Jul 062015
 

Brian plays Melinda his early sketch of "Lick My Love Pump."

Brian plays Melinda his early sketch of “Lick My Love Pump.”

There’s a scene early in Say Anything 2: The Healing of Brian Wilson, in which John Cusack’s Brian attempts to find the condo of his new infatuation and future wife, Melinda Ledbetter (Elizabeth Banks) by walking in circles and calling her name up to the dozen balconies overlooking the courtyard of her complex. I kept expecting Cusack to pull out a boombox and serenade his new infatuation with Peter Gabriel’s “In Your Eyes.” There were some strong scenes in Say Anything 2, when the story inexplicably strayed from the middle-aged exploits of our hero, Lloyd Dobler, and zoomed back to the 1960s, to follow a confusing parallel tale of a brilliant, troubled musician during the creation of his band’s masterpiece, Pet Sounds, but the Dobler-Ledbetter second-chance-at-love scenes, set anachronistically around the same time as the original film’s timeframe, could not have been what any fans of the original Cameron Crowe classic were expecting!

Share

  19 Responses to “Movie Review: Say Anything 2: The Healing of Brian Wilson

  1. I think you nailed it!

  2. saturnismine

    This was a fun read, Mod!

    In case it wasn’t obvious from my comments in the All-Star Jam, I thought most of the film felt contrived.

    And tell E Plurb that goes for the wrecking crew scenes as well.

  3. One minor criticism of Cusack I chose not to add in the piece but will mention in the Comments: he wouldn’t take the time to do anything with his hair or wardrobe or gestures to physically embody Brian Wilson, but he was fine with dying his hair and eyebrows jet black. I found his hair dye about as distracting as I find the dripping spirit gum in Oliver Stone’s period piece movies. Maybe he thought he was going to be playing the old Giants pitcher with the same name?

  4. I’m stunned the theater was two-thirds full. I saw the movie this last week and the theater (for the early evening showing) had 11 people in it (and my wife, son, and I were the youngest and God only knows why He had two older women in the row behind and a few seats over who’s hearing must be shot which would explain them loudly repeating dialogue to each other).

    • saturnismine

      You can be damned sure the theater down here was NOT even close to full. We felt like they were keeping the movie in the theater just for us because we had called a few days in a row just to make sure it was going to be there on the day we planned to see it. Sure enough, it’s not running this week.

    • Yes, EPG and I assumed we’d have the theater to ourselves, but that was not the case. We couldn’t even find an open area where we didn’t have to feel bad about whispering and laughing the whole way through. We had to accept feeling bad about our behavior as we sat about 4 rows from the front. We may have been the youngest people in the theater; it seemed everyone else was in their mid-60s.

    • ladymisskirroyale

      We had a decent number of people in the theater, about half full. And it’s playing on numerous screens around here. Regardless, despite the rows in front of us being empty in front and behind us, this woman came and sat one seat over from me. It totally ruined my ability to whisper comments throughout the movie.

  5. I, too, wish that Cusack had turned in the kind of performance you wished for Mr. Mod.

    On the other hand, I guess it’s not a reasonable wish. This movie undoubtedly exists for three reasons. (1) Melinda wanted it, (2) she convinced Brian to want it, (3) some backers put up a small amount of money to make it. [If Cusack did it for a paycheck he must be heavily invested in Greek debt because I can’t imagine it was much of a paycheck.]

    Those three reasons probably all needed an unrealistic portrayal of ’80s Brian. I’m not sure if Melinda is/was the looker she is in this movie. Regardless, for the rom-com aspect of this to have any credibility certain liberties had to be taken. These liberties all would tend to get Melinda’s, Brian’s, and financial backers on board.

    • She’s a good-looking woman in real life, too (as Brian is a good-looking man). I have no issue with her looks in real life or the movie – and I love looking at Elizabeth Banks. I’m fine with the need to take some liberties, but for a movie that seemed to be driven from Melinda’s role in helping Brian, I found the story to be underwhelming in terms of its portrayal of her as anything remotely three-dimensional. The movie even stopped short of doing what’s normally done in these sorts of biopics: portraying her as a “strong” woman who “loves her man out” of his psychological predicament. I guess it’s nice that they tried to make it a straightforward, sweet love story between 2 well-adjusted people, but the fact that Brian wasn’t really well-adjusted in the story or historically made it a tough sell dramatically.

      • Yeah, and you know what I recently found out – there is no such thing as a radioactive spider!

        I totally agree with you about what we would have wanted this movie to be. I was just noting that that movie probably couldn’t have been sold.

        Truth is stranger than fiction, clearly, if Melinda fell for/rescued the ’80s Brian who was under Landy’s sway. I think Brian as portrayed made for a more believable, i.e, Hollywood, movie than reality!

  6. ladymisskirroyale

    I’m giving Cusack cred in one area: his take on being on “antipsychotic drugs” (oops, that diagnosis was updated and found not to be accurate by a team of clinicians at UCLA!!!) was pretty accurate. During the Hamburger Scene” he did a good job of the dry mouth/tongue thrust/zombie stare/hunger associated with those medications. However, this is faint praise given Cusack’s generally good acting chops.

  7. […] Wilson biopic Love & Mercy, which Townsman E. Pluribus Gergely and I took in over the weekend. My overall critique appeared yesterday and is still open to discussion, but I plan on spending the rest of this week examining some of […]

  8. To aid in this week’s coverage of Love & Mercy I recommend the following article – http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/06/10/love_mercy_fact_vs_fiction_how_the_new_brian_wilson_biopic_starring_john.html

    Two key points regarding our commentary so far. Check out the side-by-side pictures of Cusack and Brian in the 1980s. Cusack looks a lot more like him than we have been giving him credit for.

    And the answer to the correct diagnosis of Brian per Melinda is “schizoaffective disorder, which is a manic depressive with auditory hallucinations.”

    • ladymisskirroyale

      Interesting photos.

      Re. the diagnostic issues, talk about splitting hairs! Schizoaffective disorder is also treated with antipsychotic drugs, but has a stronger mood component than plain ol’ schizophrenia. It also has a lousy long term prognosis, and is believed to be of questionable validity due to the difficulties differentiating it from schizophrenia and from bipolar disorder with psychotic features. Let’s just say I feel for the man and his family. That is a whole lotta heavy weight to be carrying around.

    • saturnismine

      If you think those photos of Cusack and the 80s Brian make them look alike, then I want some of what you’re smoking.

      Also, the mid-60s pompadour Brian is the wrong guy to compare with Paul Dano’s mop-top look. Brian sported the mop during his Pet Sounds period.

      I expect better from Slate.

  9. […] regulars to discuss threads outside the forum. One Townsman was content to air his objections to my movie review via private messages on Facebook, while E. Pluribus Gergely, the man who accompanied me to the […]

 
twitter facebook youtube