Sunday, May 25, 2008

Helvetica (2007) and Wordplay (2006)

I have been talking up a storm about Helvetica, so it donned on me while watching Wordplay recently that these movies might make a good pair to write about. Both films incite those two bugging questions: "How can someone make a full-length movie on something so minuscule?" and "Who would watch such a movie?"

Helvetica (2007)

When my mother recommended a movie called Helvetica, my response was "You can't possibly mean the font, could you?" She handed me the Netflix disc and in the familiar courier font there was the title "Helvetica (2007)" I laughed instantly and pictured a docu-drama conspiracy around a printing press. "Helvetica: It Must be Stopped."

Firstly, yes the movie is about the font, but it serves as a platform for a larger debate. At the heart of this film is the battle between the formalist tenets of design versus more expressionist design.

I found a wonderful connection between this movie and Madmen, AMC's series about late 50's era Madison Avenue ad execs. In Helvetica one designer describes the shift in ad designs to a more bold and minimalist approach using Helvetica. When ads like these start showing up in magazines in Madmen, the ad execs are perplexed and disturbed at this new style. (Where's the content? Is this a joke?). I wonder if they will adopt Helvetica in the new season!


Above: The Coke ad that designer Michael Bierut loves. Below: The VW ad that stirs controversy in Madmen

Wordplay (2006)

I'm always appreciative of people who devote their lives to such arcane interests like puzzles. More than one puzzle solver said in the movie is even in poverty they will still devote themselves to puzzles. The idea that being dedicated to something so arcane that can bring someone such joy is why I know I'll never be bored or unhappy with life. There are so many things to become obsessed with!

I never liked puzzles all that much for a very superficial reason. Strictly for the concept that technically nothing new has been created. The answers are somewhere, and you can get them, but solvers really want to make it difficult for themselves. When they're finished, all they did was complete the puzzle like everyone else that finished. The end product of what these solvers are trying to attain all looks exactly the same; a finished puzzle that can only look one way. Of course this is short sighted, because it's easy to debate that what is created happens not in the puzzle, but in the solver's brain. Also, the creativity is not in the end product, but how they got there. Nonetheless, I still have an aversion, especially to jigsaw puzzles.

I am an ideal sample viewer for this film. I have no interest in puzzles, and I don't know anything about crossword puzzles. If movie's goal was to get me prepared and excited for the climax of the movie, then it was a success.

I would also like to paraphrase Josh, because I loved his comment about this film. He basically said that the film felt as if it were directed by the font itself. I suppose he means that everything in the film is modern and crisp, like the font. One thing I noted was a lot of the movie was shot on grey, overcast days.

I still haven't seen a documentary that I haven't liked. It is very hard for me to critique these movies because I like learning about new things and documentaries all expose me to these things. I get too lost in learning to analyze the movie.

I particularly liked the use of CGI to organize and display all of the raw data behind the puzzles and the competition. However I can imagine some people would still argue that it is too much visual information to interpret and it's distracting. Especially for those who saw it in the theater.

I wonder if the regulars of the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament now resent this movie. Many of them were sentimental on screen about coming back to the Stamford Marriott where it was hosted for almost 30 years (and during the time that this movie came out). As soon as the movie came out the previously niche competition exploded in popularity, and was moved to a much larger venue here in Brooklyn. (closer to me, woo!) Ironically the movie itself most likely took away the more intimate communal experience that it shows.

This is also the second movie that has had funny clips of John Stewart in his office, the first one being The Aristocrats (2005).

So overall I enjoyed myself, was inspired, and now people think I'm completely boring when I tell them that the last two movies I saw were about a font and a crossword. With all these heroes, villains, gangsters, robots, zombies, and aliens that I write about it was nice to deal in the ordinary for a change. I reminded once again that there is an art to everything!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Hey Adam!

Thanks for writing in. I read your post too. :)

You must think Im awfully rude to not have replied earlier.

You are right. Its the larger debate that makes Helvetica so interesting. And its awesome cinematography.

Im going to go ahead and more of your blog now.

Bye,
Kanishk.