I watched Singles at age 14, well before I saw Crowe's debut, Say Anything... Me coming to love that film hinged entirely on a tape I had of soundtrack songs performed by nobodies and sold for cheap as compilations, this particular one being for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (it may have been 1 or 2 I can't remember). The song was In Your Eyes by Peter Gabriel, but for some reason was marked as Say Anything from the movie of the same name. And since the tape didn't seem to have any info on the original artists, (it may have been in the liner notes) it took ages for me to find the song after I warped the tape from constantly listening to it.
Singles seemed to be a great film when I was in high school. I even wrote a report on it senior year, the same year I finally saw Say Anything. They're relatively different films about love with similar sentiments and shots of kissing in the rain, but I went to watch Singles the other day for the first time in ages, after I'd watched Say Anything, and Singles made me cringe. So much so, I turned it off after twenty minutes, when the character Steve is talking about how he learned about sex in a satirical flashback of him in as a kid in a doctor's office mishearing sperm for the word "spam". Then I asked, how could a movie about two high school graduates discovering they're made for each other despite vastly different backgrounds be more mature than a movie about twenty somethings looking for love in the early 90s?
Fact is, I don't know, other than Crowe drew two very unique, believable teens, Lloyd and Diane, better than he did five adults, most of whom live in the same complex of single bedroom apartments. Singles is essentially a comedy with drama elements, while Say Anything poses as a romantic comedy only to slide effortlessly into dramatic territory without breaking stride. I'm not going to go into the problematic nature of Lloyd's pursuit of Diane through a 2019 lens. I've grappled with it and you have to distill what you see - Lloyd is still charming, respectful and idealistic, he does give up on Diane eventually and she's ultimately conflicted over being with him. You want them to survive the drama concerning her father. In a nutshell, Diane is the perfect student who's been coddled by her father after her parents' divorce, and she's placed her unending, implicit trust in Jim, while his drive to see her succeed is essentially sullied by him squandering money from the residents of his aged care facility. There are deleted scenes padding out this premise of Jim lying to the courts over where the money is going (a box in his house, or in items around the 9000 dollar mark, as Diane discovers), but the bulk of this story is intact and drives the drama of the film, while Diane and Lloyd's peculiar romance and courtship decorates the comedic parts. Jim's behaviour is ultimately worse than any criticism you could throw at Lloyd, who valiantly takes the high road convincing Dianne to mend ties with Jim before she leaves for England, after she swears never to speak to Jim again. Jim actively breaks up Dianne and Lloyd out of his own delusion Lloyd is no good for her; he's a professional kickboxer with no direction but who still won't buy, sell or process anything sold, bought or processed, or work in the military with his absent father. (see Lloyd's manifesto). We root for Lloyd essentially from his optimism, which is defined by Crowe as a revolutionary act. With the right sense of positivity everything will essentially work out, they basically do, at least for Lloyd and Diane, but not without major struggles brought upon them by Jim's actions.
But with Singles, the drama winds up slightly forced, culminating in Steve and Linda's roller coaster relationship that hits an unexpected pregnancy within weeks of them getting together. For the sake of cutting out too much explanation, here's that essay I wrote:
"The feature film “Singles”, produced by Cameron Crowe and Richard Hashimoto, follows the stories of five twenty-somethings living in Seattle at the the height of the grunge scene. The title reflects not only the fact four out of the five characters live in the same apartment building with single bedroom units, but the issue of dating and being single in America in the nineties.
Linda Powell, an environmentalist, has a problem with relationships in the sense that she trusts the people she becomes involved with too much and when they hurt her [so] she becomes cautious. Steve Dunn, who works for the Department of Transportation, also has a past of broken relationships, coupled with an uncertainty about dating and sex. While he wants to be cautious and focus on his work, he finds himself involved with Linda and the pair go through a rocky relationship involving pregnancy and the issue of marriage. Meanwhile, the young and somewhat naive Janet Livermore is grappling with the idea of “doing something bizarre” before she gets to twenty-five, since she believes that is when “bizarre becomes immature”. While she is confident and cheerful, she has a body-image problem and is willing to change herself for her boyfriend’s sake and not hers. Her boyfriend, Cliff Poncier, (the delusional musician who has a string of occupations including working at the coffee house Janet works at), has a more casual and somewhat sexist attitude to women, and does not appreciate Janet or respect her, while she is crazy about him and delusional to the fact he is tagging her along. Debbie Hunt also has a casual attitude about dating, and goes through men in her search for the perfect partner. While Steve and Linda seem to have a more mature idea on dating, Janet, Cliff and Debbie come across as being very immature and young in their attitudes*. Each character represents differing attitudes in the arena of dating and searching for the right person to be with, and their various stories make up the film’s content.
