Review of Brief Interviews with Hideous Men (2009) by Joseph S — 01 Mar 2010

The only Foster Wallace fiction book I've read, and one I moderately enjoyed, I appreciated this mutant rom-com adaptation. I probably appreciated it more because I had been watching Resnais movies the day I watched this("Providence" and "Life Is A Bed Of Roses"), and Krasinski actually makes allot of sense in that context. This is not Wallace's book, some of his stories do appear from time to time to great effect, but mostly this story focuses on dating, masculinity, and mysoginy. Some Kaufman moments of narrative daring, that actually surprise, in more confrontational ways than much of the imitators, that have followed in his wake.

I have never seen the US "Office", so I know nothing of Krasinski other than to say this is one of the most interesting first attempts of an actor turned director, especially arriving from American independent cinema, in years. Like a Resnais the multiple characters and fragmented story telling deserves to be watched twice for it's themes performances to really jel (or for an audience to become aware of the full extent of how well it really does "jel) but still packs an emotional and intellectual impact. There is ugly, uncomfortable male neurosis, and conflicting gender politics at work here, given to a generation made limp on middle-brow and all encompassingly middle-class Woody Allen type projects like "500 Days Of Summer" and "Garden State".

Yes, there are lots and lots of cameos, and lots of "talking", and lot's of creepy men saying creepy things, but I've heard much worse, with much more frequency, from men of all ages, races, creeds, and classes. The fact that so few films attempt to even glance sideways at any of the complexity of the lives of men in a "post-feminist" (there's a funny short film called "The Stalker Guilt Complex" made some years ago that hits this nail on the head with mixed results), only tells me how deeply uncomfortable and entrenched such positions are. Von Trier is allowed to brave such waters so long as he remains murky and horse whips his audience's sense of outrage, but Krasinski's attempt at looking the gift horse in the mouth, is ignored because he lacks an "auteur" name-brand.

I've had mixed experiences with Foster Wallace's books in the past, liking parts and being annoyed with others, and this was no different. The parts of the film that are strongest are those which come directly from the novel, and though the acting is too polished to serve as realistic confessions (something "24 City" does much better), the editing and writing bolster the film into territory less based on what sadly must be called Kaufman-quirk and into Resnais level poetics. A very good first film.