yearofthedog2.jpg

All the Lonely People

Year of the Dog / Jeremy C. Fox

Film Reviews | April 24, 2007 | Comments (27)


I guess you could say that all fiction, even all art, is in some way about desire, but Mike White may be unique among screenwriters in the consistency and thoroughness with which he explores yearning and the varied forms it takes. Whether it’s the adolescent sexual fantasy that possesses Buck O’Brien in Chuck and Buck; Justine’s inchoate longing for something, anything, better than her current life in The Good Girl; or, indeed, Nacho’s dream of being a famous luchador in Nacho Libre, White’s characters are compelled — obsessively, often self-destructively driven — to pursue a goal. And so it is with Peggy Spade (Molly Shannon), the protagonist of White’s latest film and directorial debut, Year of the Dog, though her ultimate goal is perhaps the most quixotic to date.

We’ve all known a Peggy or two — nice, reasonably bright, but rather mousy women who’ve arrived at middle age and somehow never found Mr. Right (Peggies always use terms like “Mr. Right”), they ease into spinsterhood by either giving up on romance entirely or maintaining an earnest, deluded belief that the man for them is perpetually “right around the corner.” They live alone in small but cute houses with a pet (often several) that they refer to as though it were a child and that receives more of their attention, energy, and adoration than most actual children do from their mothers. Peggies are loyal workers, trustworthy confidants, and devoted, self-sacrificing aunts, sisters, and daughters, but all those people who depend on a Peggy inevitably also feel sorry for them — you can’t really be happy without a man in your life, can you, Peggy?

As Year of the Dog opens, this particular Peggy is perfectly happy, thanks very much. She and her beagle puppy, Pencil, do everything together, and their relationship is happily codependent symbiotic. Indeed, Peggy’s closeness with Pencil could come off a little desperate, but Shannon’s affection for the dog is so sweet and genuine, and the beagle itself is so damn cute that even a non-dog-lover like myself can’t help thinking their relationship is pretty near ideal.

Naturally, Pencil winds up dead within the first 15 minutes, after he gets into a neighbor’s yard and ingests something deadly (Iams, perhaps?), and Peggy must find a way to go on without her constant companion. A possible solution arises when she gets an unexpected phone call from Newt Erdrich (Peter Sarsgaard), an earnest, sexually ambiguous guy from the vet’s office who’s seen how distraught she is and thinks maybe he can help by fixing her up with a new pooch. (Get the joke? Her surname is Spade, and his name is Newt Erdrich. … Get it? Spade and Newt Erdrich. Pretty silly, I know, but White gets away with this, as he does some other gags that could be howlers, because he never presses it; he just leaves it lying around in case the audience happens by and notices it. His direction, too, is flat and uninsistent, framing the actors simply, often centering them frontally, so that we have a subjective, one-on-one relationship with the characters.)

It would be sheer douchebaggery for me to reveal how the plot develops from there, as the great pleasure of White’s script is that it’s completely unpredictable from start to finish; he keeps faking us out by introducing plot elements that suggest conventional directions but never actually lead to them. (Though what’s even more remarkable is that the film’s trailer doesn’t ruin the surprises; almost all the scenes in it are from the first half-hour.) The story takes a number of turns, many of them absurdly loopy, but the script remains true to its own warped logic, and Shannon’s relatable feelings of pain, obsession, and triumph carry us along, aided by the liberal application of the Cat Stevens song “I Love My Dog.”

Though still best known for her over-the-top “SNL” characters like Mary Katherine Gallagher and Sally O’Mally, Shannon is surprisingly adept at playing this quieter tragicomic role. She allows us to laugh and cringe at Peggy’s excesses without ever making her entirely foolish and thus losing our sympathy. The people around her, though, are often far less likable, particularly Thomas McCarthy and Laura Dern as her smugly suburban brother and sister-in-law, the kind of frighteningly overzealous parents who can’t understand why everyone doesn’t want to settle down into domestic zombiehood. They’re only part of a superb supporting cast that also includes John C. Reilly as Peggy’s unfortunate next-door neighbor, Josh Pais as her irascible boss, and Regina King as her friend Layla, who’s both hilarious and relatable, though the character relies a little too heavily on racial stereotypes.

