AMERICAN FICTION (2023) - do-rag and a tank top with the muscles showing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0MbLCpYJPA

trailer looks immense and it's always a treat to watch Jeffrey Wright. i feel like this will want its own thread, which is a bad sign because my instincts are generally terrible

anyway this is going to be great and i'm up for it

guess this means i need to find time to read as much Percival Everett as i can get my hands on now

saw this at TIFF and it's okay, like if it won Best Picture or whatever I wouldn't complain

the thing is if this came out around when the book it's based on came out, the satire would hit harder but as is, it doesn't quite accurately depict the cultural landscape that it lambasts

I'm looking forward to it. I doubt it will win Best Picture, but it's been at least a decade since a TIFF People's Choice winner wasn't nominated. Jeffrey Wright deserves the attention.

read glyph and i am not sidney poitier this year, guess it's time to add erasure to the list

Seeing next weekend and keeping as open a mind as I can; The Fabelmans won the TIFF audience award just last year so

This was very much "just fine." The wonder (and, frankly, probably weakness) is that it's as broadly appealing as it is. At its best, it feels like a version of Sideways that's not annoying and self-obsessed but, rather, reasonably generous to all its major characters.

If indeed this beats Oppenheimer for the Oscar, then good. Great!

the broad appeal is intended, Cord Jefferson said both in his intro and post-Q&A that he wanted it to be a crowd-pleaser

and yes, it's a weakness if you want your work to be satirical as well

the broad appeal is intended, Cord Jefferson said both in his intro and post-Q&A that he wanted it to be a crowd-pleaser

and yes, it's a weakness if you want your work to be satirical as well

Adam Brody, once-upon-a-time one of my top celebrity crushes, plays admirably greasy here

no release date in the UK yet

You can get away with a measure of satire in your mainstream drama but ultimately if you want to get the broader audience you have to play nice I guess

Paul Schrader weighs in.

Cord Jefferson's AMERICAN FICTION is a masterly combination of deadpan wit and antiwokeness. Although at times it flirts with becomming the film it's critizing, the overall impact is like a fresh breeze on an airless day. Put it on your short list.

Comments are predictably quick to jump on the misuse of "woke" here.

i think paul schrader should be banned from the internet

he's a fetid breeze on an airy day

a fresh fart on a hairless gay

Wow. Y'all liked this?!

Less so in memory, but still preferable to Sideways

Yeah, your comment is on point. Boy, do those jokes about white lib pieties grate after the first six.

I'm glad someone made a film about the Black middle-class, though, and that it's getting distribution.

I probably have an unfair prejudice against seeing movies titled like this, American anything.

Erasure would have been a better title but maybe they're saving it for the Vince Clarke biopic

They should've just committed to the bit and called it Fuck

I'm glad someone made a film about the Black middle-class, though, and that it's getting distribution.

This pretty much is the crux of it. The Vulture critic Alison W. accurately said this is the movie embodiment of what Monk would rather see on bookstores' "Black voices" shelves, and why not?

i can't really be unbiased about this film so keep that in mind but... i do think the lightness of touch that you guys are keying in on is a crucial layer of subversion that enhances the film. to take a weighty & personal topic -- a film about the constrictions placed on black artists by the intrinsic racism of the white people who run american institutions -- and apply a tone that is similar to i.e. "sideways" is actually pretty daring, imo. the film is sort of a wish fulfillment of its own mission in that sense, but i never detected any self-satisfaction over that fact. this isn't to say that the movie succeeds simply bcuz of said subversion, but i do think as an artistic choice it makes the film more interesting instead of less. i like that the film is sorta in a constant meta conversation w/ itself -- at once it shows us comically hamhanded depictions of black people while also situating its black characters in a cape cod beach house -- while still being focused on the characters and not the meta-ness. i like that the score is kinda jazzy and jaunty, the movie rides this delicate line where it both obviously believes in the importance of its own story while also constantly undercutting its protagonist. i love the ending of the film for this same reason -- jeffery wright's character spends the whole film on a crusade operating as if he has an acute understanding of being a black artist that no other black artists he encounters in the film can relate to, only to have all his fury & bluster basically depantsed to his face by an unwitting extra on a back lot just trying to get thru his day. wright's character is basically told "get over yourself, you privileged asshole" which i think is a pretty funny & fairly subversive ending to a film that is broadly about a black protagonist encountering racism. he is sorta left in a purgatory between hero and anti-hero that feels genuinely nuanced to me. or at least that was my reading of it, anyway. and also for being about a very specific thing, i think the film actually ends on a pretty universal note, pitting the principled artist who views the world strictly thru a lens of ego-driven morality vs a layman who has to make scratch every day to put food on the table. i think ultimately the film lingers on a question of how we all navigate morality and ego vs money and success etc in a way that successfully transcends the discreet story being told.

