Reviews

Nights and Weekends

In brief scenes, lovely or tense, mostly unresolved, Nights and Weekends indicates a slow, almost imperceptible evolution in the relationship.

Nights and Weekends

Director: Joe Swanberg
Cast: Greta Gerwig, Joe Swanberg, Alison Bagnall, Elizabeth Donius, Jay Duplass
MPAA rating: N/A
Studio: IFC Films
Display Artist: Greta Gerwig, Joe Swanberg
First date: 2008
US Release Date: 2008-10-10 (Limited release)
Website
Trailer

"You just want to get a bunch of shit and share it?", asks James (Joe Swanberg). "Yeah," nods Mattie (Greta Gerwig), "Let's eat on the ground like animals." Ahh, true love. As James speaks to Mattie from inside the shower, she dries herself off, rubbing her head with one towel while wearing another. When he reaches for his towel, oops, she's been using. She apologizes, but it's no matter. They're about to order Chinese.

At the beginning of Nights and Weekends, directed by Gerwig and Swanberg, James and Mattie are in mid-relationship. He lives in Chicago, she in New York. They spend weekends together, but they're stymied by their stop-and-start structure, each encounter shifting from anticipatory bliss to sorrowful parting over two or three days. The first weekend you see, at James' place, is full of cuddling and sexy kissing and nakedness. Even when Mattie is briefly put off by James eating a banana in front of her (it's just the smell and the sound of someone else doing it, she explains, "I like bananas when I eat them"), they're close, arms and legs entwined, when they're inside his apartment.

As in most mumblecore, troubles emerge in bits and pieces of conversation. In brief scenes, lovely or tense, mostly unresolved, the film indicates a slow, almost imperceptible evolution in the relationship, the unchartable rhythms of a romance diminishing. When video game designer James brings Mattie along to a coworker's apartment, she won't go inside. "I won't know what to say to them," she whimpers, "They're all video gamers and I'm not." He leaves her in the hallway, eating chips, while he walks off-screen. The frame stays on Mattie, the walls pressing, the space empty-feeling. James comes back, a couple of cuts later, and she's undone. It's not clear how she's turned so needy or maybe always was, but his efforts to keep up are useless.

Outside, she prompts him to play with her, which he does, but his gamboling in the rain and funny faces don't appease her. She's already anticipating their split at weekend's end, she's feeling abandoned, she's wanting another way to be in a relationship: any or all of these feelings might motivate Mattie, but the upshot is, she yells at James, the man she loves and doesn't want to leave: "It's not funny when it's not meant with sincerity," she declares, "I don't want to do it if you're just doing it out of anger. I only want to do it if you're actually gonna have fun and right now, you're just fucking making fun of me and I don't think that's funny."

Her focus on "fun," or some idea of fun that's slipping away -- whether suddenly or routinely is unclear -- suggests Mattie's fears are functions of expectations. They're not defined, not especially rational, but they emerge in outbursts of affection and anger. Both (all) types of interactions are vital to the short days and nights they share. James responds to her tears with his own, lower-key panic ("I'm sick of you fucking crying every time it's not perfect"), and so she offers to behave: "Don't worry," she sniffs, "I won't cry the rest of the weekend." And so she doesn't: they visit with his brother and his pregnant wife, they pose for photos in a booth, where they can select from various "exciting backgrounds." In matching red knit caps, they smile and mug. "Make an excited face," Mattie instructs.

The jumble of their backgrounds is thematic as well as literal. Even as they promise one another to "make a plan" for going forward, they don't. The next time they meet in the film, in New York, he's seeing her apartment for the first time. Acknowledging their nervousness, they talk and cuddle, spend less time in bed. They ponder the relationship, looking back on key moments ("Did you tell me you loved me because you thought that was what I wanted to hear and that it was exciting or that you felt it?") and imagining a future. Mattie connects her past with what might happen, asking, "Do you ever wonder like what story you're gonna be in someone else's life?"

You see already that James and Mattie will become stories in each other's lives, though they put off the split. The film doesn’t press the crisis or the realization. As alternative to conventional plots, character arcs, even conclusions, it offers hints and gestures, glances and failures. When James comes to New York again, "One year later," he's in town for an interview, on account of a game he's designed. At a restaurant before they have dinner, Mattie watches James through the window: standing on the sidewalk, he speaks into his phone, never looking back at her, as she puts on lip gloss and adjusts his air. Mattie's in the foreground, James blurry through the glass. You never find out whom he's talking to, never learn exactly how they broke up, only watch the awkwardness as they look for another way to interact.

They find one possibility when they go to James' photo shoot. They pose and joke a little, not quite correcting the photographer's assumption that they're boyfriend and girlfriend (they've worn matching jeans and sweaters, to be "funny," the photographer notes that she's looking at him "adoringly"). Back at James' hotel room, they look over the shots and share a few minutes of mutual desire -- for the couple who looks out at them from these professionally composed images, faux spontaneity and happy faces. It might have been them. Or, as Nights and Weekends suggests, even their good times might have been imagined, at the time.

8

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
6

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
Theatre

​'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
10

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
7

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
8
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

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

rating-image