyfriend and listens sympathetically to Bret when she complains about her woes with childcare. Peggy is a prime examine of a nurturing woman. I find it is interesting that Peggy as a woman in a middle position job without a relationship or children is a person other people assume would not have her own problems to share.
Peggy is devoted to her dog Pencil. However one nigh he eats something which poisons him and leads to his death. Peggy is devastated by his death. What is interesting to observe is that the other characters namely Layla and Bret are not necessarily able to extend the same understanding or sympathy to Peggy as she has to them. Note this quote from Layla-‘ I believe that there is somebody on this planet for us all. Even retarded cripple people get married. You just have to be open. So maybe your dog died so your love life could live’ .
Peggy is phoned up by Newt (Peter Sarsgaard), who works in the clinic Peggy took Pencil to in an attempt to save him. He persuades her to take on a troubled Alsatian called Valentine (interesting name!). This affords another telling quote from Layla ‘How are ever going to find a boyfriend if you keep shacking up with dogs?’ Again Peggy’s choices are not ones that fit into a conventional narrative, particularly for a woman. Layla is keen to be married to her boyfriend Don (in spite of their rows and the fact that he has been flirting with other women). She does indeed get engaged and set a wedding date by the end of the film. I actually find the portrayal of Layla reflects my experience that women often end up being the party that think about their relationships and that they often are expected to discuss their relationships amongst each other. It is also an accurate representation of how women perpetuate the pressure to be in a heterosexual relationship. I have personal experience of a very dear female friend who wants me to be in a relationship, just like Layla does Peggy.
Through Newt Peggy starts to get interested in animal rights and under Newts’ (passive aggressive) influence she becomes a vegan. There is a very interesting line that Peggy comes out with when she tells her brother and sister-in-law she is a vegan ‘It's nice to have a word that can describe you. I've never had that before’. For Peggy veganism not only becomes an ethical choice it becomes a way for her to explore and assert her identity. Women are usually expected to take on particular identities by which to identify themselves and find fufilment – mother, wife (such as Bret), or girlfriend (like Layla). When Peggy takes on an identity as a vegan, it is something that the people around her are unable to fully understand and certainly don’t respect. Her brothers’ reaction is "It will be interesting to see how long this lasts."
Peggy tries to start a relationship with Newt but he tells her he is celibate (due to alluded to abuse in his childhood). Many critics found Newt the most interesting character in the film, in part because of his sexual ambiguity and in part due to his passive aggressive treatment of Peggy. I cannot help but feel relieved for Peggy that she does not enter a relationship with Newt as I feel his behaviour is not entirely respectful and it is clear he has deep seated issues which would make him far from an ideal partner. He does remain a concerned friend to Peggy throughout the film. It is important to note that after Newt has rejected Peggy, she does not give up either her animal rights activism or her veganism. Although Peggy gets interested in animal rights and veganism as a way of getting closer to Newt, they become things which in the end become far more important to her than her friendship with him. Most people watching the film would expect the film to follow a conventional ‘romantic’ narrative with Peggy entering a romantic relationship with Newt. The fact this does not happen may account for the fact the film was not particularly successful at the box office as it made it difficult for a mass audiences to get a handle on. The film does not shy away from saying that maybe there is not someone for everyone (something White says on the DVD commentary)- I personally appreciate this message than an entire years output of Rom-coms.
As Peggy’s interest in animal rights deepens her behaviour starts to become rebellious. After Robin refuses to sign her petition against animal testing, she retaliates by writing cheques in his name from the company chequebook to various animal rights charities. She destroys Bret’s fur coats while babysitting and takes her niece and nephew to an animal sanctuary (and then attempts to take them to a slaughterhouse). Peggy is no longer the good natured amenable woman of the films beginning. She becomes argumentative with her brother and tells Layla about her fiancé flirting with another woman during an argument.