The film’s tone is a sort of melancholy earnestness. White insists that outsiders like Peggy be treated with dignity and understanding; indeed, his identification with the character seems almost total, at times to the detriment of the other characters, who can seem straw men set up to look fatuous or boorish next to her. It’s a movie, I think, that will divide audiences not only between animal-lovers and non-animal-lovers but also between optimists and cynics and between conformists and eccentrics. It’s also one of the least predictable and most humane — in every sense — movies I’ve seen so far this year.

Jeremy C. Fox is a founding critic of Pajiba and a member of the Online Film Critics Society.You may email him at jeremycfox[at]gmail.com.

ofcs.gif


Sisterhood of the Traveling Pajiba | Pajiba Love 04/24/07





Comments

I so ever wanted this movie to be good..
Thanks Jeremy! Ive missed you :*)

Posted by: Sandy at April 24, 2007 2:45 PM

I love the idea of Molly Shannon and Peter Saarsgaard. I will definitely see this movie. My dog just passed away recently, so I might have to bring tissues. Thanks for the great review.

Posted by: Rachael at April 24, 2007 2:49 PM

SO glad to read this review, SO excited to see this movie, and SO glad to see Mike White returning to form. I absolutely adore him, but after the umpteenth Jack Black Vehicle I was beginning to lose hope.

Posted by: litelysalted at April 24, 2007 3:14 PM

I really want to see this movie after reading this review, but I'll have to Netflix it, since I know I'll just be a blubbering mess once the dog dies. I'm a wuss like that, and I don't want anyone to be subjected to it!

Posted by: JKo at April 24, 2007 4:31 PM

Is it wrong that I have a lingering, fetishistic attraction to Molly Shannon? That, combined with Peter Saarsgaard's No. 3 position on my list of "If I Had To ..." guys, makes this an odd combination of "must-see" and "likely to produce discomforting mental images."

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at April 24, 2007 5:24 PM

So is she a lesbian? Or would that be a cat?

Posted by: anikitty at April 24, 2007 6:10 PM

Peter Saarsgaard's No. 3 position on my list of "If I Had To ..."

I would totally do Peter Saarsgaard, provided he was securely restrained at the time. I find him fascinating in a very odd and disturbing way.

I've never cared much for Molly Shannon's work; but in the trailer for this, she seems very real and appealing. Throw in Regina King, and my ass is in a theater seat.

Posted by: Jerce at April 24, 2007 6:54 PM

It's a movie, I think, that will divide audiences (...)between optimists and cynics and between conformists and eccentrics.

Aha! I shall know them by their reactions! This looks terrific, nice review, Jeremy.

Posted by: MJ at April 24, 2007 7:14 PM

I really want to see this movie after reading this review, but I'll have to Netflix it, since I know I'll just be a blubbering mess once the dog dies.

I'm worse -- I'll have to Netflix it, then fast-forward through all the scenes at the point where the dog dies. I might miss some plot, but I just can't take it.

Posted by: Louise at April 24, 2007 9:48 PM

Wow. I've never heard of this but now I shall have to see it. It was like this for Hard Candy, too - a flick I'd never heard of, where Pajiba's review made it stick in my head. (I watched it on the weekend, finally.)

Posted by: Sarah at April 24, 2007 9:49 PM

I would totally do Peter Saarsgaard, provided he was securely restrained at the time. I find him fascinating in a very odd and disturbing way.

Hee, Jerce. I agree with you on the fascination of Peter, although I get the feeling he's a total geek. Which is so hot. In any case, he's one of the few actors that I always enjoy seeing on screen, and I don't ever feel like I'm watching "Peter Sarsgaard portraying a character."

Posted by: Daphne at April 24, 2007 11:20 PM

Jeremy, you don't like dogs?
Wow. Harsh, man. Harsh.

Posted by: Some guy at April 25, 2007 12:02 AM

I'm with the weepers. I can't watch dogs (okay...any animals, really) die on screen. Maybe it's because I own dogs...for me it always seems more personal. Or maybe I'm a big wuss.