perhaps it makes for a funny feted debut bcuz the film isn't really about the director leaving his fingerprints on the film from like a visual/cinematographic POV? there are very few if any shots where you can feel the director shouting out "it's me, the director!" it's very much a story and character driven film & the layers to peel back are about that subtextual conversation w/ itself, w/ its actors, w/ the director's personal artistic history (if you care to go that far with it) etc. my lone regret is just that tracee ellis ross is in the movie for like 10 minutes. i thought sterling k brown was fantastic.

As entertaining as Brown is, I had problems with him as Black Gay Comic Relief (and wished for a mainstream film about a gay Black middle-aged man realizing his sexuality).

Sharp post, sarge. I wish the film I'd seen was stronger on showing what it's like to be upper middle-class and Black in Cape Cod than in making jokes about the insularity of white libs that were done to far better effect in Get Out. To say Jefferson's not a visual filmmaker (for now) is an understatement; so many of his cuts played like MEANWHILE BACK AT CAPE COD .

That shot of Sinatra in a waiting room reading Lauren Michele Jackson’s White Negroes annoyed me no end.

the thing is if this came out around when the book it's based on came out, the satire would hit harder but as is, it doesn't quite accurately depict the cultural landscape that it lambasts

― Murgatroid, Tuesday, October 17, 2023 7:53 AM (one month ago)

i can see what you're saying insofar as the story that monk invents is based off very broad cinematic tropes that def feel less present in the culture of the last 10-20 years than they were in the 10-20 years that preceded when the book was written

but i do think the more general cultural landscape being depicted -- like all the scenes w/ the book judges -- still speaks pretty directly to the way institutions, and the white people who generally run those institutions, are trying to navigate an era where people expect diversity to be a primary, driving focus of how said institutions operate. i saw cord do a Q&A after the screening i went to and, based on his telling, white film executives meeting w/ black writers and ignoring their pitches only to ask them to write scripts about slavery is still an active dynamic in hollywood. i also think that even if you feel like there is something slightly stale about a depiction of, i.e., white people standing to applaud a black author's cartoonish book about black pain, i don't think it's putting too fine a point on it to, like, cite hollywood's hysterically fascist institutional reaction to palestinian sympathy as a hyper current example of how this movie's story about white institutional power resonates beyond any BLM-era framing

the more general cultural landscape being depicted -- like all the scenes w/ the book judges -- still speaks pretty directly to the way institutions, and the white people who generally run those institutions, are trying to navigate an era where people expect diversity to be a primary, driving focus of how said institutions operate. i

This is true. Not to what-about this conversation but the film puts characters in boxes as definitively as those book judges, i.e. Cliff and his twinks, even the sitcom beat to the rhythm between said twink and Monk ("Cliff said you were a tight ass!" or whatever).

Booming posts Jordan

So should some adventurous programmer pair this with Ron Howard's Hillbilly Elegy?

LOL, I just name-checked Hillbilly Elegy in my review (filed, not yet published).

Also, totally agree with J0rdan's take on the ending. It's a bit of a kick but also a bit of a benign shrug

(Also, I have no objections to a movie this soft and cuddly also depicting a late-in-life out gay man living out his weekend twink threesome fantasy, without judgement)

Along with that Paul Schrader post, Pamela Paul's rave in the NYT has me worried that it will become celebrated among the tiresome pundits who complain about wokeness.

to take a weighty & personal topic -- a film about the constrictions placed on black artists by the intrinsic racism of the white people who run american institutions -- and apply a tone that is similar to i.e. "sideways" is actually pretty daring, imo.

I remember Chris Rock saying a similar thing about what he aimed for with Top Five: basically letting these characters be in lifelike domestic/relationship situations. I realized after seeing this one that the Wright character reminded me of Michael Douglas in Wonder Boys.

Anyway, enjoyed this a lot, thought it balanced the publishing storyline with the family storyline well, and thought it would make a good double feature with The Holdovers: not just due to the Boston-area setting, but the way both movies give secondary characters details that round them out. (Which especially goes a long way with the Issa Rae character having subtlety and complexity after the broad comedy of her first moment at the book festival.)