After Newt has Valentine put down after he has mauled another dog to death, Peggy’s already fragile mental state is further undermined and she adopts eleven dogs what were due to be put down. She is fired for embezzlement and she attacks her neighbour, trying to scare him in retaliation for his hunting animals. Her brother and sister-in-law take her in and allow her to recuperate. She goes back to her job. But she realises how important animal rights have become to her and the film ends with her going on a protest.
I want to reproduce fully the final words of the film. In a reverse of the opening scenes when Peggy is the one who listens to others, the final moments have Peggy sending the other characters an email telling others how she views the world and why she has made the decision to become an animal rights activist-
'And there are so many kinds of love in this life. So many things to love. The love for a husband or a wife, a boyfriend or girlfriend. The love for children. The love for yourself. And even material things. This is my love. It is mine. And it fills me and defines me. And it compels me on'
We see the other characters reaction to this email, along with shots of desks showing the things that people choose to define themselves by while Peggy goes on a bus to a protest. Peggy’s activism is shown to be as valid as Bret and Piers decision to be parents, Layla and Don’s decision to be married, Robins’ pursuit of his career.
By this point Peggy is rational and able to make clear decisions. Her behaviour at the end if the film and her email are not that of a mentally and emotionally unhinged personn
It is very rare to see a film coming from Hollywood (even the indie side) which argues that it is as valid for a woman to be a political activist in the same way as it is for her to be a wife, mother or girlfriend. It is also rare to see a woman’s journey towards political activism in a Hollywood film.
A quick word about Molly Shannon’s excellent performance. The script was specifically written for her and she makes Peggy a character you feel for and sympathise with even when her behaviour is most challenging. She more than manages to convey her character’s journey.
Mike White himself is a vegan (although he admits to being imperfect) and has a strong interest in animal rights.
This film is one that means a considerable amount to me personally as it allows me to feel good about decisions I have made about my own life and the things that are important to me.
Thursday, 24 June 2010
Wednesday, 23 June 2010
33. Why I like Mike (White) pt.1- an overview
I have been a fan of scriptwriter/actor Mike White for almost ten years. I will never forget going to see ‘Chuck ad Buck’, a film he scripted and played the main role of ‘Buck O’ Brien’ in at the Ritzy cinema in Brixton three times in two weeks in November 2000. From that point onwards I have watched his career and made sure I have seen (and indeed own the Dvds!) of all the films he has scripted
Mike wrote the scripts for ‘The Good Girl’, ‘Orange County’, ‘School of Rock’ (all of which he had small but telling role in), ‘Nacho Libre’ and ‘Year of the dog’ which he also directed (I intend to write more about this particular film in a later post). I am not aware of any other scriptwriter who is able to veer from dark indie comedies to mainstream Hollywood comedies with such ease. That in itself is an achievement.
Even though these are a seemingly disparate butch of films there are a number of themes I have observed in all of them.
Firstly the central character is usually someone who is socially marginalised or alienated from the circumstances they find themselves in. In ‘The Good girl’ Justine feels alienated from her husband and colleagues and the mundane existence she is trapped in. In ‘School of rock’ Dewey has landed up in his mid thirties without a band and sleeping on a friends couch, with seemingly no future in music. In ‘Chuck and Buck’ Buck is trapped in the mindset of an eleven year old, unable to socialise meaningfully with his peers. In ‘Year of the Dog’ Peggy is mainly defined by her interactions with others. Even in ‘Orange County’ Shaun feels alienated from his family and the values of Pasadena where he lives.
The script follows them in their struggle to find some identity and role for themselves within these circumstances. Justine does this though an affair with a mentally unstable co-worker Holden (as she tells him ‘I like having a secret’). Peggy becomes interested in animal rights activism. Dewey finally finds both a sense of purpose and responsibility by forming a group of eleven year olds he has tricked his way into teaching into a band. Even in ‘Nacho Libre’ Nacho uses wrestling to give him a sense of purpose and identity (ironically considering he also has to conceal his identity!)
