Adam Green in The Wrong Ferrari (Adam Green)
The first thing that one must do when they are going to watch The Wrong Ferrari is deal with the nature of the film at hand, in more ways than one. The film is available online, for free and was also shot mostly on an iPhone. In that regard it is intriguing as it tests how much the Effect of YouTube has penetrated cinema. Also, viewers should be warned as this film has not passed through the MPAA that it is thus unrated but viewer discretion is most definitely advised as it’d be next to impossible to escape a meeting with that body without receiving an NC-17. In fact, the filmmaker himself advises those under 18 not to download the film.
So what does this film have to offer aside from the technical oddity that it is for the most part a cell phone shot feature? Sadly, not much. There are many parts of this film wherein it feels like YouTube upload that sprung legs and really doesn’t know how to use them properly. Not to say the randomness and free-ness in structure of YouTube videos cannot be incorporated in longer form narratives. For example NigaHiga, one of the site’s more popular channels, does have a 25-minute Ninja story that is not irrelevant aesthetically and very funny and that’s not the longest one either. The gap between a “Long Short” and a “Short Feature” is not really that great so it’s not an impossibility for the viral aesthetic to transcend the parameters of short, disposable entertainments. There are many YouTubers who make wonderfully crafted short films, which are highly artistic. Here’s an example.
That lengthy aside is to illustrate, if one hasn’t read my Effect of YouTube article, that my mind is not closed in terms of avant garde form and content. What fails this film is nothing technical or having to do with the fact that I played this on a Mac off a file as opposed to on a DVD or TV or saw a piece of celluloid projected. So please take any technical concerns with a grain of salt as your home setup may be a contributing factor.
The film immediately started to shut me down within the first few minutes. It is very clear from the outset that a style and tone are established, however, there’s not enough consistency to it. In the opening it is established that we are going to have absurdist plot elements and dialogue coupled with over-the-top performances. While I didn’t find it funny, as much of it clearly was meant to be, there was consistency.
Then there starts to be this uncomfortable mingling of parody and philosophy. Non sequitors abound and one character will seem to be making an intelligent point and another will respond with utter nonsense which seems to be there only for comedic, shock or paradoxical effect. This happens so often it’s maddening and such that the revelation that was just commented upon is rendered meaningless by association.
It’s rather clear by the end of the film that there is a point trying to be made albeit a puerile and facile one that is rehashed and needn’t take even seventy minutes to be examined so opaquely. If it was all supposed to be a joke or if was all supposed to be seriocomic is totally lost and thus I as an audience member get somewhat lost and I was not directed properly. It’s the direction that is perhaps most lacking in this film.
Whether or not a script was ever drafted also crossed my mind, however, that’s an irrelevant because Mike Leigh improvises every film and has never had these kinds of issues.
You know you’re in for a doozie when even one of the better elements which would be the occasionally purposefully crude and infantile set piece and prop. However, it’s also somewhat incongruous and to willing to submit to such artifice it should ideally be persistent as it was in Dogville, where most if not all set pieces and props were missing throughout. If you have a nouveau neorealist approach most of the time it’s hard to suddenly accept blatantly fabricated props that break with reality.
This is the kind of film that thinks jump cuts excuse any and all continuity errors, such as an actor disappearing from frame. It’s a film whose dogged inconsistent stance makes one think it was created for a very small audience and then foisted upon the world at whole.
The acting style employed also is very, very dangerous if you have a cast that only boasts one recognizable actor, Macaulay Culkin, who while he does quite well is not the lead and is not there often enough to balance it out.
I want the reader to bear in mind that this is my polite and well-metered reaction to the film and that there were many notes I took while watching this film that were angry, virulent, profanity-laced and did I mention angry? Why angry? Because this is the kind of film that just does things because it wants to, like the random crude cardboard comic book frames and bubbles. It’s like the anti-Scott Pilgrim in that way, in that it never truly defines its world but continues to redefine it throughout.
Rather than belaboring the process more, here are the remainder of my complaints which are fit for publication:
It’s a trainwreck that seems like it won’t stop and yet you continue to watch it.
At times an Indie/foreign parody that ends up being that which they seek to mock.
I seriously debated watching the laundry that I had running during this screening.
I don’t even want to see this mocked on Rifftax because that would require me to watch it again.
It thinks it’s European but it’s just friggin’ stupid.
Pseudo-philosophical bull…feces.
I’ve seen other things with the clock constantly in my field of vision and they didn’t feel this long.
Why does this exist, in the form and length it does?
Structure was bound to be off from the start but there is no flow here whatsoever.
Doesn’t earn its ending at all though it very clearly thinks it does.
I had previously harangued Beastly as being one of the worst of the year in all likelihood. However, I will say that Beastly knew what its audience was and tried to speak to it but it just didn’t speak all that well. A lot of its problems were in the set up. Few were created in the middle. This film didn’t ever seem like it was sure about anything, except its style (if not its desired impact), but went ahead and did it anyway, whether we like it or not.
