American Splendor

source: American Splendor

Perhaps I don't fully appreciate the nuance and brilliance of this flick, but to come on this site and read the comments about it makes me wonder what film other saw that I didn't. The one I watched was a biography of a loser guy who was not only uninteresting but actually crotchety and basically a schmuck. Somehow, he has managed to get his biography turned into a movie - incredible as that is, it's true. And, yes, Paul Giamatti's portrayal was very accurate -- he too was a disagreeable and unlikeable character. So that makes this movie a winner?!? To me it was a waste of two hours. Reading the reviews here I think have made me like it even less.

My main beef with this movies lies not so much in the execution but in it's subject matter. The subject being Harvey Pekar who writes comics about true to life situations which is just a positive way at looking at someone with no imagination. The movie does for it's part use a lot of good post modern jumping between reality and film reality as was perfectly executed in Adaptation, but at this point the subject matter jumps in and ruins the movie by turning into a two hour festival of complaining by a man who is unwilling to change because he believes the world should warp nicely around his egocentric cynical little view of the world. But wait, he's diffrent from others because he listens to music other people don't listen to and he reads comics and he observes situations diffrently and blah blah blah. He's honest. This man is not honest. In the age of cynicism and irony I think my generation has lost the ability to tell cynicism and honesty apart. Somebody needs to threaten Harvey Pekar's existence and hopefully that will bring him to life, otherwise he should do himself, society, the world, and Charles Darwin a favor and off himself.

After reading comments and checking the ratings for this movie I decided to give it a shot. I can say that i have never been so disappointed in a movie, it's a very slow movie that never really takes off and honestly I don't get why it's regarded to be a comedy. I could just as well just start following any guy on the street and probably see more interesting things.

I hated hated HATED this movie. I would have sooner spent my two hours finding interesting ways to destroy the DVD. I hate "hipster" movies like this. Okay okay. I realize there might be some Harvey Pekar fans out there, but what was so great about him? He couldn't draw comics, and all he did was relay his boring life in stick figures for others to illustrate. And his observations were about as funny to me as Bizarro (i.e. not at all). This was painful. Painful to watch. Painful to listen to. Painful to experience. And it got worse. *****SPOILER WARNING (ALTHOUGH YOU'LL BE SPARING YOURSELF THE TORTURE IF YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND READ THIS SPOILER)***** He got ball cancer. And the movie turns into a standard sentimentalized ball cancer story - the exact thing Mr. Pekar has been railing against since the beginning of the movie! ARGH! Unfortunately for me, the character doesn't die. He survives ball cancer, and he and his wife make a graphic novel out of it called, Our Cancer Year. Granted this is obviously where Tom Green got the idea to do his MTV special about his ball removal, but Tom Green was married to Drew Barrymore and did outrageous stuff on his TV show (especially to his parents) that actually made me laugh. This Harvey Pekar guy was basically a sad sack loser who got a movie made about him that a bunch of hipsters lauded with critical praise and now I'm forced to suffer through it because of their misconception of what a good movie is. Oh and I hate R. Crumb too, so I won't be seeing that documentary about him either. I think the straw hat is what makes me hate him most. No one wears straw hats unless they're in a revival of The Music Man. You're only wearing it to draw attention to yourself.

Where to start, or finish for that matter. I only watched this dog of a movie because of recommendations from this site, hopefully I'll spare someone from sitting through this movie expecting something, anything, of even mild interest, happening. This movie in a nutshell: The life of an ordinary, boring nobody who does very little in his life except appear on the Letterman show, purportedly because he writes (he can't draw beyond stick figures) comic books, but he's only invited on the show so that Letterman can goof on him without him being in on the joke. The only thing that makes the main character different from the millions of similarly eccentric people you'd find in NYC any day of the week, is that he's not from New York. There is little or no character development, the scenes are unnecessarily long where they should be short, and cut short where more development of plot line is needed. The subject of this film is so interesting, if you stripped away the window dressing and got down to the meat of the subject, you could sum up this guys whole life with a 15 minute skit, including credits. A more honest title for this movie would have been "Total Loser Gets Own Movie." With so many good movies out there, and so little spare time, don't waste any of yours on this movie.