Mostly agree with A.A. Dowd's review:

American Fiction is two movies awkwardly smashed together — one a warmly observed portrait of Black American life, the other a cynical lit-world satire. There is, to be fair, some rhyme and reason to the bifurcation of writer-director Cord Jefferson’s debut feature: The scenes focused on the family and love life of struggling author Thelonious “Monk” Ellison (Jeffrey Wright) present a nuanced alternative to the stereotypical poverty porn he parodically parrots with his accidental bestseller. Unfortunately, the former material is so thoughtful — thanks in large part to the terrific performances of Wright, Sterling K. Brown, Tracee Ellis Ross, and more — that it can’t help but throw into sharper relief how broad the showbiz critique is. How outdated, too. In adapting Percival Everett’s 2001 novel Erasure, Jefferson selects a literary target way past its expiration date, to say nothing of how social media would make Monk’s lie so much harder to hide today. While the like-minded Bamboozled ruffled feathers in its day, American Fiction goes down smoother, never threatening to genuinely discomfort the audience that applauded it on the festival circuit.

I have no ill feelings towards it, and I'm delighted Jeffrey Wright (finally!) earns an Oscar nod, but it left no impression.

Posted this in the Oscar thread:

I thought this movie had a lot to say about who gets to tell their story and how. I found it intriguing that the central drama - and it is largely a drama, interrupted by the occasional broader satiric beat - not only depicts a relatively under-represented on-screen group (upper middle class Black family) but simultaneously riffs on broken family tropes through that prism (as opposed to the broken family street cliches Monk abhors). And I thought it clever that a lot of said family drama stuff also happens to be the cliche purview of so many run of the mill (white) indie dramas. The parent with Alzheimer's, the family member coming out, the struggling novelist, etc., all of which I could imagine the subject of movies starring Paul Giamatti, the kinds of prestige movies that get awards instead of box office, which plays into the film's sort of central conflict. Not sure how much of that was intentionally, but given the chaotic/cynical nesting doll aspect of the conclusion ... maybe!

Has anyone read any of Everett's novels? The movie led me to browse them, all with compelling first pages, though Erasure has large chunks of My Pafology, which made me glad the movie condenses them succinctly.

I quite liked Telephone (main character in that is very much akin to the one in American Fiction) and I've got a copy of the Trees cued up... dude is prolific, he's written dozens of books.

no release date in the UK yet

― no gap tree for old men (Noodle Vague), Monday, 30 October 2023 15:31 (three months ago) bookmarkflaglink

Opening on Friday. Think it might struggle to find an audience here, with Zone of Interest, Holdovers, Poor Things and All of us Strangers also on release, but I'm willing to use my Cineworld card on a viewing of it.

it’s definitely worth seeing. i think it’s doing something a bit different from the book, and has a warmer centre. not that this is a bad thing but i missed some of the relentless, irresolvable cynicism and sacrifice of the book. eg the death of the sister or the relationship with the brother.

it is however funny and it’s good to see jeffrey wright doing his anti-faces. good cast generally.

really moving parts of the book - the central section with the holiday and the wedding of the help - don’t really exist iirc (saw it at back end of last year so may need to see again). and doing something like the book within a book like My Pafology is brave, and i think it’s more brave than entirely successful. but i like the bravery.

The Hollywood stuff in the movie, is that in the book?

American Fiction goes down smoother, never threatening to genuinely discomfort the audience that applauded it on the festival circuit.

i guess where i break from this criticism is that to me the film anticipates this reaction and attempts to inflame that tension by being subtle. i mean, there is a scene where we see a white audience applauding a "threatening" book that is on the festival circuit -- we are given the sense that is is basically a pavlovian response to seeing black art about black people. so i think you would have to be particularly detached from your own complicity to be a white person applauding this film on the festival circuit and not be able to draw a direct parallel between yourself and the people depicted on screen. isn't the point that the slightly parodic white book festival audience depicted in the film and the audience for the film itself are one in the same? is that "genuine" discomfort? to me it is! the fact that the film "goes down smooth" is the trojan horse of it all, in my estimation. white people who see the film and think "well, that was a relatively smooth watch that didn't challenge its audience" are i think positioning themselves to be a rung above a less discerning/enlightened white person, and i think the film strives to equalize those two audiences, which i think is a provocative argument to make, even if its done in gestures and not with threats

That's what I was getting at (but better) when I was commenting on the way the movie riffs on common white indie darling tropes, even cliches. The biggest difference between the bulk of this movie and a lot of melodramas with similar subjects and settings is that the cast is almost entirely Black, it's written and directed by a Black man, and it's based on a book by a Black author. The plot of the movie is about a refusal to conform to certain stereotypes, but the movie itself is doing the same.

That's why I was asking if the Hollywood stuff was in the book, because in the film it adds another subtext to what's going on.

I liked this quite a lot.

