Runtime: 1 hour, 44 minutes
Rating: R
Director: James Franco
Quick Impressions:
My first initial impression as The Disaster Artist drew to a close was, “Tommy Wiseau had a beautiful film inside of him. He just needed someone with more talent to make it, someone who knows how to make movies.”
Then the end credits rolled, and I saw the whole movie was based on a book of the same title written by Greg Sestero (Wiseau’s collaborator then and now, played in the film by Dave Franco).
For me, that changed everything. Now I wonder, when we watch The Disaster Artist, are we really watching a (broadly) true story about the making of the so-bad-it’s-good cult classic The Room, or is the entire movie just a piece of clever myth making perpetrated on the audience by these two oddly successful hack filmmakers who have managed to get their ideas in front of James Franco?
All of these mysteries surrounding Tommy, these things that the credits are so careful to remind us that nobody knows to this day…
I mean, this isn’t a revival of Unsolved Mysteries. Tommy Wiseau isn’t dead. He wasn’t potentially abducted by aliens. He didn’t pilot a plane into the Bermuda Triangle never to return. No, Tommy is alive and well and currently still making movies and doing public appearances with the author of the book the movie is based on. So…
I’m not sure what to make of that, honestly. I’d love to know if James Franco is actually privy to these esoteric facts about Tommy Wiseau, or if he really believes in the mystery his film tries to sell to us. I’ll bet Franco is aware of the slight absurdity of the situation and finds it funny. I’m not saying it’s a joke on the audience exactly, but Franco seems like the kind of guy who would be highly aware that he’s crafting a piece of fiction that pretends to be more real than it is in order to make some kind of statement.
Let me back up and say that I’ve never liked James Franco. In fact, he’s one of a very select group of actors that I actively dislike. Over the years, it’s become even more than that. I have a positive antipathy for James Franco which has turned into a kind of dark attraction. (I don’t dislike very many people, so when I notice these feelings of disgust, intellectually, I’m always like, “Well that’s interesting. Let’s pursue that and figure it out.”)
Maybe what I dislike more is the media’s presentation of James Franco. A few years ago, everyone seemed to be asking, “Is there anything James Franco can’t do?” and the obvious answer was, “Yes.” Mere attempts to do something don’t make you an expert. Not everyone who buys climbing gear from a sporting goods store is the next Sir Edmund Hillary. Also when Franco plays the typical leading man, I don’t usually like him because he seems to have nothing behind his pretty face, and I don’t particularly like his face. (This all sounds pretty harsh, so I’m going to go ahead and say here that Franco is much more attractive and successful than I am.)
I did love him as Alien in Spring Breakers, though, and I also found his willingness to poke fun at his own image in This is the End remarkably charming. After watching this film that he directed, I’m beginning to think that I’d probably like him if I met him in real life. (Of course, I doubt he would like me since I’m coming across a bit like Mr. Darcy in his first proposal just now.)
I went to see The Disaster Artist because I’m an awards season junkie, and the film has been getting so much buzz. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t expect it to be good. The preview looked so bizarre and unappealing to me that when I heard about all the positive buzz the film was getting, I figured it had to be something special. I just couldn’t imagine what a good movie heralded by that bizarre preview would look like.
The Disaster Artist was pretty great, though, touching and funny, with elements that really resonated with me as a misunderstood creative genius (if that phrase can describe Tommy Wiseau then surely I can go ahead and claim it, too).
I’m all for James Franco getting a Best Actor nomination. As I’ve mentioned, I’m no fan. (I think I might even qualify as a hostile audience.) And I think his work in The Disaster Artist is really good.
The movie also left me dying to see The Room. Of course, I’ve heard of it, but I’ve never participated in the cult phenomenon. One more item to add to my bucket list, I guess. (Actually, I’ve never started a bucket list, so now it’s the only thing on there, which is…embarrassing.)
The Good:
It’s easy to see why James Franco might be interested in portraying Tommy Wiseau. Just as Wiseau was repeatedly told he was an ugly villain and too far outside the box to be a star, Franco has that pretty face and the right looks to play an average leading man but clearly believes his soul lies outside the box. (This is just a guess on my part, but it’s what I assumed as I watched the film.)