If you’re interested in seeing it, and I certainly encourage people to draw their own conclusions about films as I can only offer my opinion and experience, you can download or stream it here.
1/10
boner
May 25, 2011
1) im not trying to be mean
2) this review as as drawn out as the movie it is reviewing. be more concise.
3) i dont believe the movie was intended to be good in any single way. not saying i like it, but i think it was intended to be pointless and non-reviewable.
bernardovillela
May 25, 2011
Boner,
I appreciate that you are attempting to be constructive and don’t take it as mean and I appreciate comments and being read.
As for your second point, I believe in being thorough and know that can cause me to be verbose at times. Consider yourself forewarned that I typically hit 800 words on film reviews and, yes, I admit that was a long one but my time was thoroughly wasted and I needed to vent and make no apologies about its length or anything else I post here.
As for point three, I’ve read things that belie that sentiment like Green saying “Watch it on a big screen, with the lights out.” I grant you something can be intended to be pointless, and even so it still fails as I did not find it funny, however, nothing is “non-reviewable” or above reproach. I watched it and that was my reaction.
Bernardo
Lucy
May 31, 2011
I’m downloading it right now, and I think this movie is for fans. Devendra Banhart, Pete Doherty, and Adam Green in the same movie? Man, that’s why I’m going to watch it, I want to see some of my favourite singers acting, I don’t really care about the plot, I know I’m going to laugh because it’s them. If I wanted to see a good movie I know I shouldn’t watch this. And it’s Adam Green! Everything he does in senseless. I knew Moldy Peaches’ songs but the first time I saw him was on The Strokes’ movie, In transit, because he toured with them. I LOVE In transit because it’s The Strokes. I’m gonna like The Wrong Ferrari because it’s Adam, Pete and Devendra.
Chaplin
June 11, 2011
Open your mind to the mind fuck that it was intended to be. Every word you wrote was missing in the trajectory that the films flow was exploring and reaching. The movie was brilliant. If you had a hard time watching this I insist you watch 200 motels by frank zappa. It’s surrealist, absurdist, obscurity and that’s why Adam Green who has the balls to do something like this is a profound respected artist. Your review has no merit because the movie was written in Chinese and you can only read english.
bernardovillela
June 11, 2011
Chaplin,
If there’s one thing I resent it’s the “You didn’t get it” argument. I don’t think you read me carefully enough. I acknowledged it’s absurdity but just because something dabbles in such a milieu doesn’t mean I’ll excuse it if I dislike it and feel it didn’t work. If I didn’t “have an open mind” I likely a) wouldn’t have watched it in the first place b) wouldn’t have watched the whole thing. I believe it’s rather presumptuous of you to assume I’m narrow-minded for disliking this film when you have no frame of reference for some of the unusual films I do like as they have not been posted here. I went out of my way to discuss how technique and aesthetics were my issue but apparently that’s lost on you because God forbid we disagree. Horrors!
Film, like any other medium is subjective, and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. You’ll note someone named Lucy commented before you about why she wanted to see it, it completely contradicted a lot of what I have to say but I didn’t comment. Her feelings are valid as are yours, however, she chose not to be vengeful because I disliked this. How does my expressing my honest opinion affect yours of a film you already saw and liked? If I’m stupid because I didn’t “get this movie” the loss is mine, is it not? So what do you care what I thought? If you like it good for you. However learned one is in cinema opinions rarely change and if they do that usually comes from within. So your little diatribe won’t make me see the movie in a new light it just makes you look petty and small whether you are or not.
So perhaps you had better post angry, abusive and profanity-laced (For as much as I hated the film I did manage to keep it PG-13) tirades on some other blog. Was that English clear enough for you?
BV
Martin
July 4, 2011
I liked it a lot,like Head or 200 Motels even Uncle Meat the lp;It fits very well with films like them and it has Macaulay Culkin in it.
bernardovillela
July 5, 2011
Martin,
Thank you for reading and for expressing your difference of opinion in a couteous manner.
Cordially,
Bernardo
David Copperfield
August 27, 2011
Having met Adam Green more than once and being a fervent lover of his music, even I was thrown for a loop by this movie. Bernardo, I must agree with many of criticisms. However, there were many single lines, as references by Bernardo, that were amazingly astute observations. Again though, as Bernardo said, they were followed by absurdities making the viewer second guess whether they were purposefully written or stumbled upon serendipitously through usage of ketamine. I finish this review by saying that I personally believe ketamine to be a distasteful drug. There are many other substances that Green could have made reference to disguising his real usage. Overall though, this movie is fun if only for the fact that Green and friends definitely had a blast making it.
bernardovillela
August 27, 2011
David,
Thannk you for reading and for your thoughtful comment. In the credits there is a clear indication (or so I perceive) of the sincerity of this project, which isn’t as apparent within the film itself, which brings it back to direction. In one way I can say that Green succeeded is that no one seems to be on the fence about the film and for that I must applaud him.
Cordially,
Bernardo