+ another review of The Whole Nine Yards by Jonathan Beller
WARNING: The following review contains spoilers.
The Denominator of Denial
The director of The Whole Nine Yards, Jonathan Lynn, used to
specialize in delectable mayhem disguising chilly objectivity, as
innocents driven to reluctant guile clash with Machiavellian
schemers wearily exploiting human weakness. From the British TV
series, Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister (which he also
co-wrote), to his most successful US film, My Cousin Vinnie,
Lynn has relished the unending struggle between affable goodness
and affectless pathology. The Whole Nine Yards returns to those
preoccupations via a hectically plotted script, rich in the
bizarre but rigorous logic characteristic of the Cambridge
University school of British comedy, and an oddly assorted
ensemble cast. But where Lynn once drove ice, he now spoons ice
cream.
The film's plot concerns dentist Nicholas "Oz" Ozeransky (Matthew
Perry), who recognizes his new Montreal suburbs next-door
neighbor as Jimmy "the Tulip" Tudeski (Bruce Willis), a notorious
hit man. Desperate to rid himself of his whining wife and her
mother, he accedes reluctantly to sell out Jimmy to his old
employer, Janni Gogolak (Kevin Pollack), in return for a finder's
fee that will allow him to afford a divorce. While Oz goes to
Chicago to set up the deal, his wife Sophie (Rosanna Arquette)
rats the story to Jimmy. This is Sophie's second attempt at
divorce by death, as she's losing patience with the neophyte
hitter she's already hired. Ordered by his jolly receptionist
Jill (Amanda Peet) to "get laid" on his trip, Oz in Chicago meets
and falls in love with Jimmy's estranged wife, Cynthia (Natasha
Henstridge), who just happens to tell him the secret to
liberating the $10 million dollars her husband and Gogolak crave.
Oz also finds himself embroiled in the double-dealing of
Gogolak's employee and Jimmy's friend, Frankie Figs (Michael
Clarke Duncan), and Jimmy's own plot to collect the cash.
So far, so good. It's screwball comedy crossed with that
particularly British sub-genre, the farce, complete with its
stock characters: the sluttish and shrewish older wife, the
hostile mother-in-law, the hapless suburban professional, his
amoral friend, and the nubile love interest for both. The
similarities to this hybrid form continue, as farts,
unintentional excretions, and other projectile bodily functions
occur. The script furnishes the requisite wit, and Perry's gift
for physical comedy (given far too little scope on Friends)
triggers much of the laughter. The pale-faced aplomb of his
vomiting after his first encounter with the Gogolak gang, and his
frenzied ricocheting between Willis and Duncan before taking
quivering refuge behind a spindly floor lamp produce an
unexpected emotional richness.
However, in more dramatic scenes, he lacks the robust insouciance
of classic comedy performers like Cary Grant or the very
different Billy Crystal. Instead of acting nervous, nerdy, and
needy, he is nervous, nerdy and needy, physically shrinking
into his skin, forgetting that pusillanimity requires more
presence than power. Willis smiles and slinks through his role,
recalling Robert Mitchum in his sleepy calm, while Henstridge
makes a competent stab at a role obviously written for the ghost
of Grace Kelly (or surrogate of the moment, Gwyneth Paltrow).
Duncan is the sleeper of the cast, turning a muscle-bound role
into a touching portrait of misplaced loyalty.
Competent script, competent cast, some heartfelt laughs. Why
isn't the film more likable? Classic British bedroom farce
delights audiences first by spiraling a single ill-advised action
into an accelerating avalanche of disaster and then reassures by
successfully restoring all characters into a carbon-copy of the
(heterosexual, monogamous) status quo ante. In the hands of
skillful contemporary writers like Alan Ayckbourn, Michael Frayn,
and Lynn himself (or the troubadour team that produced Monty
Python's Flying Circus), the mechanical resolution allows
heartbreak to overshadow its reassurance, if it is not disrupted
entirely. The internal logic of the drama overrides the desire
to leave an audience content.
In movies, though, when logic of plot and predilections for pat
closures clash, plot usually crumbles. The Whole Nine Yards is
no exception, though its fantasy ending (the two white male leads
paired oh-so-neatly with the two younger, also white, females)
plays out in
particularly disturbing ways. Michael Clarke Duncan, the only
African American actor in the film, exudes as Frankie an
impersonal and kindly malevolence which overshadows the slighter
Perry and complements Willis' shorter fuse. But his role in the
plot and his eventual fate finger the conservative agenda of the
movie's end.
In his buddy-to-Bruce role, Duncan lingers in the "protective
custody" of a white actor (think of Danny Glover with Mel Gibson
in the Lethal Weapon movies or Jesse L. Martin with Jerry
Orbach in the current iteration of TV's Law and Order team),
traditional for strong black actors in mixed race casts. In
character, Frankie is subordinate and unflinchingly loyal to his
alpha male mate. Racially isolated, he is also dramatically
isolated. He not only shapes up early as the person for whom no
sexual partner will appear, but he's also the only "good guy" to
die, a casualty of the fickleness of male bonding when it crosses
racial lines.
As Cynthia and Jill (now inamorata-elect to Jimmy) clean out the
$10 million bank account, Jimmy takes hostage Oz (to ensure
Cynthia's good behavior) not to the safety of the populous art
museum but to an isolated boat, aided, as usual, by the
ever-helpful Frankie. When Jimmy pulls a gun and threatens to
kill Oz, the only hurdle to his life with the lucre, he suddenly
and arbitrarily blows the laughing Frankie into the bay.
Partnership severed. And for no reason. As if registering this
wrenching violence to character and plot, the film doesn't even
try and justify the act, slipping uneasily past with limp
physical by-play and cans of beer, themselves symbolic
(respective lips to respective cans) of the clinching of a new,
and all white, male bond.
In a darkened cinema, hope, alas, triumphs over experience. Lynn
had assembled all the ingredients for a stab at subversive
closure, and this viewer was fooled for a minute. Jill suggests
that the two women run away with the money (plausible and
possible by the terms of its release), leaving the men to their
games with guns. They consider it. Jimmy could have shot Oz,
who actually did little, except gibber and drill to gain a share
of the money. Jimmy and Frankie could have sailed into the
sunset (okay, I'm a romantic in non-nuclear family terms),
poorer, wiser, but knowing more profitable bodies to kill lay
over every horizon. A tantalizing thought, but ultimately doomed
by the denominator of denial.
The pattern of eliminating difference (from non-ethnic white straightness)
runs through the whole film. Although the spattering of ethnic names
(Ozeransky, Tudeski) includes the two male leads in melting-pot North
America, neither betrays any visible marker of difference. But the
accented Sophie and Janni join Frankie Figs in oblivion, leaving $10
million dollars to the cozy suburban foursome. In his earlier work,
particularly the two Yes series, Lynn often highlighted the fragility of
the status quo and troubled his audiences, even as they laughed, by
revealing the pathologies that maintained it. Here he simply endorses it,
and them, if they fit, subscribe or aspire to non-difference. Perhaps all
audiences need comedy to reassure themselves. Perhaps all audiences need
a little wish fulfillment. But when the price is extirpation and erasure,
the price is too high.