As with most US indie films of the last 10-15 years the central characters are not always endearing. Justine behaves in a self-centred deceitful manner in order to conduct an affair, and her attempts to deal with its’ consequences will have tragic results. Throughout most of the film, she views her husband and colleagues with contempt. Dewey starts out feckless and irresponsible, thinking nothing of living off a friend. Buck stalks Charlie and thinks nothing of disrupting his home and work life. Shaun is rather self-centred and judgemental of his family. Even Peggy, the most sympathetic central character of any of White’s scripts, on occasions crosses the line in her behaviour once she becomes interested in animal rights.
But White has enormous compassion and sympathy with his central characters, no matter what trouble they get themselves into. White explores their loneliness and isolation and does not offer any pat solutions to their problem. Relationships of all kinds get very short shrift. There has been criticism of how White resolves ‘Chuck and Buck’ (with Buck the nominally gay character in no relationship at the end of the film) but heterosexual relationships do not work out either. Peggy is rejected by Newt. Justine’s affair with Holden has terrible consequences for them both.
I would also say that White makes some very pointed comments about sexism and its effects on women by calling a film ‘The Good Girl’. For while Justine may not always be good she is also not a girl. The fact that she tries to think of herself in such terms shows the effect of years of having to compromise her own desires and intelligence.
Several characters use writing as a means to express themselves. Buck writes a play which he has put on at a children’s theatre. He uses this play in part to record the exact nature of his childhood relationship with Charlie and the consequences it has had for him, and in part to try and woo Charlie. Shaun in ‘Orange County’ wants to be a writer. He finally realises that he has the inner resources to be a writer without attending the course at Stanford. ‘Holden’ in ‘The Good Girl’ attempts to become a writer but is held by an inability to write any narrative other than the self destructive one which he proceeds to live out to its logical conclusion. White did joke about the fact he had two films come out at the same time which featured tormented young writers- although their stories play out very differently!
I also enjoy the fact that most of the other characters in the scripts are often dealing with issues of how to find a place in society in their own way. In ‘The Good Girl’ Phil and Bubba use marijuana to dull the boredom of their lives, Bubba is resentful and envious of his best friend, Corny takes solace in evangelical Christianity, while Cheryl uses cruel humour to deal with her dead end job. In ‘School of Rock’ all the children in the class turn out to need more from their education than good grades and Principal Rosalie Mullins realises how much of herself she has compromised to be a successful principal In ‘Chuck and Buck’ Beverley uses the opportunity of directly Buck’s play to show what she is capable of (after years of sitting behind the desk) and Sam wants to act to escape the drudgery of a blue collar job (as he says it beats laying ****ing carpet!). Even Charlie turns out to be aware that aspects of his life may be a front in his final conversation with Buck. In ‘Year of the dog’ Layla is obsessed with marrying her boyfriend (oblivious to the fact he has a wandering eye), Peggy’s sister-in-law Bret is wrapped up in middle class motherhood while her boss Robin is only concerned with his position in the company. White shows society is made up of imperfect, complex individuals who try and grab what comfort and connection to others that they can. He shows the impossibility of trying to define what ‘normal’ behaviour is, when we all struggle with what ‘normal’ behaviour is.
Mike White’s scripts deserve to be considered along with the work of Alexander Payne and Noah Baumbach as studies of discomfort and dislocation in modern USA.
I unashamedly prefer White as a scriptwriter to Charlie Kaufman and Wes Anderson. Firstly he has written several interesting female central characters, such as Justine and Peggy, not just middle class educated white heterosexual men (which is what the central characters of Anderson’s and Kaufman’s usually are!) I also find that while Kaufman and Anderson’s writing is undoubtedly original, they are both highly self conscious and self consciously clever in the way they write. As Matthew Fox at Kqed.org in his review of ‘Year of the Dog’ notes Whites scripts are deceptively simple and need a second viewing to fully appreciate them. Whites’s scripts are also often more radical and disquieting in the questions they ask. Anyone who doubts this should look at the debate that still goes on around ‘Chuck and Buck’ on IMDB and Amazon.com!