Franco makes a very convincing Tommy. He portrays him as someone who is genuinely weird, not someone trying to be eccentric. What seems to be key about Tommy is that he doesn’t believe he is weird. He chooses to believe he is normal. When others laugh and point fingers at him as if something is wrong with him, he refuses to acknowledge that they may be right. That simply is not an option for him. He seems unable to alter his behavior and insists that he has no desire to do so.
His frequent assertions that “human behavior” is odd and inscrutable I found really thought provoking. As I watched, my first thought was, “He’s probably right.” People do behave in absolutely bizarre and unpredictable ways. True stories are always the strangest ones. Then after the movie, I found myself wondering, “Is he autistic or otherwise non-neurotypical? Maybe to him all human behavior seems as erratic and strange as his own behavior seems to us.” My husband mentioned his accident and wondered about a potential injury causing many of his more unusual qualities. But maybe we’re trying to take Wiseau too literally. He seems more like a walking conundrum.
Franco plays this odd character fearlessly and somehow manages to make him (though incredibly weird) powerfully sympathetic.
(There was a moment when I thought, “Okay, if Alison Brie’s character were telling this story, it would be so different.” In real life, I’m sure more people would side with Alison Brie, and this definitely suggests that society, on the whole, is cruel.)
The rest of the cast is really good, too. I’ve always been a Dave Francophile. He seems so effortlessly handsome and charming. This is a really excellent performance by him, too. There’s much more depth to this character than to some of the characters he’s played.
The movie goes out of its way to show us that the relationship between Tommy and Greg is close but not sexual (as is clearly one worry of Greg’s mother, played by the always fantastic Megan Mullally who ought to know). I mean, obviously there are some borderline romantic feelings on Tommy’s end. From a distanced point of view, he pushes for greater intimacy with the nineteen-year-old Greg very quickly and naturally seems a bit predatory. I’m sure Greg’s mother worries that the unfortunately sinister-seeming Tommy has some unwholesome designs on her innocent son. (Maybe he plans to seduce him, rob him, pimp him out, sell him into slavery, murder him for sport.) As we watch, we see that Tommy is incredibly attached to Greg emotionally, which makes him irrationally jealous and possessive of him, likely because Greg is literally his only friend.
I mention this because there’s a weird vibe between Tommy and Greg throughout the film. (I don’t mean that they are sexually involved. The film makes it extremely clear that the relationship is not sexual. But Tommy views Greg as something more than just a friend (by the usual definition and boundaries of friendship). There’s an odd dynamic between Tommy and Greg throughout the film and yet never once while watching did I think about the fact that in real life, the actors playing these characters are brothers. That’s some great acting by both James and Dave Franco who make their characters very real for us.
Other standouts in the cast are Seth Rogan and Paul Scheer who play crew members on the production. I really liked Rogan’s character best. He makes him so normal and relatable, so easy to watch, so unlike Tommy and Greg who are both somewhat odd. (Tommy’s the type who makes us uncomfortable even when we like him.) I always like Seth Rogan. He has the best voice! But I’m not as familiar with Paul Scheer, so this was like a great introduction to his talent.
Even though she has a smallish part, I thought Jackie Weaver had a couple of very nice moments, too. A kind of callback joke (if you want to call it that) when she whispers something to her husband at the premiere seemed far funnier to me than it probably should have. And she gets that great little speech about what it means to be an actor.
It was sort of surreal to see Zac Efron and Josh Hutcherson in their respective roles, mainly because they were odd roles, but both actors were good.
Alison Brie’s character intrigued me because she’s practically unsympathetic, which is odd because if this were a more traditional Hollywood movie, we would almost certainly be on her side.
I think it’s awesome that Melanie Griffith is in the movie early on in light of a conversation they have later. It took me forever to place Sharon Stone. And Judd Apatow and Brian Cranston both get great cameos showing that while Tommy doesn’t fit in, the Hollywood establishment isn’t all bad (important to note if you’re hoping for Oscar recognition).
Best Scene:
My favorite scene by far is Tommy’s acting class in LA taught by Bob Odenkirk. That moment really resonated with me emotionally. What Tommy says to shame the class is so powerful and so revealing. It also pairs perfectly with a later scene at the premiere near the very end of the movie.
If someone were to ask me, “What makes The Disaster Artist so great?” I would point them to this scene. For me, it’s the reason we watch the movie and the bit of wisdom we take away with us.
