Tommy Wiseau’s really been riding a high since The Disaster Artist. Even though that film doesn’t portray him in an entirely positive light, there’s been renewed interest in him. And so it’s perfect timing that he happens to be headlining a new movie -a small budget Indie movie, but still a movie. Best F(r)iends is his first movie of note since his infamous 2003 cult classic The Room, and it reunites him with Greg Sestero, who wrote and produced the film (with Justin MacGregor directing). And if this movie does indeed work, it wouldn’t at all without Sestero.
Jon (Greg Sestero) is a homeless drifter in Los Angeles who happens upon a mortician called Harvey (Tommy Wiseau) who specializes in making masks for disfigured bodies. He manages to get a job as a janitor for the bizarre character and they soon become friends. However when Jon enters into a sketchy business enterprise, it has a potentially devastating impact on their relationship.
Best F(r)iends is an art film. If the title didn’t tell you that, the production values certainly do. It was made very much on the cheap, with few sets and no known actors outside of the cult status of its two leads (and Paul Scheer of all people). The movie also has a few abstract touches in its editing and framing, as well as some vague story elements. The story seems a little hackneyed on the surface and the script is definitely in need of another rewrite. However it is fascinating. Those familiar with The Disaster Artist, either the movie or book, will recognize parallels in this film to Wiseau and Sestero’s early relationship. Harvey has an unusual passion that others find off-putting, at one point Jon’s dating life gets in the way of the work he’s committed to do for Harvey, etc. They’re not overt references though (aside from a couple easter eggs, such as a scene where they juts toss a ball back and forth to each other as they talk). In fact it’s kind of clever Sestero has managed to make a distorted mirror variation of his own book. But one where he’s allowed to take some extreme liberties. Because this movie does go in some weird directions -it’s certainly unpredictable. And not all of them work. Sometimes you can feel the movie biting off more than it can chew. What mostly saves it is the fact that, unlike in The Room, all the strange choices are intentional, and the filmmakers self-aware.
And that brings me to Wiseau, who funny enough, does work in the movie. He’s still bad of course -I don’t think he’s capable of giving a good performance. But him not calling the shots makes all the difference. Sestero and MacGregor are able to use Wiseau’s unique eccentricity to the advantage of the movie, largely by writing it into the story. Apart from Jon, most characters are taken aback by his odd behaviour and manner of speaking. And the tone of the movie suits him better as well. Stuff he does that’s unsettling is conveyed as unsettling, unlike in The Room where it was played off as whimsical. His acting instructors were right in that he could potentially make a good villain, or at least a disturbing anti-hero. Wiseau’s not believable in his acting, but his personality’s at least believable in this story. Sestero is also a better actor than The Room would lead you to believe. He’s not great, but he’s at least decent in this movie. Though you don’t connect much with his character, which I think is by design. But it’s not really a mark in the films’ favour, as you’re not much invested in Jon as a person. The only other character of note is Jon’s girlfriend Traci played by a generally unconvincing Kristen Stephenson Pino.
However the movie’s problems don’t phase me a lot, largely due to its other major influence: film noir. It borrows quite a few story tropes, and techniques from the genre (as well as melodrama and even Shakespeare near the end). Jon’s character especially reminds me of any number of film noir protagonists with troubled pasts. And much like Detour, though its ostensibly not good, it has an unadulterated bare-bones appeal and a zealous, if possibly misplaced, ambition.
Something that should be known by audiences before seeing Best F(r)iends is that it’s a “Volume One”. There is a second movie coming. But rather than being a sequel for no reason, the impression is given more that this is one movie in two parts, like Christine Edzard’s Little Dorrit. Ultimately it’s not going to be as good, but it will be fascinating. Perhaps I can consolidate a more complete opinion after I see Volume Two.
I certainly am curious to see Volume Two.
Comments
Post a Comment