Major props also for the additional wit and wisdom of Mr. Burke (the teacher he plays in Orange County) on the Orange County DVD- worth buying the DVD for alone
Mike wrote the scripts for ‘The Good Girl’, ‘Orange County’, ‘School of Rock’ (all of which he had small but telling role in), ‘Nacho Libre’ and ‘Year of the dog’ which he also directed (I intend to write more about this particular film in a later post). I am not aware of any other scriptwriter who is able to veer from dark indie comedies to mainstream Hollywood comedies with such ease. That in itself is an achievement.
Even though these are a seemingly disparate butch of films there are a number of themes I have observed in all of them.
Firstly the central character is usually someone who is socially marginalised or alienated from the circumstances they find themselves in. In ‘The Good girl’ Justine feels alienated from her husband and colleagues and the mundane existence she is trapped in. In ‘School of rock’ Dewey has landed up in his mid thirties without a band and sleeping on a friends couch, with seemingly no future in music. In ‘Chuck and Buck’ Buck is trapped in the mindset of an eleven year old, unable to socialise meaningfully with his peers. In ‘Year of the Dog’ Peggy is mainly defined by her interactions with others. Even in ‘Orange County’ Shaun feels alienated from his family and the values of Pasadena where he lives.
The script follows them in their struggle to find some identity and role for themselves within these circumstances. Justine does this though an affair with a mentally unstable co-worker Holden (as she tells him ‘I like having a secret’). Peggy becomes interested in animal rights activism. Dewey finally finds both a sense of purpose and responsibility by forming a group of eleven year olds he has tricked his way into teaching into a band. Even in ‘Nacho Libre’ Nacho uses wrestling to give him a sense of purpose and identity (ironically considering he also has to conceal his identity!)
As with most US indie films of the last 10-15 years the central characters are not always endearing. Justine behaves in a self-centred deceitful manner in order to conduct an affair, and her attempts to deal with its’ consequences will have tragic results. Throughout most of the film, she views her husband and colleagues with contempt. Dewey starts out feckless and irresponsible, thinking nothing of living off a friend. Buck stalks Charlie and thinks nothing of disrupting his home and work life. Shaun is rather self-centred and judgemental of his family. Even Peggy, the most sympathetic central character of any of White’s scripts, on occasions crosses the line in her behaviour once she becomes interested in animal rights.
But White has enormous compassion and sympathy with his central characters, no matter what trouble they get themselves into. White explores their loneliness and isolation and does not offer any pat solutions to their problem. Relationships of all kinds get very short shrift. There has been criticism of how White resolves ‘Chuck and Buck’ (with Buck the nominally gay character in no relationship at the end of the film) but heterosexual relationships do not work out either. Peggy is rejected by Newt. Justine’s affair with Holden has terrible consequences for them both.
I would also say that White makes some very pointed comments about sexism and its effects on women by calling a film ‘The Good Girl’. For while Justine may not always be good she is also not a girl. The fact that she tries to think of herself in such terms shows the effect of years of having to compromise her own desires and intelligence.
Several characters use writing as a means to express themselves. Buck writes a play which he has put on at a children’s theatre. He uses this play in part to record the exact nature of his childhood relationship with Charlie and the consequences it has had for him, and in part to try and woo Charlie. Shaun in ‘Orange County’ wants to be a writer. He finally realises that he has the inner resources to be a writer without attending the course at Stanford. ‘Holden’ in ‘The Good Girl’ attempts to become a writer but is held by an inability to write any narrative other than the self destructive one which he proceeds to live out to its logical conclusion. White did joke about the fact he had two films come out at the same time which featured tormented young writers- although their stories play out very differently!
