Insignificance (1985) – Review

The Actress (Theresa Russell) demonstrates the theory of relativity to The Scientist (Michael Emil).

Like many directors who made their mark in the 1960’s and 70’s, Nicolas Roeg hit a bad streak in the 80’s. While I was a fan of BAD TIMING, it wasn’t well received by critics or the box office, and Roeg’s follow-up film, EUREKA, starring Gene Hackman as a prospector, ended up being barely released, to critical and public indifference (after rewatching it recently, it didn’t hold up for me for the most part). However, Roeg managed to recover to adapt, of all things, a play, when he took on a film version of Terry Johnson’s play INSIGNIFICANCE, and delivered yet another one of his best films.

The Ballplayer (Gary Busey) pleads with The Actress while The Scientist looks on.

As with the play, the film takes off from the famous image of Marilyn Monroe’s white dress blowing up while she’s standing over the subway grate in Billy Wilder’s THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH. Taking place over the course of one night, it imagines that Monroe (Russell), known only here as The Actress, goes to a Manhattan hotel where, as it happens, Albert Einstein (Michael Emil, brother of filmmaker Henry Jaglom), known here only as The Scientist, is staying. Einstein is in town to speak at a peace conference, though Joe McCarthy (Tony Curtis), known here only as The Senator, has other ideas; he wants Einstein to testify in front of HUAC and denounce communism. Meanwhile, Monroe’s ex-husband, Joe DiMaggio (Gary Busey), known here only as The Ballplayer, just wants Monroe to come back to him, but acts crazy jealous around anyone who shows interest in her (we first see him watching and seething during the recreation of that famous shot from Wilder’s film). Monroe, on the other hand, just wants to discuss with Einstein the theory of relativity, the creation and meaning of the universe, and other matters of, well, insignificance.

The Senator (Tony Curtis).

The main subject of Johnson’s story seems to be celebrity, in particular how a public persona can often hide what’s really underneath. Roeg’s contribution to this was, as usual, to show people’s pasts through flashbacks, from Monroe in auditions being ogled by talent agents to Einstein in war-torn Europe, to DiMaggio as a young player and McCarthy as an altar boy. And what the characters talk about, particularly when Monroe is demonstrating the theory of relativity to Einstein, is the clearest way of illustrating the huge gap between what we think we know and what we actually know, whether about the theory of relativity (Monroe admits while she can explain it, she doesn’t really understand it) or about a person in general (McCarthy thinks he can get Einstein to testify simply by either appealing to his intellect or by bullying him, while DiMaggio thinks if he cajoles Monroe enough, he’ll get her to come back to him. Both of them are wrong). And despite the fact most of this (except for the scene recreation and the flashbacks) is set in the hotel room and hallways, Roeg, Lawson, and cinematographer Peter Hannan (who shot, among other films, MONTY PYTHON’S THE MEANING OF LIFE and WITHNAIL & I) never make it seem stagy.

Because the characters are not really DiMaggio, Einstein, McCarthy and Monroe, the actors are a little more free to play around with the material. Busey, for example, may seem at first to be too energetic and mercurial to play the notoriously aloof DiMaggio, but he carries himself like an ex-athlete, and makes that manic nature work for him as someone who doesn’t like the fact the world no longer acts the way it should now he’s retired. I’m not familiar with Emil’s other work as an actor (I’m not a fan of Jaglom’s films, in which Emil was a regular), but he captures both Einstein’s intellect and his sadness that the world was becoming something more horrible than he imagined. Curtis gives one of his best performances as McCarthy, re-imagining him as if Sidney Falco hadn’t been killed, but had gone on to outdo J.J. Hunsecker in fake charm, intimidation and manipulation, though showing the sweat much more. Finally, while Russell may be nobody’s idea of Monroe, and comes off as a little too affected at first, gradually I warmed up to that once I realized her conception of Monroe was of someone aware of the affectation but resigned to it nonetheless even as she struggled to break free of it. For the movie, Roeg and Johnson added an elevator operator played by Will Sampson who claims Einstein is part Cherokee – meaning he has a deeper understanding of the world than anyone else – and that comes off as borderline patronizing (though Sampson at least plays the part well). And some of the scenes drag at times. Still, overall, INSIGNIFICANCE serves as an entertaining meditation on our knowledge of the world, or lack thereof.

Reel 69: When Icons Meet

In a way, this episode is an unofficial third in our recent series of fairy tales, in the sense that it depicts a couple of “What if?” scenarios, except this time around we’re using people who really existed. First up is Insignificance, from 1985, and then it’s One Night In Miami… from 2020. Interestingly, both films involve four famous people and take place largely in a hotel room, and they’re also based on stage plays. So: a lot of commonality going on here.

In Insignificance, we get four characters identified only as The Professor, The Actress, The Senator and The Ballplayer, but it’s pretty clear that they’re meant to be thinly disguised versions of Albert Einstein, Marilyn Monroe, Joseph McCarthy and Joe DiMaggio.

Our four characters interact in ways that are at different times frightening, outrageous, charming and endearing. It’s an interesting take on power, fame, and knowledge, and how they can be simultaneously good and bad.

In Part 2 of our episode we’re looking at One Night in Miami… (2020), directed by Regina King.  In this film, it’s clearly spelled out that we’re watching Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali (still in his Cassius Clay days), Jim Brown and Sam Cooke. The four of them come together in early 1964 and spend a rather contentious evening together discussing their roles in the Civil Rights Movement of that era. The evening ends abruptly when they discover that the press has gotten wind of the meeting.

Side Note: One Night in Miami… was produced by Amazon Studios. Doesn’t their opening logo make you think of the intro to Game of Thrones? Or is that just me?

COMING ATTRACTIONS: 

In our next episode, we’re looking at a couple of films that depict Love During Wartime. We’ll start with The Unbearable Lightness of Being, from 1988, and move on to  Cold War from 2018. Join us, won’t you?

Reel 53: Only Disconnect

Sean and I individually thought for a long time about what a good title for this episode might be. We’d informally called it “Personalities,” but that was too bland. We kicked around “Mind F**ks” but we like being family-friendly, mostly. There were a few others, and as publication time approached, I was afraid we weren’t going to come up with anything we liked.

I don’t know if I like “Only Disconnect,” to be honest, but it was simultaneously a little bit clever and tied in well with an upcoming episode, which is titled “Only Connect”. And I think it does work with this episode’s films.

We have a couple of films this time around wherein characters’ personalities change in surprising ways. And the way they ultimately behave as a result of those changes comes as a surprise (we think) in both films.

First, we examine Ingmar Bergman’s Persona from 1966. Persona stars Bibi Andersson and Liv Ullmann as a nurse and her patient. They find themselves isolated at a beach house for several weeks. It’s meant to be therapeutic, but what that means becomes murkier as the film progresses.

From there we go to 1970 and Performance, written by Donald Cammell and directed by Cammell and Nicolas Roeg. It stars James Fox and Mick Jagger in his film debut (though Ned Kelly was released first), along with Anita Pallenberg and Michèle Breton as a foursome who find themselves in a world of drugs and sex and shattered minds. I guarantee that you will not see the last 15 minutes of this film coming, so even more than usual we should warn you to see this one before listening to the episode, but beware: it’s not for the squeamish. And we should note that while we don’t use explicit language during this episode, we do discuss some rather mature themes throughout.

COMING ATTRACTIONS: 

In Episode 54 we go to France and review two movies that have crime at their center. From 1960, it’s Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless, followed by Le Cercle Rouge, from 1970 and directed by Jean-Pierre Melville. We spend perhaps more time than necessary musing on the ending to Breathless. Come join us in the confusion.