The film is structured to be a visual book, using elements of a documentary as well as chapter-type sections, each with a different title. The film begins with Linda’s monologue on how she ended up in her house in Seattle after leaving college. The viewer follows her story and sees how easily she places trust in Louis, a Spanish man from the university, and she is brokenhearted quicker than she falls in love with him. In the next chapter named “Have fun, stay single”, the viewer meets Steve Dunn, who also gives a monologue on his recent break up with his girlfriend and his father’s pessimistic attitude to commitment. Steve and Linda meet in a crowded club and their relationship begins from there. The viewer then meets Janet, and she tells the viewer about Cliff. These monologue explanations are used throughout the film, either with the characters regarding the viewer or through voice overs. While the stories are separate, they become intertwined as the characters learn about incidents outside their own story and they explain it to the viewer. For example, Cliff tells the viewer about Debbie meeting a man at an airport after he told her he liked her earrings. This shows Debbie’s character is still important, but she is not a major part of the film and gives a greater satirical edge to the film through her dating mishaps.
Flashbacks of Steve’s childhood and Linda’s bad dating experiences also add to the satirical nature of the film and give a visual interpretation to the viewer. Close ups are used in conversations involving two characters, to give the viewer a closer insight into how they relate to each other. This is seen when Steve and Linda are arguing over Steve’s decision not to call her for four days. Juxtaposition is also used in the chapter called “Blues for a T-shirt”, when Debbie says to Steve, “She doesn’t want you tugging at her bra strap. She wants mystery, she wants drama, she wants excitement. Believe me, I know women.” and in the next scene, Linda says to her friend Ruth, “I don’t want drama, I don’t want excitement, I just want to trust him.” This use of dramatic irony** shows the viewer the characters are still really confused about relationships and are easily conflicted by other people’s attitudes. The viewer could then relate this to incidents in their own life when they were pressured or misguided by friends.
Close ups on certain objects symbolise the memories the characters have. Steve offers Linda his garage door opener and Linda becomes disturbed by this as she offered her door opener to her last lover who the viewer met at the beginning of the film. Later on, Linda drops a plate on her kitchen floor and as she stares at the pieces, she is reminded of the time she dropped a plate in Steve’s kitchen and sentimentality takes over, causing her to go back to him. These little symbols remind the viewer also of previous incidents(*), and they get a sense of what the character’s inner thoughts are, despite these objects being trivial and unimportant to others. The montage of shots used to show the weeks Steve and Linda are together is practically identical to the montage in the feature film, “Say Anything”, also by Cameron Crowe, in which two opposite characters fall in love and go through a serious relationship similar to Steve and Linda’s.
The final scenes of the film involve Cliff and Janet’s reunion and as the shot changes to a overview of Seattle, their voices overlay the shot. Cliff asks her, “Does everybody go through this?” and Janet replies “Nah, I think just us.” At that point, various disembodied voices can be heard talking and arguing about relationships and people and these voices become intermingled, proving other people do, and always will, go through the problems the characters in the film went through. The film is essentially a comedy, but the dramatic overtones in Linda and Steve’s relationship shows the viewer the serious side of dating and adulthood in the nineties.
The feature film “Singles” is actually too polished and well acted to even be considered a mocumentary (mock-documentary), but it does accurately represent young adults’ attitudes to relationships and growing. While the characters are all considered to be adults, they grow emotionally through the film. Janet has a list on how she wants her perfect man to be, and has to cut it down to be realistic, and even then Cliff does not fit into it. Janet learns, through the plastic surgeon she visits to get breast implants, that she has to realise that Cliff may not be for her if he can not accept her, and when she does, she becomes stronger, wiser and more independent. Cliff, meanwhile, sees the error of his ways and tries to win Janet back, but to no avail. Steve and Linda convince each other they can still be friends, but Steve realises they love each other and should be together, and the two characters learn to not be afraid when it comes to trust. All the characters come under the delusion they do not need to be with people, but in actuality, they really need to be with someone, and the film is constructed to prove to the viewer Steve and Linda belong together, as do Cliff and Janet. This theme is prevalent in the film and is what makes the film realistic and completely believable. The characters each have their own believable eccentricities so the viewer can relate to them and their problems. Overall, “Singles” is a fresh and real interpretation of adults and how they change through love, friendships and life in contemporary America."