Posted by: bonnie at April 25, 2007 12:46 AM

Whoa! THAT'S Molly Shannon? I didn't even recognize her. When you dropped the SNL reference I stared at the picture for a good two minutes before giving up and IMDBing the movie. Still, I barely see her in that puffy, sweet person up there. I always saw Ms. Shannon as WAY more bony.

Posted by: MaliceAlice at April 25, 2007 12:53 AM

I saw this at the Phoenix Film Festival and was pleasantly surprised. I agree with the review, very unpredicatable, the trailer left you with a vision of predicatbility.

I was on the fence on if I'd sit through this screening or not; but an NPR interview with the director pushed me over the edge. Molly Shannon took a shot at acting, and not sniffing armpits or flashing granny panties.

I thought Adam Sandler in Spanglish was respectable, played a serious role, but you could still get a whim of the "old" Adam Sandler from time to time. I thought the same of Molly Shannon, just a hint of the Molly Shannon we usually think about. Respectable, not awesome, but some potential for sure.

I enjoyed it. May have waited for Netflix if not for the festival pass, but worth a look one way or another.

Posted by: Bill at April 25, 2007 1:02 AM

As much as I hated SNL in her era, I've always had a deep affection for Molly Shannon, and a suspicion that she was capable of great things. Of course, that could be a side effect of finding her remarkably attractive in a very quirky, very human, very wonderful way.

Posted by: Landon at April 25, 2007 3:40 AM

I'm I too dim becos I still can't figure out the SPADE and NEWT ERDRICH.

Help me out anyone.

Posted by: Jean at April 25, 2007 5:57 AM

'Spade' = spayed, 'NEWT ERDich' = neutered. When you remove the reproductive capabilities for popultation control.

Posted by: Meaghan at April 25, 2007 9:08 AM

While people are fessing up about Peter Saarsgard, I will confess to having rewound the scene in which he shows his whole monty in Kinsey no less than....well, let's just say a LOT of times.

Maggie Gyllenhall is one lucky lady, that's all I gots to say.

Posted by: Kathy at April 25, 2007 9:33 AM

Yup, I'm with the cover-your-eyes-when-the- dog-dies crowd. I'm a gigantic baby when it comes to things like that. But then again, my beagle sleeps under the covers in my bed, and 90% of the reason I bought my house was because it had a yard the dogs could run around in. So that probably says something about me.

Peter Saarsgaard is hands-down one of my favorite actors right now. I'm not saying I'd sleep with him, but there's definitely something electric about him. And I'm thrilled to see someone throw off the shackles of SNL sucktitude and make something good and interesting and NOT just a kick-in-the-balls movie.

Posted by: TK at April 25, 2007 9:36 AM

Meaghan, Thanks hon.

Boy I really wouldn't have figured it out.
Kinda makes sense now.

Posted by: Jean at April 25, 2007 10:09 AM

No worries Jean. I actually didn't get it until I read your comment and then it clicked for some reason.

Posted by: Meaghan at April 25, 2007 10:25 AM

wow. that's pretty much my life. except there's no "Newt Erd"...and as far as I can tell, never will be. I'm seeing this movie.

Posted by: Rebekah at April 25, 2007 10:03 PM

oh pajiba you really did me wrong this time-i saw this movie last night purely based on your review and ew! i hated it! I took my mother who already worries that her single 30 year old daughter might lead a sad life because there is no man in it and I'm pretty sure she now thinks that has to be true. this movie just made me sad.

Posted by: katie at April 26, 2007 2:02 PM

TK, you always have the best comments! Can I pajiba-marry you?? ;)

Posted by: Lauren at April 27, 2007 11:08 AM

Regina King, relying too heavily on racial stereotypes? NO! I just can't believe it!!!!

Posted by: go big red at May 18, 2007 1:29 PM

i just saw the film in mention this evening, and i loved it - it was whimsical in a sense and spoke to me more than a film usually does (which is unusual for a film studies student).

it reminded me of how i used to be filled with passion for animal rights and social activism. somewhere along the line i lost it, and the movie reminded me that it isn't a title (like "vegan") that makes the person, it's the actions and values and beliefs that do.

thank you so much jeremy for giving this film the review it deserved; that of subtlety, simplicity and honesty.

Posted by: citizen_cris at May 21, 2007 11:38 PM





Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.