It is really, really, tremendously unjust that Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was never given a wide release. Released in 2005, a lack of ability to market it led to it being rushed in and out of theatres. This has nothing to do with what I’m about to say, but it ticked me off so much because it is a film that should be widely seen. It’s distortions of genre (what I’m actually going to talk about) are nothing short of ingenious, and it’s also just a really (expletive deleted) good film. And yes, I am trying to imitate the film’s style, to no avail, and probably to the detriment of my grades (too self-referential? Almost definitely. I apologize for it in advance: it only gets worse from here-on-in. Also, if you forgot what this sentence was originally about due to this ridiculously long intrasentence parenthesis, it’s about me imitating the film), in this blog itself. And yes, I will overuse (and incorrectly use) parenthesis.
Spiritually, the film really reminded me of Robert Altman’s The Long Goodbye. Both are criminally unseen, both are comedic takes on the noir genre (or whatever noir is), and both involve tremendously incompetent protagonists. In fact, they are so much similar that I’m going to make this paragraph extraneous, and just forgot I ever brought up the previous film after this paragraph (you can skip ahead now). Without spoiling the film, the scene where Robert Downey Jr. shoots the murderer of the purple-haired girl is nearly identical to the closing of The Long Goodbye. The slapstick violence, twisting plot, and mockery of Hollywood are also key components of both films. BUT, I know, my point here is not to recommend films. Instead, it is perhaps to show how Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is a successor to a long line of films that managed to subvert genre without neccesarily being satire. And, I think, to show how Hollywood itself (Robert Altman, who would later direct the out-and-out Hollywood satire The Player, and Shane Black, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang's director and a long time screenwriter, both had experienced some of the stereotypical betrayals of a cutthroat Hollywood) forces the people who work in film to question and mock its conventions, its mores, and even the other people in Hollywood. It's interesting to see how these subversions develop over time, and how little Hollywood culture and conventions really changed over the course of 30 years (unfortunately, no clips from the film I'm referencing, which sort of makes it hard to show the obvious parallels).
Well, after two paragraphs not talking about what I should talk about, let me get down to business. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is a great example of how to subvert a genre without necessarily lampooning it. This is not an Airplane!-like film. There are real characters here, and even when their situation is played for laughs (which is often), I still felt for the characters. Perhaps it’s a tribute to Robert Downey Jr.’s acting ability that I can laugh when he accidentally shoots a man, yet simultaneously feel his rage and indignation when he purposefully shoots another. The second scene is, and I don’t mean to exaggerate, one of the best acting jobs I could imagine. Robert Downey Jr., who up until this point has essentially served in a comedic fashion, switches the film’s tone almost instantaneously from one of comedic (on my first viewing I laughed when the hitman sees him) to pure darkness. He is a moral man who commits a cold-blooded act of murder, and the switch is pitch-perfect.
It’s one hell of a balancing act, and it’s one that Kiss Kiss Bang Bang executes almost perfectly. It allows the film to out-and-out mock the noir genre (the Russian roulette scene, throwing the gun in the water, the entirety of “Gay” Perry’s character), while still employing the techniques that make the genre effective. The emotional resonance of some scenes (including when Gay Perry is shot) is amazing, especially when one considers how funny the scene right before it was. Admittedly, sometimes Shane Black's screenplay fails to work (the conclusion is a bit unsatisfying: it leaves open the romantic subplot in a manner I think is lazy, and it erases the impact of Gay Perry’s shooting. Also, the plot is still way too convoluted), but, as Some Like it Hot taught us…
Well, that joke didn’t work too well either. Let’s move on. The key to the film’s structure that allows us to simultaneously mock and submit to the noir genre is the film’s consistent breaking of the fourth wall. It’s an technique that can be used for great success (and, looking back on my blogs, I will bring up Annie Hall for the 10,000th time. Could you tell I’m a New York Jew? However, it's also a great tool for pure comedy), or can completely remove the viewer from the film. Indeed, the film can admit when it’s being lazy (the expository dialogue about the antagonist, ending the film as many times as Return of the King), and yet it can still be lazy. It’s also the assumption I tried out with this blog: concede each one of my screw ups, and try to pass them off as jokes. Hopefully, I didn’t make you forget out of the actual ideas of my post.
Oh right, the actual ideas of my post. Well, I guess it’s this. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang does an incredibly great job of subverting genre. It uses great performances and comedy to both mock and embrace the noir film. It’s hysterical, occasionally poignant, and undeniably unique. I love it, but I tried to concentrate more on how the film successfully toys with the idea of genre. I could see why some might find its self-referential nature obnoxious (for example, people who find this blog obnoxious, and trust me, I don’t blame you if you do. In fact, if you don’t, you’re just being overly generous), but I think it transcends that with simple good execution, acting and dialogue. Either that, or I have a gigantic man-crush on Robert Downey Jr. (yes).
