The image and reality of ‘Simone’

Dennis Piszkiewicz

If you’re trying to sell something -- for example tickets to a

movie -- it helps to have a gimmick. The gimmick in “Simone” is a

title character that the producers claim is not portrayed by a real

actress but is a computer-generated simulation.

“Simone” is writer-director Andrew Niccol’s opportunity to

satirize the movie business, celebrities, the media and fans. That’s

right, you and me. The story begins with the making of a movie within

the movie.

Director Viktor Taransky, played by Al Pacino, is about to finish

his first major film when his female star quits. As Taransky watches

his career go swirling down the toilet, a dying fan, who is a

software programmer, bequeaths to him the solution to his problem.

The fan has written a program that lets the director create the

digital image of a woman to replace the actress who abandoned him and

his film.

Nine months later, Taransky’s completed film opens with, in the

lead role, a stunning blue-eyed blond with pouting lips and perfect

teeth; but the director alone knows that she is just another

computer-generated special effect. The movie becomes a smash hit, and

Simone becomes a star.

Taransky, the director, must then deal with the consequences of

creating an international celebrity who has no existence outside a

computer. His studio wants more films starring Simone. The media

wants interviews. Her fans want to worship her in person. Taransky

scrambles to maintain his deception.

Pacino, as Taransky, gives his usual over-the-top performance,

which this time is right-on, because satire, which is at the core of

this movie, requires exaggeration. The movie’s makers would have us

believe that Simone is the creation of a platoon -- if not an army --

of digital artists. True, there are computer-manipulated images of

her, but anyone with Internet access and five minutes to spare can

learn that Simone is played by supermodel Rachel Roberts. The script

calls upon her to portray Simone as if she did not have a thought in

her head or a word on her lips that was not written for her, and that

is what she delivers.

The makers of this film would have its viewers question the

reality of celebrity. We might ask if, after having been processed

through the Hollywood publicity machine, Pacino is any more real a

person than Simone? What about Julia Roberts (not to be confused with

Rachel Roberts) or Madonna or Russell Crowe? Do they -- and other

celebrities -- have a reality independent of the roles they play or

their images as stars? And why do movie fans have a pathological need

to know about their lives?

As a satirical film, “Simone” is unnecessarily subdued. The

performances, like Pacino’s, could have been more outrageous, the

gags should have had more bite. Still, “Simone” delivers enough

laughs and food for thought to make the result worth seeing. But

don’t take the stars of the movie seriously. They are not real.

’24 Hour Party’ disjointed, annoying

Was this film the historical account of an infamous and

controversial producer Anthony Wilson (James Coogan), an elaborately

concocted scheme by the Manchester Tourism Board, or an accurate

depiction of the torrid genesis of the counter cultural phenomena of

new wave music?

It is up to the audience to decide, the director obviously had

other intentions besides plot and character development when he

conceived of this of this torrential downpour of non-sequiturs.

“24 Hour Party People” initially beguiles the audience with the

charisma and urbane, sardonic charm of Coogan and a poignant

reference to the fable of Icarus that should have served as an

allegory for the life of the unpredictable Anthony Wilson. Instead,

the introduction belies a movie that is quickly mired in a miasma of

plot diffusion and nauseating cinematography.

The pace of the movie never matches that of the music it follows.

The innovative and imaginative tunes are overshadowed by

interjections of gratuitous sex, and reproachful self-indulgence.

The candor is appreciated but the delivery is emotionally lethargic

and distinctly unappealing.

The saving grace is the inventive juxtaposition of performances by

bands such as the Sex Pistols with the debonair brilliance of Coogan.

This film, however, should have been proofread, given more thought

and guided into a more purposeful direction.

* EVAN MARMOL is Laguna Resident. he graduated from UC Irvine

with a degree in Psychology and Social Behavior.

‘Happy Times’ slow and worth it

We wanted to see this Chinese film in order to see the progress of

director Zhang Yimou, one of China’s more prominent directors. We do

like to see films by filmmakers from other countries -- especially

those with new or burgeoning film industries.

“Happy Times” is filmed in vibrant color, a signature of this

director. The screenplay is humorous and poignant but slow moving.

The story is about one man’s unsuccessful search for love by

constantly marrying and divorcing the wrong women. The last object of

his pursuit is a mean selfish woman whom he is willing to settle for

due to his low sense of self worth.

To get her consent to marry she requires a lot of money for an

elaborate wedding. He is poor but sets up a scheme to earn this money

with the help of his friends.

The shrewish fiance has a blind stepdaughter that she cares little

about and treats with distain. At her request he gives this lovely

and bright young girl work at the “Happy Time Hotel,” and when this

fails he sets her up in a fake hotel massage salon. This sham starts

out for the wrong reasons and ends up being a scheme continued out of

love.

Although slow paced, the building of trust and love is rewarding

to watch. Along the way you also smile a bit and the ending leaves

you thinking and wondering.

This film is a small but lovely gem from China. If you can, it is

worth seeing. On our scale of 1-10 we both rate it 7+. If you miss

it, put it on your “to rent” list.

* DIANE AND IGAL SILBER are Laguna Beach residents and avid film

buffs.