(Of course, all of that is complicated by the complementary scene after the premiere. You think, Are we supposed to learn a lesson, or has Tommy learned what’s practically the opposite lesson?)
After watching the entire movie and getting some distance from it, I’m honestly not sure what that scene in the acting class is supposed to mean, but I’m positive it’s the most important scene in the movie (or at least the one I will always remember).
It’s a scene that truly humanizes Tommy and makes him shockingly relatable. He’s without question an odd person, but surely everyone can relate to being laughed at and misunderstood.
I can personally recall uncomfortable moments in my life when I’m in the company of another person (or people) and realize with dismay, “We disagree so profoundly that you will never understand me at all, let alone try to see things my way. Rather than create further conflict by engaging with you, I will leave and seek out more like-minded souls.” I get the impression that this awkward sensation is where Tommy lives, only when he attempts to seek out more like-minded souls, he doesn’t find any, not even when he spends millions of dollars trying as hard as he can. It’s very easy to see why Tommy becomes too attached to Greg. From what we can see, Greg doesn’t understand Tommy, either, but he’s the only one who wishes he did.
Best Action Sequence:
The first football scene between Tommy and Greg is very funny. Then we get a later football scene that is not funny at all. This pairing of scenes is similar to the acting class/premiere moments I just described. I suppose this movie gives us several pairs of scenes like this, similar moments separated by time and tonal differences, and shows us that whether something is funny or sad is a simple matter of perspective. I keep trying to decide if we are being urged to take control of our world by adjusting our world view, or if the entire point is something related to Tommy’s frequent and esoteric “human behavior” utterances. A lot of behavior looks erratic from the outside. We are never truly in sync with other people and can never actually understand anything. (But then if you take that second “moral,” it’s complicated by the fact that a highly contrived movie carefully suggests the idea to us.) This is a film that grows more puzzling with time (maybe it’s meant to, in order to echo the journey of The Room).
Best Scene Visually:
This movie is not about magnificent visuals. It’s pretty hard to forget the filming of the sex scene, though.
Most Oscar Worthy Moment, James Franco:
What is most memorable about Franco’s performance to me is his frequent use of Tommy’s bizarre laugh. (As I write this, I realize the greatest strength of the film is to take a misfit no one understands and make him into an “everybody knows Tommy” kind of character.)
The effevtiveness of Franco’s performance builds as the movie goes on. For instance, I love the scene when Tommy laughs at an odd moment during filming, reacting inappropriately (everyone else thinks) to a story Greg’s character has told him. But that moment builds off an earlier fantastic scene when Tommy can’t get an entrance right. And none of these on-camera hijinks would be funny (or as disturbing) if we didn’t know Tommy’s character off camera by now.
Every moment Tommy is in belongs to Tommy, and even when his behavior becomes off-putting, he retains a great deal of our sympathy. That’s why Franco is a serious contender for an Oscar.
The Negatives:
This is not your typical Hollywood movie. Well, maybe it is. It’s a movie about a guy who doesn’t fit in (in Hollywood or anywhere else) finally making his dream happen through hard work (except that to make his dream happen, he must retroactively revise his dream). So it is a variation on a pretty classic type of Hollywood movie. But if you go in expecting a typical comedy (though from James Franco, I don’t know why you would) this is not that.
The only thing that truly bothered me about the movie was the discovery that Greg Sestero himself wrote the book on which the screenplay is based. But why would that bother me so much? It’s not like any movie “based on a true story” is ever actually completely true. It’s just that now the whole film looks like one more piece of an elaborately plotted web of self promotion by Tommy Wiseau. Is Wiseau actually the mastermind he imagines himself to be, or is he a lucky idiot? The same could be asked of James Franco.
Actually that last line was a joke. Watching The Disaster Artist has given me a great deal of respect for Franco’s work. His performance is probably not perfect, but the film is awfully good. It takes a subject many may find laughable and reveals its true value, asking genuinely profound questions about the human experience. And it is also consistently funny.
Overall:
I really liked The Disaster Artist. It’s probably not for everyone. (Well, maybe it is, but good luck convincing some people to watch it. If you think they’ll be a hard sell, don’t show them the preview first.)
James Franco delivers a performance that seems a little one-note until you gradually realize that he’s giving us an entire symphony in that one note. Then you wonder, “How did he do that?”
I can see why his performance is generating so much buzz. I think he deserves an Oscar nomination for The Disaster Artist.