In 1998, Mark Illsley and Ed Stone, two buds living in Los Angeles with barely existent film experience were bussing tables and making telemarketing calls to make ends meet. In their late 20's, the big 3-0 was fast approaching, and so they decided to make a movie. Together, they concocted an outlandish premise: two escaped convicts are mistaken for a gay couple that puts on beauty pageants. Together with a self-admittedly fairly poor screenplay by Stone, the two somehow borrow $1.7 million from friends and family, and all of a sudden, Happy, Texas is born.

Interesting story huhn? More on that later.

Happy, Texas is for all intents and purposes a modern day reworking of the topsy-turvy genre as perfected by Gilbert and Sullivan though practiced even by Shakespeare. You set up an outre situation, throw in a mistaken identity and a few comical mix-ups, and then everyone gets married.

Wayne Wayne Wayne Jr. (Steve Zahn, master of memorable bit parts in mid-budget films: Out of Sight, Forces of Nature, You've Got Mail) and Harry Sawyer (Jeremy Northam: Emma) are two small-time cons who haphazardly find themselves freed during a jail break. Stranded in a particularly desolate stretch of west Texas, the pair steals a rickety old Winnebago belonging, unbeknownst to them, to a pair of gay beauty pageant consultants. They soon find themselves in the dusty one horse town of Happy, Texas, where the lure of the $1000 consultant's fee and the promise of coaching pageant contestants convinces them to assume the identity of David and Steven (the originals are cameoed by the perennially gay duo: Tim Bagley and Michael Hitchcock). Obviously, much hilarity ensues. The contestants turn out to be aspiring Shirley Temples rather than aspiring Vanessa Williams and this is merely the first twist in this classically silly light comedy.

Zahn's earnest stuttering and haphazard verbal ejaculations make Wayne Wayne difficult to take seriously. Yet, Zahn's portrayal also makes Wayne Wayne endearing in his inept connivances. Zahn creates a believable comic character and deftly avoids the pitfalls of excessive buffoonery despite his skilled pratfalls. Wayne Wayne soon makes a connection with his charges, the coterie of preemie girls, and his criminal energies soon get redirected toward making the Happy girls (guffaw, guffaw, blame the credits for that awful pun) stars of the pageant.

Thank heaven, for little girls.. The Happy girls are terribly cute in a way only little girls aspiring to the trappings of adulthood can be (and without any of the creepiness of Jon Benet). Of particular note is young Madison played by Jilian Berard, with all the cuteness and spunk of the Pepsi girl (again without any of the creepiness).

Harry Sawyer is Wayne Wayne's slightly slicker partner by association. Northam's portrayal made him clearly the presentable one, but at the same time, he struck a good balance between an aloof professionalism and likeable amateurism. The main feature of the film’s two main characters is that they are escaped-cons, but yet, are also likeable soft-boiled criminals whose hearts are in the right place. Northam and Zahn manage this role exceptionally well, creating believability and avoiding farcical burlesque. Northam, in addition, believably manages a sophisticated but not overly so American accent, but otherwise had a rather unmemorable performance.

While Wayne Wayne was busy with the diminutive Happy girls, Harry becomes involved with Jo (Ally Walker: Profiler), the pretty blonde bank manager, a tough job, since the bank manager as It's a Wonderful Life teaches us, is the person responsible for the well being of every small town. Walker's transformation is quite impressive. She casts off her slick sophisticate persona from the highly under-appreciated Profiler, to assume that of Jo, smart but slack-jawed yokel. She literally somehow makes her jaw slack throughout the entire movie. Jo's story is standard fare: smothered by small time life and the responsibilities incumbent upon small town bank managers, she has been in a loveless relationship with a married man, and is ripe for emotional outpourings and the finding of the love of her life. Walker outpours emotionally nicely, but the chemistry between Walker and Northam never quite materializes.

The highlight of the film, however, is William H. Macy, who plays Sheriff Chappy Dent. Chappy is the amiable, potent Sheriff, though insecure in social situations, because of his long hidden homosexuality. When the purportedly gay duo enters town, apparently in the midst of a spat, Chappy seizes the opportunity to profess his affection for Sawyer. The heart-wrenching earnestness of Macy's puppy dog eyes, the effusive joy with which he attacks their first dance, and the stoic devastation after the inevitable heartbreak, make Macy the indisputable star of the film.

Like most films of the indy ilk, Happy, Texas is incredibly character-driven. The technicals, such as cinematography, were utilitarian, adequate to drive the plot with a couple pretty shots but nothing memorable. The lighting, however, was well done, as was the coverage, and the color correction was particularly effective to provide a dusty yellow Texan pallor that was just sunny enough to keep the mood smiling like a Happy face. As the film’s budget necessitated them to film in California, an occasional scene has a curious lush verdant hilly backdrop that was decidedly not Texas, but this was not obvious enough to detract.

The main problem with the film comes from editing and what felt like a slightly stilted development. The essential reasons for this is limited footage for postproduction due to a limited budget, and an inherently flawed haphazard script. The auteurs, Illsley and Stone, were frank and up front about this on the DVD, admitting their own incompetence, and the fact that much had to be re-shot a year after the film premiered at Sundance. Watching the nearly 45 minutes of deleted scenes provided on the DVD, it is clear how the film was completely remolded from a love story between Harry and Jo to a much more effective, much more memorable, ensemble piece of quirky northern-exposure-esque characters.

