Skip to main content

A Steaming Invitation

Olivia Wilde really set out to prove herself with The Invite after all of the insanity that spiraled around Don’t Worry Darling. I would argue she didn’t need to -it was the script, themes, and performance of Harry Styles that sank her last movie, which was otherwise fairly well-directed. Still, this is an industry not always kind to women behind the camera so I understand the impetus, and it is greatly fortunate that she channeled it into something of a much more drawn-back and intimate scale. Don’t Worry Darling tried to be a bigger, updated and socially-relevant variation on The Stepford Wives. The Invite traces its roots to the great domestic dramas of the same era, specifically Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? -if George and Martha’s dinner guests happened to be interested swingers.
It is actually an English remake of a 2020 Spanish comedy called The People Upstairs, adapted by Rashida Jones and Will McCormack. Wilde herself pulls double duty, starring as one-quarter of the film’s total cast, and it is certainly interesting -given the historic publicity of her personal life- that she chose to put herself at the centre of this movie fundamentally about a deteriorating relationship, regardless of its comical avenues. That is not to say it actually means anything, but Wilde is shrewd enough to know it invites a little speculation; and if it is a form of therapy it is at least a compelling and entertaining one.
Joe (Rogen) and Angela (Wilde) are a couple who have been married for many years and miserable for a recent chunk of them. Joe is a failed musician who now teaches with little fulfillment at a local conservatory whilst dealing with recurring back pain, while Angela is a former artist now stay-at-home wife and mother to their daughter Maggie. Their home is a spacious apartment that Joe inherited from his parents, where recently they have had to deal with the loud lovemaking of their new neighbours. But Angela is compelled by them and has invited them over for an elaborate dinner party to Joe’s chagrin. Pína (Penélope Cruz) is a sexologist and Hawk (Edward Norton) a retired firefighter. As Angela awkwardly tries to impress them with Joe subtly undermining her, the two keeping down the vitriolic nature of their relationship it transpires that Pína and Hawk are swingers , and in fact interested in a sexual experience with Joe and Angela.
Though it is the centrepiece of the movie’s premise and marketing, the script builds gradually towards this reveal -coming at about the hour mark- while refining the character dynamics, and both the movie’s sense of humour and drama. It is in fact much more about the chaotic relationship between Joe and Angela than it is two couples getting together for sex. Their bickering with each other, competing attitudes towards their neighbours and just the layout of the evening drives a lot of uncomfortable tension -uncomfortable in both a humourous and a severe way. Wilde and Rogen have terrific chemistry as sparring partners, trading wit and jibes and personality quirks to a natural and graceful comic rapport. Yet at the same time, beneath it all the cracks from which these little animosities grow are heavy and wounding -both actors play that not-quite-repressed despair governing a lot of their characters’ mood. And sometimes the two collide really effectively. It is funny the way Angela is embarrassed a couple times by her own presumptions -her meal doesn’t fit Pína’s dietary requirements for example- and how Joe will passive-aggressively make fun through the course of conversation, but you feel the devastation there at how Joe is so callous about it. Likewise, Angela’s habit of strutting naked past a window with a direct view out of Hawk and Pína’s place and Joe’s reaction to it are discussed with humourous awkwardness, but the sense of real hurt and betrayal to Joe is quite sharp.
Hawk and Pína’s contrastingly ideal relationship is a foil that is almost too convenient. And that is indeed the idea, as there is a certain level of disingenuousness to how they carry themselves -especially Hawk- which Joe is only too keen to pick up on. But their little niceties, pretensions, and barely concealed true motivations for accepting the invite makes for some funny, dynamic dialogue and smart comic tension. It reaches its fever pitch when the subtleties come down and the pair explain both the orgiastic source of their ruckus and ultimately their intentions towards Joe and Angela, beautifully paced to draw out the amusingly explicit descriptions and wring as much as possible out of the Rogen's bemused interest and Wilde curiosity and awe. Yet the seductive frankness of Cruz's tone here, paired with Norton's earnest satisfaction makes for a conversation dripping eroticism from its humourous context. The actors are each terrific, but while there is almost certainly some improvisation at play (especially from Rogen), it is really a triumph of the script, which for a time eases out of that tenor of conflict.
All the while Wilde’s direction is compelling -arguably showy in places, but compelling. Working with a single-space setting, she doesn't have a choice lest the film be visually tedious. To prevent this, she surrounds herself with highly talented collaborators -Yorgos Mavropsaridis, who has edited all the movies of cinema’s more famous Yorgos, Adam Newport-Berra, the Emmy-winning cinematographer for The Studio, perhaps brought on board by Rogen, and musician Devonté Hynes, whose piano score functions as perfect punctuation guiding the tone.  But it is the purpose behind Wilde's artistic and compositional choices that make them adept and interesting. The camera and framing are as much a vessel for the couple's tension as their dialogue, in which they are contrasted on opposite ends of a wide room underneath an arch subtly evocative of a wedding scene -under which Hawk and Pína are symbolically defined as well. Attention is paid to the layout of Joe and Angela's space -at once both crowded and open, Joe's office is especially cluttered. The first section of the movie features a lot of shots in which the characters are observed through reflections -mirrors and windows- and almost entirely in close or wide shots rather than more conventional mediums. It has the greater effect of forcing the audience into their intimate squabbles, the strains of a settled relationship deprived of its spark.
Ultimately this is the heart of the movie and where the climax rests rather than in anything excitingly sexual. Joe and Angela are the couple who might be recommended an orgy as a way of reigniting the life of their marriage but it is by no means a solvent, and the crux of the movie is in their reckoning with the state of their relationship fueled by various disappointments and setbacks in life. It should be noted though that more of this comes from Jack's direction than Angela's. What's striking is how honest and authentic it is, both as presented in the performances of Rogen and Wilde -each giving their best in years- and the subject matter itself, which is relatable and visceral. The adult toll of losing dreams and expectations, insecurity with one's success and status, and a toiling obligation to a relationship which has been dead for a while (and probably had a shakier foundation than assumed) purely for the sake of a child in spite of how unhealthy it is to all involved.
Amid the sex jokes, neighbourly tension, and layered conversations, this is where the movie really has some power. And it is a kind very much of a piece with Virginia Woolf for a new generation, albeit notably less vicious. The swinger aspect prove a great cushion for what might otherwise be an ordeal as miserable as Joe and Angela are, and out of it come important insights and revelations for the drama that matters (consider how both behave through the swap).Most of all though The Invite proves what Don’t Worry Darling struggled with -that Wilde is indeed a versatile director who can work wonders with the right script and collaborators.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more