As others have observed, it's a film of two main elements: the literary world side and the everyday family environment. I was surprised that I liked the family environmental side more (disregarding a slight slide in schmaltz in places) - because it interestingly portrayed someone who is dignified and polite, intelligent and considerate and yet beset by events that make him quite an angry person.

The literary satire side definitely has its moments though, and I really liked the cameo roles in particular from Jenn Harris and Michael Cyril Creighton.

The domestic scenes are what I remember most, and the scenes with Erika Alexander.

Yeah, I need to check the book out - curious about what the additional story aspects were.

Jordon S OTM

“The Literary Awards” being the name of the literary awards made me howl in the theater

I really liked the cameo roles in particular from Jenn Harris and Michael Cyril Creighton.

I also thought Adam Brody turned in especially greasy work here

It was so nice to see Erika Alexander in this, however briefly

Brody’s character fake and slimy as hell (in a fun way)

Brody has been great in a bunch of stuff, fulfilling the promise that people once saw in Topher Grace.

the gesture John Ortiz kept giving Jeffrey Wright to signal to him to do a stereotypical black voice was killing me

“I’m glad she’s not white.”

John Ortiz was so funny as the agent. Haven't seen enough of him since Miami Vice.

it's funny that it was one of the first things I saw him in and he's so sinister as Jose Yero and then everything since he's usually the likable guy.

Rep theatre I go to took forever to book this, but finally saw it today. Liked it much better than I anticipated from the trailer I saw half-a-dozen times. I'd take out maybe five minutes, most of which I think they worked into the trailer.

As others have pointed out, the family stuff is very good. Was sorry that Tracee Ellis Ross was written out so quickly, though I get the dramatic function of that--her scenes with Jeffrey Wright are a highlight, especially her corny legal joke. Many supporting performances I enjoyed: Sterling K. Brown, John Ortiz, Erika Alexander, Adam Brody. (Seeing Patrick Fischler in anything always makes me laugh--David Lynch for most people, Mad Men's Jimmy Barrett for me.) I didn't like Wright in those terrible Wes Anderson films--I'll blame Anderson--but he deserves the accolades here.

Even the broad satire, my least favourite part of the film, was salvaged at the end. (The ending they settle on reminded me of The Player.) The conversation between Monk and Sinatra Golden took an obvious question--Monk's question--and handled it well. You'd have to actually read the two novels to decide how credible Golden's response is, but just as a theoretical rebuttal, it worked fine. (And led to one of my favorite lines in the film: the way the other judge, rejoining them, said, "So--what are we talking about here?")

When Monk sits down and starts writing his novel, I thought he'd already decided he was doing it for the money to take care of his mom--I didn't expect him to tell his agent it was meant as a middle-finger joke. (Maybe subconsciously it was both.) I guess you're supposed to suspend disbelief as to how quickly he writes it--unless I missed something, in a single sitting it seemed.

The one guy from the publishing house who joins in on the calls (2:10 in the trailer above) struck me almost as over-the-top of a caricature as Mickey Rooney in Breakfast in Tiffany's--has that gotten any comment? Is it okay because he's balanced by Sterling K. Brown's performance?

Overall, I'd put it in there with Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest as my runners-up to Past Lives among AA nominees.

Assuming you are talking about Michael Cyril Creighton, I don't think that's a caricature? I only know of him otherwise from Only Murders in the Building and he's pretty much got the same delivery there.

Long profile of Percival Everett in this week's New Yorker (Cord Jefferson surprisingly didn't mention him last night when accepting Best Adapted Screenplay).

I checked the novel out of the library this morning.

The one guy from the publishing house who joins in on the calls (2:10 in the trailer above) struck me almost as over-the-top of a caricature as Mickey Rooney in Breakfast in Tiffany's--has that gotten any comment? Is it okay because he's balanced by Sterling K. Brown's performance?

I see what you're saying, but I've seen Michael Cyril Creighton in enough other things (most recently Only Murders in the Building) that it didn't strike me as that different from his usual persona. (I suppose it is different from his role in Spotlight.) Also, Mickey Rooney wasn't actually Japanese IRL.

(xp I see Jon has covered this)

Yes, a gay actor playing a gay type is by many measures removed from what Mickey Rooney did (or was asked to do) in Tiffany's

Fair enough--I don't know the actor.

I don't think I'll be the only straight person who reacts that way to the character (if you don't know the actor). Which I realize may say more about me than the character.

I liked the book when I was a teenager but no way am I watching this.

