tonight i finally got round to watching 'i'm still here' - the joaquin phoenix/casey affleck docu/mockumentary that came out in 2010 as a culmination of a year or so long set up in the everyday media.
i, personally, thought it was great. truly one of the most entertaining and simultaneously painful pieces of cinema that i've seen in quite some time.
now, before seeing the film i'd been a party to the general conversation around J.P.s seeming meltdown, the majority view being that it had to be a rouse, all be it a very subtle one and also one that we here in the UK may have been less exposed to than the US market. we'd had the obligatory forwarding of articles and youtube videos including the now somewhat famous letterman interview where J.P. was giving a very convincing impression of being removed from himself and quite possibly genuinely bonkers. there were moments where you could see him smirking. now with hindsight i find it incredible that he managed to keep such a straight face. i for one would have cracked under the pressure and ended up in hysterics.
i also remember the public commentary on the matter at the time. it seemed to be almost split 50/50 between people who were genuinely (and quite heartwarmingly) concerned for the beloved actors well-being and those people who were dismissing it as a fake there and then (maybe exceedingly good foresight, but also maybe just the natural reaction of that portion of the population that doesn't want to be made to feel 'stupid' if it is later revealed to be a hoax).
i found it hard to make a call on it during the news releases. my gut feeling was that it was some kind of act. i'm saying this not because i want to make myself out to be clever, but more that during this day and age my immediate reaction to everything is that its staged - very rarely these days do news stories, especially those surrounding any kind of celebrity, actually turn out to be real. there was also something maybe just too controlled in the performance that he was putting on. it was very clever. but the impression that i got was that it was just that bit too clever for it to be spontaneous. however, at the same time, i just didn't know. no-one did. there are always lots of 'insider sources' leaks in the media but you can never really know for sure until someone actually involved makes some kind of official statement.
so now, finally watching the film (by the way i am gutted i didn't get to see it at the cinema, i really wanted to but things conspired against me and before i knew it i'd missed my opportunity - sorry joaquin) it's funny. very funny.
you're taken through a rambling story of a successful hollywood actor, destroying his self image in the belief that he is doing what he needs to do. you see the press reaction and general condescension of those who feel it either necessary or their place in the world to comment on his choices. you see him apparently be shit on by a guy who you it will later dawn on you is an ex member of the once popular british band 'spacehog'. there are arguments, there are deep meaningful conversations. there is an excellent performance by sean 'don't call me diddy' coumbs. all the time it leaves you guessing, even though you know its staged.
it all seems so obvious with hindsight. put together as a whole coherent story and with the cast of supporting characters, in on the joke or not, it tells a funny and quite sorry tale indeed. it runs its course splitting you between laughing your arse off and cringing at some of the more awkward moments; because even though you know it's a fake, you still don't really know to what extent as what dawned on me is that usually, in the best of stories or the most tragic of comedies, there always lies an undisputable element of truth.
after all he wouldn't have been the first A list celebrity to go the wayward route. looking back at some of britney spears antics, or even lindsay lohan's recent transition from child star plastic disney face to jewelry stealing rehab regular, the thought of a big name star jumping the shark isn't that ridiculous.
what cant be disputed here is that phoenix, even as an actor, had to put himself completely on the line to be able to pull this off. the whole integrity of the story depended on it. and as for public reaction, even though it was planned, it could still break him. while they obviously knew what they were aiming to achieve the success of its execution relied on the public being unaware of this, but that meant that there were very few people who were truly in on the joke. so while some are slating this endeavor as being a piece of self indulgent rubbish, even boring, i really wonder if they have stopped to think about how blurred the line between reality and fiction really ended up. it's one thing committing to an idea of an ambitious and risky project, but another to find yourself a year into something, dismantling your career, having to take the backlash (that no matter how expected, has still got to be a fucking soul destroying thing to do) and yet still not being able to explain what it is all in aid of. just having to have the courage of your convictions to believe in the idea and see it through to the end. he must have had times where he got scared though. i found myself wondering how many of the scenes actually then started giving glimpses into the 'real' world of joaquin phoenix. When he is seen having emotional breakdowns about how he's fucked his life up, how much of that was really acting drama over his failing hip-hop career and how much was channeled from the fear that with something this different he might well be actually fucking up his future as a respected actor?
as for the haters, well, thats your opinion and you're entitled to it i suppose.
some complain about the fact is was a hoax at all, as if the only thing worth watching would have been the genuine derailment of a once very talented person (a very sorry state of affairs which its pretty obvious the film was working to highlight). others complain about knowing that it was a hoax - that the knowledge has ruined the whole premise, but that to me just seems lazy; taking some information at its most basic level and not even bothering to pay any attention to the detail. then there's the people complaining even though they haven't even seen the film. here in lies the rub. its always going to get peoples backs up, not because it's a shit film or a waste of time, but because they weren't in on the joke.
if you have seen it, then maybe ask yourself this... why did you watch it? was it because you'd heard it was a good film? is it because you wanted to know what all the chat was about? was it because you had seen the pre-amble and were curious over the supposed conclusion? or were you one who still maintains it wasn't a hoax, and so watched it because you wanted to see a star fall apart on camera? whatever your answer, i think it shines a light on all of us as to our motives behind our interest regarding these kind of things. the way we can be split between lauding someone's talents but also reveling or criticising their later demise.
but for me, there-in lies the brilliance of this piece of film/art/theatre/whatever you want to see it as.
it's too easy to say this was a hoax. yes, it was a story written by a couple of long time friends. yes, J.P. was playing a character of himself. but what was real and what was not seems too close to be able to pigeon hole it so conveniently. it positively revels in the fact that for the most part, we as viewers will never truly know. we can still only wonder.