The highlight of the film was definitely the quirky ensemble, and the presence of high quality actors covered up much of the deficiencies in the script, a fact readily admitted by Illsley and Stone. However, perhaps because of the inchoate directors, or perhaps because of the massively reworked script, or perhaps because of the faulty editing, the characters as an group never clicked, leaving an amorphous blob rather then a polished gem.

Surprisingly, despite these faults, Happy, Texas maintained a decidedly well-budgeted look and feel. Whether this feel is a result of having lots of extras, or effective screen colors, or effective coverage with multiple camera angles, or a kitschy musical montage, or a remarkably large marketing budget, this professional look is what fascinated me about the film, and what I discuss in the next section.

One redeeming feature for this incipient pair’s first (and possibly last) film is the slightly unconventional ending, which reprises a hot dance number by the adorable and unfortunately under-utilized Happy girls, and maintains a smidgen of integrity amidst the topsy-turvy formulae.

Overall, Happy, Texas is a bright and happy tale, shot in a perpetually sunny world, with highly talented actors. The film also reveals the amateurism of its makers, though the big-budgeted feel hides this well. It does show at least a glimmer of promise for the future of Illsley and Stone. Quirky, interesting, I had a good time.

Final Grade B-/C+

This is my second write off, and for the second time, I have picked a rather unconventional entry. JuiceJW's charge for this write-off was to: "Choose a film with a new-name, young-faced director that proves the guy in charge has what it takes to bring Hollywood to new heights for quite some time." I actually have high expectations of Hollywood's future, and I am fairly sure the dynamic duo of Illsley and Stone will not be the ones to lead the way. However, it is the story of how the film was made that captured my imagination, and the insight derived from this story is where I presage the future lies.

I am a fairly pedestrian film viewer. Although I approach each film I watch analytically and carefully, I am rarely aware of the deep recesses of non-multisuperplex films, more likely attracted to Legally Blonde or A.I. than to Ghost World and Daytrippers (which I only saw due to my cousin, ronette's influence). This is why it is significant that I was well aware of the truly independent film Happy, Texas.

Happy, Texas had no studio sponsorship. In 1998, two Hollywood wannabes with little experience and few prospects realized they were rapidly becoming not-young, and so borrowing extensively though bank loans taken by friends and family, they personally raised $1.7 million. With the money and a hastily constructed screenplay in hand, Illsley and Stone managed to attract a bevy of reasonably big Hollywood stars and managed to enter Sundance in time to be nominated for a Grand Jury Prize for best film. This caught the attention of Miramax, fresh from its Oscar sweep of 1997, and amidst its own frenzy that rivaled the concurrent dot-com bubble, Miramax bought distribution rights, and marketed Happy, Texas extensively for wide release. The movie netted, in the end, moderate but likely disappointing receipts.

This meta-story is the ultimate story of the democratization of content. It absolutely blows my mind that a couple of yahoos can somehow wrangle together a movie with well known stars and a well produced feel completely by themselves, and even more-so, achieve wide distribution and mass market recognition. Yet, at the same time, it emphasizes the limits of democratization.

With the advent of hundreds of cable channels and super-broad band Internet, we were supposed to be hit with infinite choices and infinite power to make our voice heard. (Epinions is part of this.) Yet with the collapse of the dot-coms, so followed the collapse of the fortunes of on-line quirky film providers like Atomfilms or Doug Limon's (director of Swingers and Go) Nibblebox.

As Happy, Texas shows, there is a finite supply of talent which limits democratization. There is good reason that the actors in the movie had a track record and have a name: they have talent. Whereas Illsley and Stone just aren’t there yet. It also demonstrates, though, that democratization is happening. Miramax is quite a success story, making its reputation not for making films, but as arbiters of taste, finding what's good, and pushing it out. Regardless of how easy venues like Napster make distribution in the future, there will always be a need for some narrow tap to regulate the flow, to extract the gem from the chaff (mmm, delightfully and painfully mixed metaphor). How else will we have a phenomenon like Survivor that comes to dominate discussion at the water-cooler?

Democratization of content is certainly coming, but not as fast, and not as uncontrolled as previously expected. Illsley and Stone deserve credit for demonstrating that it is possible for a plebe to create a well-crafted movie with big budget feel independent of any studio support. Just as the dot-com-ers created the venture capital market that will make the next big idea that much easier for some nobody with a great idea to bring to market, Illsley and Stone demonstrate that it is possible to independently create a film sans the shoddiness of Blairwitch or Clerks. In the future, any truly good idea can be made, and made well. The future of Hollywood is Happy indeed.

_____________________________________________
WRITE-OFF NOTES

Please read the other highly talented authors participating in this write-off. The other participants are MrsNormanMaine Shadow8 kuuleimomi DrJ008 dequebec Sloucho Stargull Matt_Harney mangiotto Pffrdfdus7 alex_isit JuiceJW JonTurner The_Wood eplovejoy Benho Grouch Kenshin-Guy

Or, find entries posted to http://futurewo.benho.org

_____________________________________________
NOTES

o If I had to make a conventional choice for this write off, it would have been Christopher Nolan (Memento) or possibly Sam Raimi (Evil Dead, Spider Man) though he is not so young.

o If watching Happy, Texas, take note of the marriage certificate, which is a bit of unintentional anachronistic unreality that bothered me a bit, but just a bit.

_____________________________________________
MOVIES I MENTIONED

Ai
http://benho.epinions.com/content_29218672260
Legally blonde
http://benho.epinions.com/content_32617303684
Daytrippers
http://benho.epinions.com/content_23009857156
Ghost World
(review in progress)


Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD
Video Occasion: Fit for Friday Evening