Cord Jefferson won an Oscar for best adapted screenplay for American Fiction. It’s based on the novel Erasure, a book that eviscerates Push by Sapphire. THAT novel became the film Precious, which marked the last time a black man, Geoffrey Fletcher, won an Oscar in this category.

— Sam Sanders (@samsanders) March 11, 2024

Not actually true, though. In the 14 years since Fletcher won, John Ridley won for 12 Years a Slave, Barry Jenkins and Tarrell Alvin McRaney won for Moonlight, and Spike Lee won for BlacKkKlansman.

(Spike Lee and Kevin Willmott, I should say)

Ope!

When I realized I'd forgotten my hearing aids, I almost postponed seeing this till Wednesday. But I was there, and it's a 40-minute drive, so I took a chance. Serendipity--this theater provides captioning on Mondays when available. I was thus granted the extra entertainment of the following three or four times: "(perplexing music plays)."

I need Jaymc to check the spreadsheet and officially certify Cord as the first Oscar winner to have been at an ILX meetup. I worry there's someone who worked on a documentary or something

whoa

our own max is a friend

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bk0oF5Sl0jq/

NABISCO!!!

Didn't want to jinx it.

Wait, what?

My personal .XLS isn't great but as I recall: Cord was buddies with Gr80, and in fact his first appearance on this server was Gr80 posting to a style-blog thread to say "hey check it out, my friend was pictured on XYZ blog." At some point later Gr80 and Anna were both in NYC and there was a meetup and I'm pretty sure Cord came through with Gr80 for a bit? I'm sure dozens of writing/media people who've been on ILX know him socially in general, but it's funny to me that he did technically swing by the function

lol fgti was obv the first ILX Oscar nominee, but he didn't win :(

That is why the Oscars are Bad and Wrong, obv.

I wish the film I'd seen was stronger on showing what it's like to be upper middle-class and Black in Cape Cod than in making jokes about the insularity of white libs that were done to far better effect in Get Out.

Colson Whitehead's Sag Harbor would make a great indie movie on this theme. I haven't seen American Fiction yet, but when I read Erasure I admit to skipping a lot of it, inc. the whole of Ma Pafology (which is over a quarter of the novel), bcs it becomes clear pretty early how it's going to pan out and there's little development, as I recall.

I finished Everett's novel this morning and it's quite amusing.

Watched this tonight, I thought it was good, I appreciate everyone saying ignore the trailers. The performances are great all the way around, and there's some good dialogue, lovable characters, tangible sadnesses.

I’ve brought an Oscar winner to ILX meetups, but a non-televised category.

So...Governor's Award? Science and Technical Achievement Award? Student Academy Award?

Maybe only because of their proximity in awards season, but the tone of this, the balancing of satire with well-limned familial complexities, reminded me of Alexander Payne at his best. Also of Spike Lee and Woody Allen, I guess.

Reading the novel, I was surprised to learn that Monk's brother plays a much smaller role.

xpost I can see that. But of course Spike lacks the discipline to make a movie this chill, and directors like Payne and Allen, while capable of telling this story, would never (or could never) tell it through Black characters, which I find to be an undercurrent of its satire.

Yep, and otm about the chill — its vibe is less frenzied or fraught than any of the above. Actually surprisingly muted in tone for something that takes such broad swipes.

Also a rare case of the Oscars getting the right movie in the right slot, in the sense that it feels like a writer’s movie — not just that it’s about a writer, but is a literary adaptation written by someone who came up primarily as a writer.

middle one, jaymc.

when I read Erasure I admit to skipping a lot of it, inc. the whole of Ma Pafology (which is over a quarter of the novel

I read the whole thing, and there were a few flashes of the "real" Monk in My Pafology that I thought were interesting. His conflict over his mother and father, for one. How he constantly alienates and pushes people away. I guess the point is that even when you're writing trash, you can still put some truth into it, even by accident.

Husband and I both loved the film. I agree that the family drama bits are more compelling than the satirical bits (hey, I'm a big This Is Us fan, so watching Sterling K Brown dance with his mother is very much on my list of things I like to see), but it's also funny that the whole marketing campaign for the film hinges on the satirical element, exactly as it would in the film itself.

I've read this and The Trees. What other Percival Everett books are essential?

I Am Not Sidney Poitier is v good.

Great, I'll get that. Thanks.

Went to Brixton Library to use the photocopier and couldn't. It was full of people there to see a talk with Percival Everett

yeah was going to go to that. but it was sold out. not really that interested tbh but am keen to get his new book.

Zoomcast with a friend on American Fiction and Maestro (reverse order):

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_oeZGnXA0I

Saw this a little while ago on Netflix and enjoyed it fairly well. Enjoying Jordan's posts upthread