I'm sorry, but I just saw this movie this week on cable, and went out and bought the DVD immediately thereafter. I have since watched it about 15 times, so far. I'm not a comic book fan (at all), and I've never heard of Harvey Pekar (though perhaps vaguely remember his appearances on David Letterman, since seeing this film). Giamatti's performance alone is worth the time in watching this film. I don't think anything Brando, Pacino, or DeNiro has done, to name a few, compares to what Giamatti pulls off in this film. And with that said, perhaps I'm still too new and enthusiastic a viewer to be reviewing his performance. However, PG's every nuance, from his eyebrow twitches and raises, to the shrug of his shoulders, to his speech pattern, to the manner in which he says "OK, OK" early on to his doctor when he's getting his throat checked to his walk...EVERYTHING is just so wonderfully "channeled". He offers such a natural character, and whether or not he is Pekar spot on, I don't know. However, he created his own wonderful big little character. (The scene in which he is talking to Joyce (Hope Davis' character) on the phone, urging her to meet him in Cleveland, is quietly hysterical). Hope Davis was also great, and it's amazing how much her natural voice and speech pattern resemble that of Pekar's wife. Full of laughs and pathos, in addition to wonderful jazz scores (I haven't checked if there's a soundtrack for the film...I hope that there is one)....this is a must-see film...absolutely brilliant! I don't even know if P. Giamatti was nominated for his performance, but he should have won every award that year, including the Oscar (or at least tie with Sean Penn). I know I have spent all this time commenting on just the two main characters, because they are both so breathtakingly brilliant in their interpretations. Therefore, I'll offer a note about the film overall as well. First, the film is brilliantly executed. Combining both actors and original screenplay material along with some real-life footage of Harvey Pekar himself was very inventive. And, the use of this approach never bordered on being "cutesy" or clever, as Pekar's perspective and ongoing commentary truly validates the entire film. As I mentioned before, P. Giamatti seems to inhabit Pekar....and provides a very endearing portrait in the process. I have for so many years far preferred quieter, character-driven films, which happen to typically fall within the "indie" category. This film has simply solidified my love for character-driven stories. It is insightful, very droll, and full of pathos. I am now even contemplating subscribing to the comic book "American Splendor", and I am someone who ABSOLUTELY ABHORS all forms of animation. I particularly despise animated films, and only read "Cathy", "Dilbert", and "Doonesbury" from the strips. However, I might just start subscribing to "American Splendor". Because I missed this film when it first came out, I am not certain how large an audience it originally attracted, quite frankly. However, watching it has made me shun, just a little bit more, larger, Hollywood productions, including typical, cookie-cutter romantic comedies (as for another mass-produced Hollywood genre....action/adventure films...I've always hated them and never watch them). I won't turn into a snob and completely shun all Hollywood films, but there certainly is something to be said for quiet, thoughtful pieces that are accompanied by a refreshingly wonderful jazz soundtrack (too many films today appear to have been written around x number of popular songs...it can be quite annoying). As for this film, it's a treasure. Please rent it and ENJOY!

12/18/03 It is said that every life has a story. Harvey Pekar's life is the exception that proves the rule (whatever that dumb homily means). AMERICAN SPLENDOR is a truly tedious and boring 101 minute movie about a guy, his wife and his friends, none of whom I would want to spend ten minutes with outside of the movie theater. Okay, I've said enough already.