I also enjoy the fact that most of the other characters in the scripts are often dealing with issues of how to find a place in society in their own way. In ‘The Good Girl’ Phil and Bubba use marijuana to dull the boredom of their lives, Bubba is resentful and envious of his best friend, Corny takes solace in evangelical Christianity, while Cheryl uses cruel humour to deal with her dead end job. In ‘School of Rock’ all the children in the class turn out to need more from their education than good grades and Principal Rosalie Mullins realises how much of herself she has compromised to be a successful principal In ‘Chuck and Buck’ Beverley uses the opportunity of directly Buck’s play to show what she is capable of (after years of sitting behind the desk) and Sam wants to act to escape the drudgery of a blue collar job (as he says it beats laying ****ing carpet!). Even Charlie turns out to be aware that aspects of his life may be a front in his final conversation with Buck. In ‘Year of the dog’ Layla is obsessed with marrying her boyfriend (oblivious to the fact he has a wandering eye), Peggy’s sister-in-law Bret is wrapped up in middle class motherhood while her boss Robin is only concerned with his position in the company. White shows society is made up of imperfect, complex individuals who try and grab what comfort and connection to others that they can. He shows the impossibility of trying to define what ‘normal’ behaviour is, when we all struggle with what ‘normal’ behaviour is.
Mike White’s scripts deserve to be considered along with the work of Alexander Payne and Noah Baumbach as studies of discomfort and dislocation in modern USA.
I unashamedly prefer White as a scriptwriter to Charlie Kaufman and Wes Anderson. Firstly he has written several interesting female central characters, such as Justine and Peggy, not just middle class educated white heterosexual men (which is what the central characters of Anderson’s and Kaufman’s usually are!) I also find that while Kaufman and Anderson’s writing is undoubtedly original, they are both highly self conscious and self consciously clever in the way they write. As Matthew Fox at Kqed.org in his review of ‘Year of the Dog’ notes Whites scripts are deceptively simple and need a second viewing to fully appreciate them. Whites’s scripts are also often more radical and disquieting in the questions they ask. Anyone who doubts this should look at the debate that still goes on around ‘Chuck and Buck’ on IMDB and Amazon.com!
Major props also for the additional wit and wisdom of Mr. Burke (the teacher he plays in Orange County) on the Orange County DVD- worth buying the DVD for alone
Tuesday, 22 June 2010
32. Research Junkie
I freely admit that I have taken part in many research projects for TS. I have done one for TS and Diabetes, a couple for TS and cardiology, one for the effects of HRT on bone density, one for TS and liver function and a couple for neurology.
I have had several MRI scans looking at my heart and brain (one that lasted almost two hours- if you have ever been in an MRI scanner you will know how claustrophobic they are!). I have been exposed to unpleasant noises, had to answer some very personal questions, been made to lie still for over two hours while blood pressure cups went off at regular intervals and most exciting of all I had a bone biopsy! Perhaps the hardest thing I have done in the name of research was stop taking HRT for three months to see what effect it had on my heart. I was physically drained by the end of the period.
My friend Lucy once asked me why I felt the need to participate in so many research projects. It is interesting that I got involved in all these research projects shortly after I got involved with a Turners Syndrome support group and was fired up to help out other women with TS in any way I could. I also was aware that many of these research projects were being run in central London, close to where I work, so I felt that at least I was able to get to these places to participate in the research, which many women did not.
But there were two main reasons I wanted to participate in research.
Firstly I wanted to find out more about what positive effects taking HRT has for women with TS. There has been so much negative coverage of HRT and there are many unanswered questions about how effective taking HRT is over a long period. I know many women with TS who have serious concerns about taking HRT. I wanted to help answer these questions as far as I could. I wanted to be able to find out for myself and my friends that taking HRT was worth the possible risks. Taking part in research projects was one way of doing this. For myself I feel that I have received a considerable amount of reassurance from the findings of the research projects I took part in.
Secondly, for me, participating in research projects has helped me view the relationship I have with the medical profession differently. This is the one time where the medical profession is dependent on myself and other women with TS. It is the one time when we have something to offer. It is the one time when doctors are dependent on our good will and co-operation for what they need. It is very easy to feel powerless in the patient-doctor relationship. By participating in research I feel I have at least altered the balance of power. Maybe not a lot but enough to make me feel a lot more comfortable. I have given something back.