I wrote this when I was 17. I keep forgetting how much smarter I was in school. That aside, the statements above still fit, just my attitude to the movie changed seeing it through the eyes of someone now over ten years older than the characters in the film, and who has cultivated a committed and mature relationship that isn't co-dependent. Maybe the mood I was in the other day wasn't appropriate for romantic satire. It still seems that Say Anything has more relevance now than a film about Gen Xers in their 20s. You could remake both films within this current decade and the issues would still basically translate. Jim could still be embezzling money from old people or just committing fraud in general. Linda would still be an environmentalist and Steve could have a contrary job in transportation or urban renewal or whatever. Janet could still work in a coffee shop to payoff her student loans and Cliff could still be in a band, it just wouldn't be grunge, I guess. You could substitute the members of Pearl Jam for the members of My Chemical Romance or some shit. The only major difference would be the inclusion of cell phones rather than digital watches that can store "twenty numbers" and garage door openers. And maybe Lloyd would still send that letter to placate his friend Corey's romantic obsession with big love and drama, rather than a generic text or email. I'll posit here the one major thing that bugs me about Say Anything is despite us still being heavily involved in Corey's epic break up with Joe, including her deluge of songs about him and her shrine of a bedroom dedicated to her and Joe, we don't get a scene of her and Lloyd saying goodbye. She coaches him on how to deal with Diane breaking up with him, but she essentially vanishes after that. We even get an expository scene of Lloyd's "girl" friends (all three of them) discussing the infamous "second date". Lloyd kind of has guy friends, but Crowe makes sure the girls in Lloyd's life are the ones he should be listening to, not the four guys at the Gas and Sip who sit around without women "by choice". And Lloyd makes out a tape to Corey to monologue his post breakup pain. She's too integral to just be forgotten. I feel like the film is lacking this goodbye, even while Lloyd and his onscreen off screen sister Constance probably have less depth and coverage than this friendship. We're introduced to the gang, Corey's voice is the first we hear, and yet, no goodbye scene. It would be a question I'd raise to Crowe if I ever met him.
I always feel like I'm younger though watching these movies. Diane and Lloyd seem older to me, maybe because I kind of go back to a teenage state of mind watching this. But with Singles, I couldn't get my brain in that gear, I couldn't relate even when I understood the movie rather explicitly as a teenage virgin in high school, as expressed above in my ridiculously analytical essay. (If YouTube had existed back then, I probably could've started my own review channel). You get the sense Diane and Lloyd have both been through their own sexual experiences enough to know they love each other at eighteen and you believe they can make it despite the common acceptance high school romances don't always last. It's harder to picture Steve and Linda together, or even Cliff and Janet, making it to old age with the same level of love and commitment. But I think it's set up to make you wonder if they'll make it, when Diane and Lloyd are simply destined. The ding at the end of Say Anything signifies more than the disparate voiceovers leading into the credits of Singles.
So it's pretty obvious I love Say Anything more. I'm not a fan of Crowe's later films like Elizabethtown, which was an insufferable movie, and Jerry McGuire isn't that great. Vanilla Sky was too long, and I didn't see We Bought a Zoo. I had no idea about Aloha until Red Letter Media mentioned how badly it did. Almost Famous would have to be my only other favourite Crowe film, essentially being semi-autobiographical but still charming and lovable, and one I'd probably watch more often than Singles. Maybe one day I'll sit through Singles and won't cringe.
(*) I have no idea what I was planning to put against this.
*I started thinking about Singles again the other day and I just about started a whole new post saying what I said above. So I'm glad I didn't. I still can't bring myself to watch it. **Look at pretentious 17 year old me. My early university essays were about this level and did well, like I said, I feel like I was smarter and more analytical when I was in school.
But anyway, I put a headband in my hair and remembered Bridget Fonda wearing one and how I wanted her haircut and her general look, I think I even rocked a pork-pie hat at 12, I basically dressed like Blossom. Then I went to look at pictures from the film and remembered she'd been seen in public looking different. So different the Daily Mail had to write a nothing article about it and describe in detail how different she'd gotten without making disparaging remarks about her weight. And the photos they used of her from the 90s and early 2000s were all of her in a bikini or scantily clad enough to show off how thin she was, which was probably the result of the insane pressure Hollywood applied to actresses to get and stay thin. It's in such poor taste, especially when her character's body issues are played for a joke in Singles. I get why she feels inadequate, Cliff's holding her up against unrealistic body standards, which is the point, she shouldn't have to change (I love Bill Pullman's character in this, I love he's thirty... three - so OLD - and he doesn't know how to have fun. You can kind of believe he wouldn't do the surgery, which is like I think an injectable, she's not prepped she's in a fucking doctor's office in a dentist chair, but of course no real surgeon would hesitate giving her pointlessly larger tits. Them negotiating over her size is a funny scene, I like they play him as a potential love interest, but it's unrealistic). But yeah, Janet's entire character gets affected by probably one of the worst periods of unrealistic body and beauty standards we fucking suffered through. Gen Z kids are like, wait, y'all weren't fat back then. You looked normal, Britney looked normal at the VMAs, why y'all calling her fat? The "fat" girl basically looks healthy, everyone around her conventionally thin looks moderately starved. Yeah, we did that. The Kardashians were resurrecting and hyper-inflating the most disgusting body ideals, you want concrete in your ass, blame them for making it popular. Meanwhile, Bridget Fonda likely looks like this because it's worked as a reasonable disguise for the last twenty years and y'all being out there acting like she's brave for looking normal is super gross and nobody cared. I had to face my own internalised fatphobia reading this tripe, if you ever once in your life were conventionally beautiful and thin, you're not allowed to ever deviate from that. So I'm glad she did, and I think she just did it to disappear, so giving her unwanted attention is unfair. Had I seen her, I'd just let her live. (I also didn't know she married Danny Elfman. He's had some weird shit brought up about him recently).
No comments:
Post a Comment