"Why, Erica, Why?" Summer Movie Library Series: Romance & Cigarettes

What if I was to tell you that James Gandolfini, Kate Winslet, Susan Sarandon, Mary Louise Parker, Steve Buscemi, Christopher Walken and Mandy Moore were all in one movie? (That’s 3 Oscars and countless Emmy and Golden Globe nominations and wins) Is that something you might be interested in?

Of course, it is.

We were off to a 3 for 3 start with good movies in the "Why, Erica, Why?" Summer Movie Library series. That’s pretty remarkable when you consider that there’s just no way to predict what’s going to come out of Erica’s bag when she brings a new batch home.

I was looking forward to continuing the winning streak and then (needle scratching on record sound) we watched "Romance & Cigarettes."

Written and directed by John Turturro - the terrific actor from movies like "Do the Right Thing" and "The Big Lebowski" - the movie bills itself as a "down and dirty musical" and is set among a working-class cast of characters in New York. Nick Murder (Gandolfini and, yes, that’s his character’s real name) is cheating on his wife Kitty (Sarandon) with Tula (Winslet) - his seductive and "down and dirty" mistress - and we see the resulting fallout.

To be honest, the best thing about this movie is that you can watch it with a friend and try to figure out what the WORST thing about it is. Actually, scratch that - I don’t want you to think you should watch this movie (even to make fun of it).

Let’s get back to some of the things that make this movie so horrible. Why would Turturro cast two actresses in their 40’s (Parker and Aida Turturro) to play two of Nick’s three daughters (Gandolfini is also in his 40’s and Aida Turturro played his SISTER in "The Sopranos"!). Mandy Moore is the only one of the three who looks like she could be his daughter. If the director wanted to make this situation weird, he could’ve at least had it be CONSISTENTLY weird and cast three actresses in their 40’s. Finally, why were Parker and Aida Turturro instructed to act as if they were mentally handicapped? Ugh!

Though that’s a relatively minor issue, it speaks to a much larger problem I have with the movie - the nearly-perverse waste of talent on display. I get that respected actors don’t want to do Oscar-caliber material all the time (see the all-star cast in a trifle like "Mars Attacks!") and sometimes they just want to have fun. However, if it’s not fun for the audience too, what we get is something I’ll call the "Ocean’s 12 Effect."

If you remember, "Ocean’s 12" was little more than an excuse for George Clooney and Co. to hang out in Europe and smugly celebrate how cool they are. Then again, even "Ocean’s 12" had a steady director (somewhat) guiding the way. Turturro seems content to let (encourage) his actors do whatever the hell they want, even (especially!) if it doesn’t make sense - which is probably the reason they signed on in the first place. I honestly believe gathering these actors and forming a softball team would've been a more worthwhile use of their skills.

It’s no surprise that the one cast member who really shines in this environment is Christopher Walken because Turturro basically brought him in to "do Christopher Walken" and the actor was happy to oblige. Unfortunately, the movie is basically filled with "Christopher Walkens." (And, no, I don’t mean everyone doing an impression of the man - I mean they’re acting as crazy as they possibly can.)

The highlight of the movie for me is Walken’s zany musical number to Tom Jones’ "Delilah." It would’ve been even better if I could actually clearly hear Walken singing.

Instead of having his actors sing the movie’s songs - tunes popularized by the likes of James Brown and Janis Joplin - Turturro had his actors sing ALONG to them. I hated this with the passion of 10,000 burning suns, while Erica actually preferred this method. Quick recap of our debate: I’d rather hear characters use their own voice, even if it’s kinda bad, while she thinks bad singing is simply too distracting. Call it, the "Mamma Mia Effect." (If we’d had this discussion on IM, we might have another "Great Debate" on our hands to rival our famed "Lion King vs. Toy Story Debate of 2006." But I digress.)

I still say Turturro is kind of a phony for dubbing this a "down and dirty" musical and then not letting his actors do their own singing, ESPECIALLY if they’re a little bad (what would be more "down and dirty" than that?). Look, I have no idea whether Gandolfini, Sarandon, Winslet and the rest can sing or not - and I still don’t. From an artistic and creative standpoint, this aspect of Turturro’s experiment is a waste of time, in my opinion. Then again, it’s entirely possible that Turturro has his actors sing along to these classic songs instead of performing them because it somehow saved him money in the end. (I’m not entirely sure how song licensing fees work). So he either made this disastrous artistic decision on purpose, or his production is too low rent to allow his actors to REALLY challenge themselves. Great.

Still, the worst thing about the movie is how painfully conscious it is in its quest to be offbeat and quirky. It’s like anybody who tries to be cool - you’re either cool or you’re not. Anyone who tries to consciously "act cool" comes off looking like a tool. This movie is kind of the equivalent of a tool.

If Turturro wanted to make a self-indulgent crapsterpiece (and his actor friends agree to help him) more power to him. (THAT might’ve actually been more interesting.) Unfortunately, he also tries to insert scenes of genuine emotion and drama, which turns out to be a complete waste of time since there’s no possible way we can care for any of these ridiculous characters. I’ll agree that there was a certain charm and intrigue in trying to figure out what insanity Turturro was going to throw at us next. (Gandolfini throwing Winslet into a lake = a great WTF moment). However, after a while you realize that it doesn’t really matter.

The more I think about this movie, the more I feel like it’s not even an interesting failure - it’s a tedious, self-indulgent failure. Right now I’m hoping Turturro sticks to showing us his talent in front of camera instead of behind it. (This is actually his third directorial effort.) Ok, that might have come off a little harsh. We’ll make a deal - I’ll watch another movie he directs if he agrees to get his head out of his ass.

Deal?

Romance & Cigarettes...D-