I have had several MRI scans looking at my heart and brain (one that lasted almost two hours- if you have ever been in an MRI scanner you will know how claustrophobic they are!). I have been exposed to unpleasant noises, had to answer some very personal questions, been made to lie still for over two hours while blood pressure cups went off at regular intervals and most exciting of all I had a bone biopsy! Perhaps the hardest thing I have done in the name of research was stop taking HRT for three months to see what effect it had on my heart. I was physically drained by the end of the period.
My friend Lucy once asked me why I felt the need to participate in so many research projects. It is interesting that I got involved in all these research projects shortly after I got involved with a Turners Syndrome support group and was fired up to help out other women with TS in any way I could. I also was aware that many of these research projects were being run in central London, close to where I work, so I felt that at least I was able to get to these places to participate in the research, which many women did not.
But there were two main reasons I wanted to participate in research.
Firstly I wanted to find out more about what positive effects taking HRT has for women with TS. There has been so much negative coverage of HRT and there are many unanswered questions about how effective taking HRT is over a long period. I know many women with TS who have serious concerns about taking HRT. I wanted to help answer these questions as far as I could. I wanted to be able to find out for myself and my friends that taking HRT was worth the possible risks. Taking part in research projects was one way of doing this. For myself I feel that I have received a considerable amount of reassurance from the findings of the research projects I took part in.
Secondly, for me, participating in research projects has helped me view the relationship I have with the medical profession differently. This is the one time where the medical profession is dependent on myself and other women with TS. It is the one time when we have something to offer. It is the one time when doctors are dependent on our good will and co-operation for what they need. It is very easy to feel powerless in the patient-doctor relationship. By participating in research I feel I have at least altered the balance of power. Maybe not a lot but enough to make me feel a lot more comfortable. I have given something back.
31. Disclosure Pt. 3- relationships
I have written in my post about Gabriel about disclosing my TS to him. I got a considerable amount of advice from two other women with TS who are in long term relationships before doing this.
Of course the moment you tell a person you are interested in forming a relationship with about your TS, you are showing that you are serious about your future. So it is a tricky balance! You risk putting someone off if you tell them too early as they may not be at a point where they want to think about things that seriously but you also risk the relationship if you leave it until things have become serious. I know at least one case where this occurred.
Interestingly sometimes good relationships have been formed when the other party has known about your TS for while so there is no need for disclosure.
Ultimately women with TS have to judge the situation in each relationship for themselves. However it is important that we all remember that we should not feel inferior or that we will be automatically rejected once we disclose. In the end, if it is an issue for your prospective partner, it is THEIR issue not yours.
A relationship will succeed or fail on any number of reasons. Undeniably issues around reproduction/children are significant. However many couples have to face these issues, often completely unexpectedly. In some ways it can be easier to know that there is an issue and deal with it from the point that a relationship get serious.
The good news is that there a lot of great partners out there who are supportive and in the relationship for the long term.
Of course the moment you tell a person you are interested in forming a relationship with about your TS, you are showing that you are serious about your future. So it is a tricky balance! You risk putting someone off if you tell them too early as they may not be at a point where they want to think about things that seriously but you also risk the relationship if you leave it until things have become serious. I know at least one case where this occurred.
Interestingly sometimes good relationships have been formed when the other party has known about your TS for while so there is no need for disclosure.
Ultimately women with TS have to judge the situation in each relationship for themselves. However it is important that we all remember that we should not feel inferior or that we will be automatically rejected once we disclose. In the end, if it is an issue for your prospective partner, it is THEIR issue not yours.
A relationship will succeed or fail on any number of reasons. Undeniably issues around reproduction/children are significant. However many couples have to face these issues, often completely unexpectedly. In some ways it can be easier to know that there is an issue and deal with it from the point that a relationship get serious.
The good news is that there a lot of great partners out there who are supportive and in the relationship for the long term.