07/03/2002 Entry:
"Three Kings - David O'Russell (1999) + DVD commentaries"

So I recently made the decision that watching films for the first time on the train was a losing proposition. Too many times after watching something, I would say to myself, "Man, I wish I had waited to watch that." This will reduce my number of films seen, but raise the viewing experience. At least, I hope so. However, decided I don't have a problem watching things I've already seen before, which gives me a chance to revisit some things and catch up on commentaries and bonus materials. Last weekend I was in Pittsburgh for a pinball tournament, and while there I visited a used DVD store and picked up a copy of David O'Russell's virtuoso masterpiece Three Kings.

I hadn't seen the film since it was first released, and had forgotten how great it was. O'Russell uses all the tricks at his disposal to pull the greatest possible impact out of this story. Jump cuts in many spots heighten the intensely fragmented mood flowing throughout most of the participants. In many places, whip pans or simple one camera handheld setups heighten the gritty realistic feel, giving it a journalistic feeling rather than a cinematic one.

The musical score is also used very well to set the mood. One of the film's earliest scene uses Rare Earth's "I Just Want To Celebrate" as soldiers party on. The scene is almost overwhelmingly jubilant, combining the music with quick cuts of soldiers dancing and literally screaming their heads off. The other noteworthy musical choice is The Beach Boy's "I Get Around," used when the team heads into an Iraqi village with the intent of stealing their gold. The scene is a sharp contrast between the fun on the beach feeling usually associated with this music. Although we still have lots of sun and sand here, we're a long way from the beach and there are no bikinis in sight. The whole mood is completely disconcerting and offputting, as well it should be. This totally jarring music, combined with the frenetic energy of the cutting and shooting style, gives the entire first half an amazing energy.

By far, the most significant factor in setting the film's mood is the choice of film stocks. For all of the scenes out in the desert, O'Russell shot on Ektachrome still photography film. The resulting negative is grainy, the colors are vivid yet washed out, and the contrast is jarring. In many scenes, the highlights on the actors' faces are so blown out that you would think half their head was gone. Many scenes also used a bleach bypass process - this leaves extra silver on the negative during processing which serves to increase gain and contrast. I saw this right before and again right after I saw Minority Report, and there is a real similarity in style there. Both films have that high grain washed out look, although I know they were both shot by two different people (Newton Thomas Sigel and Janusz Kaminski respectively.) I think it really works here whereas I thought it was less effective in Minority Report. The washed out/blown out look really makes you feel like you're in the middle of the desert. Much has been made of the way the film treats violence, and I have little to add to that except that it works really well and the whole whip pan to zoom thing during the big shootout is great.

The film suffers a pretty extreme mood change heading into the second half as the team returns to the village to loot the bunker they discovered they missed. There is an amazing shot here, after the Iraqi mother is killed. The husband and his daughter are kneeling by the woman's side grieving, and its this low level shot with the two main people really close to this wide angle lens. Their proximity to this wide lens really maximizes the sense of isolation between them and the people surrounding them looking down as they grieve. Its like they're all alone in the world even though all these other people are around, and its supremely effective.

Even in the second half, as the mood gets more serious and the film's political message starts to get more play, there is still lots of absurd humor and just surreal moments. Notably the scene where everyone gets gassed. These mysterious figures with their long-nosed gas masks are completely otherworldly almost floating through the mist.

I haven't quite gone through all the bonus materials yet, but I have listened to both the commentaries. The first, by David O'Russell is fantastic, with a perfect mix of technical film geek information and interesting or funny stories. He really breaks down the shootout scene from a technical as well as a conceptial standpoint - what his intentions were in approaching the scene a certain way.

One thing he says at some point is that if he were to redo the movie today, he would give it a more unified tone, which I can't really agree with. Its the whole combination of satire, action and drama (sometimes all within the same scene) that really makes the movie work. It makes the whole proceeding more real, less staged. He himself talks about this at a different point - the scenes where we're crosscutting between Wahlberg being taken prisoner, Clooney and the other joining the rebels, and the reporter searching after everyone. You're juggling all these moods and zooming back and forth between them, its so disconcerting but it really should be. The whole film is about these guys questioning themselves, changing their attitudes, constantly getting many of their basic assumptions shattered and reversed. Without the jarring mood shifts, I don't think any individual piece would have been as effective.

However, one change he did mention is doing away with the U2 score at the end, which I totally agree with. Its just a little too on the nose. The whole "kaching" sound effect on the title about the gold being returned was way too much as well.

The other commentary is by producers Charles Roden and Ed cDonnell. I really didn't expect much form this commentary but it was actually quite enlightening. It was interesting to hear comments that were kind of a step removed from the actual shoot. They talk about the casting and preproduction process at great length, which is something you usually don't hear too much about in commentaries (since they're usually actors and directors they usually stick to the shooting.) They get into the whole juggling act of budget and schedule too, and while in some ways its no fun getting into those details, in other ways its totally illuminating since any filmmaker is going to face that juggling act at some point.

One other interesting point they made, was that they put forth the theory that filmmaking is moving more towards being a writer's medium rather than a director's medium. Tha writers now have more control than in the past. It would be nice if this was true, but it flies in the face of basically everything else I've heard on the subject. Although they talk a little about writer-directors, and in that sense I can see it a little more, because as a writer-director you have more control over more pieces of the film. They also point out that since so many more writers and directors are independent now, not being beholden to one studio, they have more freedom and power to pick and choose where they want to work (although given the number of writers and directors out there compared to the number of studios, I think this is a little disingenuous.) Somaybe they have a point, look at me like I know any better.