Harvey Pekar is a filing clerk at his local hospital; he is miserable; he is on his way out of a second terrible marriage and his only interests are collecting second hand records, reading and listening to jazz. However a chance meeting with aspiring cartoonist Robert Crumb turns him on to the ability of comic books as an art form. Crumbs later success inspires Harvey to write a different type of comic – one based on his own life, chronicling the dreary and absurd moments of his days and life. As his down to earth portrayal of working class reality starts to generate a cult following, Harvey finds a new wife and greater fame – but actual happiness? Well, that's a different story. I have never read any of Pekar's comics and, to be honest, have little interest in the world of comics because I am consistently put off by the price of them for what you get (I'm a Batman fan but local prices for very thin comics are too high for me to start it as a habit). Despite this I was attracted to this film by it being different and offering me an interesting choice of leading man in Giamatti, but, given the very non-blockbuster appeal of the film, it was barely had any time in my local cinema and I missed it there and had to catch it on DVD. When I sat to watch it I was immediately taken in by the design of the film – the comic book opening and, more importantly, the narration and candid footage of the real Pekar (and others). This gives the film a much more interesting appeal because, although we don't know him, we get the total feeling that this is a real person we are seeing – and indeed he is. Not having read the comic itself I can only go off what the film and other reviewers have told me they are like and, from that understanding, I feel that the film is stronger for having basically the same strengths as the comic. That is to say, it is very down to earth and gritty, without sparkling scenes or flowery dialogue but with a simple wit to the weird collection of characters. This warts and all presentation is moved forward by a pretty good narration from Pekar but the ultimate strength of the film is its collection of characters – like the comic, they are the story of Pekar's life and they are the heart of the film. It is hard to describe but the collection of bitterness, psychosis's, nerds and other weirdoes makes for a good film that is interesting, humorous and, most effectively, true. Giamatti is not leading man material but here he shows that he is more that the comic relief and he delivers a really good performance throughout – not even letting the presence of the real Pekar put him off his stride. Pekar himself is also good – very easy to listen to but also unhappy and not the sort of person you talk to at work. The support cast is also pretty strong and features all manner of minor characters that make the film add up to greater than the sum of its parts. Like I said, it is hard to pigeonhole this film and the cast but it seems to work and even people who have never heard of Pekar (ie – me) will be able to enjoy it. Overall a very different film about a strange little man who managed to get much more success than he ever though possible but yet never let it change his unhappy and normal ways. It is amusing, cleverly structured and populated with ordinary weirdoes who make it fun to watch. Kudo to the director for getting the uninitiated into the film with such ease and managing to produce a film that is surprisingly weird to find in a multiplex but one that is strangely accessible to most people.

In `American Splendor,' Paul Giamatti plays Harvey Pekar, the comic book creator who became famous as a recurring guest on the David Letterman Show. A resident of Cleveland, Pekar was a socially backward man who found he had the talent to translate the pain, loneliness and frustration of his own unhappy life into universal truths, writing material that other artists would then illustrate in comic book form. He began a series entitled `American Splendor,' which was really an ongoing autobiographical narrative, drawing on people and events in his own life as his source of inspiration. The film, a pseudo-documentary of sorts, tells his life story by cutting back and forth between both staged reenactments of the events in the stories and interviews with Pekar himself commenting on those events. `American Splendor' is an offbeat little gem that, in many ways, approximates the look and style of a comic book. As the story plays itself out, captions often appear on the screen, as well as illustrations from Pekar's actual work based on the scene we are witnessing. Robert Pulcini and Sheri Springer Berman, who wrote and directed the film together, create a surrealistic tone by having Pekar and his real friends and companions frequently appear on screen next to the actors who are portraying them (some of them dead ringers for the originals). This technique brings a homespun, homey sweetness to the film. `American Splendor' is a paean to all the social misfits in the world, people who, for whatever reason, can't seem to fit into society's prescribed mold but who often develop strong, meaningful bonds with similar individuals. The movie is also a tribute to the power of art, both for the artist who finds purpose and release through his work and for those to whom his work speaks on a personal and emotional level. The people who inhabit Pekar's strange world – both in reality and within the borders of his comic strip boxes – are seen in the film as warm, good-natured individuals, not socially astute, perhaps, but not losers either. The emotional focal point for the film is Harvey's relationship with his wife, Joyce, beautifully played by Hope Davis. Despite the somewhat bizarre nature of their marriage, Harvey and Joyce forge a lasting commitment based on reciprocity and devotion. In fact, in the latter sections, the film achieves an emotional depth one doesn't expect it to early on, partly because Harvey is dealt a cruel blow of fate that he and his wife are forced to navigate through together. Yet, the film as a whole is filled with a sly, deadpan, mischievous sense of humor that demonstrates a keen grasp of the absurdities of life. As Pekar, Paul Giametti turns in a flawless performance, capturing the nebbishness, cantankerousness and ultimate likeability of the man he is portraying. In both style and content, `American Splendor' is aptly named.