Naked in New York (1993)

Jesse Hassenger

Naked in New York tries to distinguish itself through flights of fancy, but these are too brief, as if director Daniel Algrant can't commit.

Naked in New York

Director: Daniel Algrant
Cast: Eric Stoltz, Mary-Louise Parker, Ralph Macchio, Jill Clayburgh, Timothy Dalton
MPAA rating: R
Studio: Fine Line
First date: 1993
US DVD Release Date: 2004-09-14

Pity the talky early '90s indie movie in the DVD era. Too recent to be considered vintage but not new enough to have much urgency, movies like Party Girl (1995) and Naked in New York (1993) find little home entertainment love. Instead, they are quietly released in bare-bones packages that mimic their VHS editions, right down to a full-screen transfer.

As much as these semi-secret releases might make you want to champion the films themselves, Naked in New York is no classic waiting to be discovered. It's not even Party Girl. It's more like a whirlwind tour of Woody Allen country: crazy parents, neurotic creative types, and imperfect young love all overlap as Jake (Eric Stoltz), a struggling playwright, chronicles his adventures in New York and Boston, and his romance with photographer Joanne (Mary-Louise Parker).

Parker is charming as Joanne, who is less confident than Jake but apparently better at her chosen art. A sincere, smart rom-com girl, she's also undermined by the screenplay's satire of the New York theater world, which relegates her to the sidelines of her own relationship movie. (Parker would appear in an actual Woody Allen theater farce, Bullets Over Broadway, in the next year; maybe this imitation was her unofficial audition.)

Riffing on Woody Allen isn't necessarily a bad idea (see David Mandel's Miami Rhapsody [1995]), but Naked in New York doesn't work as tribute and it's not original enough for deconstruction. Poor Stoltz is "doing" Woody here almost as strenuously as actors like John Cusack (the aforementioned Bullets), Kenneth Branagh (Celebrity, 1998), and Jason Biggs (Anything Else, 2003) have for Allen's own films over the years, but injecting Allen's "voice" into this material does it no favors; these are Allen-style situations more than Allen-style jokes. This suggests a movie inspired less by life and more by other movies-by types rather than a specific voice. The Allen model for this story (young neurotics balancing their lives and their art) is so familiar that even an a passable imitation needs to say something -- about its characters, the city, theater -- to be heard above the din of actual Woody movies.

Naked in New York tries to distinguish itself through flights of fancy -- Jake sees a traveling circus at a rest-stop and imagines a monkey giving him romantic counsel -- but these passages are too brief, as if director Daniel Algrant can't commit. And these surreal asides are not helped by the film's haphazard editing, with jarring transitions between sequences, locations (the frequent New York/Boston trips are bizarre for a movie with "New York" in its title), and fantasies. Editor Bill Pankow cut together some of Brian DePalma's virtuoso work, but doesn't find the right rhythm for a supposed romantic comedy. The film moves quickly during courtship and then slows right down as the central relationship falters.

And so we are left with a modest compendium of clever moments and wistful observations. There is a moment toward the end when Jake, who has been narrating the film while driving alone down a highway, looks out his car window and imagines the major figures from his life (and the movie): in other cars, manning tollbooths, pulled over on the side of the road. It's a memorable image, on the road to Naked in New York's obscurity; it's the one sustained moment of the film that does rise above the din.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.