Harry I have to say, I always find your insights interesting. Whether I agree or not, you manage to find some way to talk about these movies that is, if nothing else entertaining. You’ve done it again with Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. You’ve definitely managed to entertain me. However, I wish you had spent a little more time talking about this movie. I know that you watch a lot of movies, and that’s great, however, if a person hasn’t seen these films, your comparisons don’t really make too much sense. Plus, if this is what you’re basing your argument on, then there is certainly a bit of a hole there. I do think the few insights you made about the film are great, and it’s obvious you really liked the movie. I think we all did, and you picked out the people and moments that made us like it, and also made us all feel uncomfortable. I just wish you would spend a little more time talking about the movies we watch in class and a little less talking about the movies that you personally like. I would suggest maybe just a list at the end of your blog if you really want to make some recommendations.
ReplyDeleteWhoa! I ran out of breath just reading this post! Love the attempt to make the post's form part of your argument. And oh yea, about your argument. You have the basis of a great point here: "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang does an incredibly great job of subverting genre." BUT you don't actually give me enough in the post (beyond the man crush) to be able to agree with you. Not fair!
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the other commentors. While you don't necessarily give a lot of specific examples from the film, and spent a huge portion of your blog dedicated to style (not that its a bad thing, it definitely makes it stand out), you also took the time to hit on a lot of what made the movie such a fantastic and intelligent commentary on the noir. The movie was memorable enough that even though we watched it a week or two ago, I can think of the examples for myself. I know that it probably hurts the argument of the blog from an academic standpoint, but as far as me personally deriving meaning from the blog, it didn't hurt. I think my favorite part of your post is your mention of the breaking of the fourth wall. It really is sort of an intelligent jab at the narration present in most noir films. It was witty without being over the top or slapstick. So, all in all, I enjoyed the blog, though I can see why others might want a few more concrete examples.
ReplyDeleteI'm with David on this one. My lord, Harry, that was entertaining as hell. The style you use and the voice that comes through (and trust me, when I'm reading this in my head, it's you speaking) makes you blogs both enjoyable and memorable. I think something we forget from time to time is that while it is important to put in as much detail into a post, or any academic literature for that matter, as possible, it is equally important to remain entertaining. All of the greatest insight and examples are useless if your reader is just suffering though your text, picturing ways to hang themselves as an alternative to reading one more God-awful page (the last Metz paper anyone?).
ReplyDeleteOn that note, I thought that the examples you gave were good. Although I haven't seen many of the films you referred to, you pulled out what should be taken away from each example. So even if I haven't seen the films myself, your acknowledgement of them adds a sense of universality to you arguments.
Harry, you are a ridiculous New York Jew and your post is quite entertaining. You spin your readers about in circles just as the neo noir you describe constantly surprises and baffles the viewer.The self referential nature, while yes slightly ridiculous at times, is again a blog rendition of militarily taking the fourth wall. I only wish you had explained a bit more about the technicalities of the noir and how the film either meets or contradicts them. I too have a man crush on Robert Downey Junior and I am glad that you gave him the appropriate justice for his acting ability. I also liked the way you described the film's ability to evoke emotional response while still conveying the ridiculousness of the genre. It both exposes and mimics and I am glad you describe the film's fine play between the two approaches.
ReplyDeleteWay to go using the form of the movie as the form for your post. At first, I thought Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was making fun of the noir, but then someone corrected me in class (it was likely you, it's usually you.) I agree with you now that while the movie puts a comedic twist on the Noi, it doesn't Lampoon it. The best evidence for this is the point you make about how you can still get into the story and feel for the characters.
ReplyDeleteA really fun read Harry!
ReplyDeleteI think that your post would have been more effective as a film review. You have a lot to say about the movie that's really insightful and it also is quite entertaining. However, most of your paragraphs begin with good points of analysis of the film and slowly turn into your opinions of the film's merits. I also agree with one of the previous posters that your references to various movies are lost on many readers (including me). More clips or links would be nice to help figure out the real meaning of your allusions. Fleshing out your analysis would also improve the blog for the purpose of the class (although if you continue regular blogging I would encourage you to stick with this style). Also thought your attempt to follow some of the film's odder conventions was a little misplaced because of the difference in media.
ReplyDeletehaha, always a fun read. :) I thoroughly enjoyed the movie as well! I'm surprised you didn't mention the self-reflexiveness of the film as part of its subversion of the Noir genre. The film makes fun of every classical hollywood ploy there is, not just of movies but actually hollywood. The whole movie was highly satirical of how a hollywood movie is made. The way that writers always "plant" things that have significance, the way that hollywood agents such as Perry always rip you off, the whole obsession with "method acting" and how Harry gets discovered by complete accident, etc etc. Anyway, very interesting post! :))
ReplyDelete"Either that, or I have a gigantic man-crush on Robert Downey Jr. (yes)."
ReplyDeleteFantastic way to end a blog. Truly.