New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Reason #4: Don Fellows/Patricia Ree Gilbert. We see glimpses of the other acting pairs (especially the two at the end who become the focus of Take 2 1/2) but Fellows and Gilbert log the most screen time here and rescue Greaves’ intentionally hyperbolic and unsubtle dialogue by digging into it like the trained stage actors they were, elevating their characters’ subpar Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf roundelay into something approximating poetry. Their inherent likeness also offsets the shrillness their arguing can descend into. It helps that they look like the archetypal mismatched couple of the late 1960s: square dude squarely on the side of the Man and fallen, middle-class hippie chick. Fellows went on to a distinguished career of bit parts, including turns in Raiders of the Lost Ark, Superman II, and Velvet Goldmine.

Reason #5: The running time is only 75 minutes. Greaves’ editing may be the most notable aspect of this project, as he finds a through line with a recognizable beginning, middle, and ending, kicked off by an appearance by a homeless Central Park denizen named Victor, who finds his own kind of gutter poetry. I don’t normally praise movies for their length (long or short) but this project could have easily felt interminable - and may anyway for some - and Greaves takes his experiment just about as far as it will go.

Reason #6: Good vibes (but…). From the original jazz score by Miles Davis to the sunny NYC spring to the (mostly) upbeat attitudes of Greaves and his crew, there’s something inherently reassuring in the very foundation of the film’s being. A multi-cultural crew wills an awkward and gangly experiment into being in the weeks (if I am right on the timeline) just before Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. And yet, like a fly in the ointment, the feedback that Greaves captures and slips onto the soundtrack, underneath Davis during the opening and closing credits, speaks to the dissent and protest that were a part of the time, and the lesson he hoped to impart on resisting authority figures.

Thirty-five years later, Greaves pulled a chapter two (thanks in part to the collaboration of Steve Buscemi and yet another interested party’s funding, this time Steven Soderbergh) and revisited his experiment. I only watched it once and so these are simply some cursory thoughts. I liked it less in many ways than the first one (particularly in regards to the six reasons I listed above) but I also found it to be more emotionally honest and genuinely upsetting in key moments towards the end, as it plays viciously with art vs. life and acting vs. reality. Take 2 1/2 could have easily fit in Chapter Two as it also functions on the various tactics a director can employ in making a sequel. A few examples:

#1: Give the audience more of the same. The first one-third of the 99-minute running time is made up of another “screen test” from 1968, with a different couple (a Caucasian male and an African-American woman) running the dialogue. After a brief interlude that captures the reaction of a crowd at a late ‘90s/early ‘00s screening of Take One and thoughts from the crew who are about to accompany Greaves on his latest venture…

#2: Give the audience something new. The final 45 minutes plays mercilessly with whether the actors are in character or not, revisiting their 1968 roles, and grappling with an entirely new scenario, or playing something a little closer to their real lives.

#3: Incorporate the passage of time. Shannon Baker and Audrey Henningham have aged, lived-in faces that contain great sorrow and weariness, yet also conceal smiles and warmth. The contrast of their young selves in the first half and their “now” in the second half is effective from a visceral point, but Greaves gives them a much stronger and realistically written scenario to act out, even as it reaches for maudlin notes. The actors’/characters’ anger undercuts any cheap sentiment.

#4 Interact with your original. What I take away is Greaves’ serious attempt to comment on and expound upon his original experiment with the point of view that only three decades of distance can help provide. Like his new scenario, it’s a way of opening old wounds in order to help them better heal. If it seems a lot crueler than Take One, I would agree it is. Even he is taken aback by where the final dialogue between Freddie (Baker) and Alice (Henningham) leads but all three come through the other side together.

Next time: Precursor to Pan’s Labyrinth? DVD Spine #351

Continued:       1       2       3