House of Games (1987)

"You're a bad little pony, I'm not gonna bet on you"

Joe Mantegna plays such a wonderfully magnetic bastard in this that you're almost sad to see him die. Mamet's definitely a better writer than a director but I really dig his elegant, unhurried style of directing, he's not particularly flashy, he just let's the plot unfold.

This isn't as polished as his later films (like the aforementioned Spartan or even Heist). But the writing is so strong it doesn't matter.

One flaw lies in the overall stiffness of Lindsay Crouse. But she kind of grows on you as the movie progresses.

Flaws and all, though, I still think it's Mamet's best film.

"You sick BITCH! I'm not gonna give you SHIT!"

*blam*

"Thank you sir... May I have another?"

*BLAM-BLAM-BLAM-BLAMMMMMM!!!!!*

What's really interesting IS the mechanical "stiffness" of his leading ladies (and his 2 wives at one time or another). Mamet gets written off as a misogynist, or that he doesn't know how to write female characters with the same kind of dimension that he gives his male characters. I beg to differ if anyone were to look at this film and Oleanna. I actually really enjoy Lindsay Crouse and Rebecca Pidgeon in Mamet's movies quite a bit because their stylistic acting complements the atmosphere. Plus a lot of his male characters let their guard down as well, leaving them completely vulnerable & devoid of identity once they try to get more than what they bargained for. Mamet's direction demands stoicism of his actors. He writes a lot of characters as "lawyers" or "philosophers," no matter what their profession might be, which for some reason I'm totally into. His stories and the people that populate them, are simple, but I've always felt Mamet's ideas behind the simplicity of it all... were quite profound.

There's a rhythm & cadence to the way his characters speak that always astonishes me. I remember when I first saw His Girl Friday, and just the fast-clip of the fire-rapid quick witticisms sold me. If you have your characters say interesting (or weird) things at a fast clip, then I'm a sucker for that shit. It's probably because I'm a slow thinker, and not super talkative. Mamet took a darker approach to writing dialogue by inserting oodles of expletives and ellipses into his work, along with the rate of speech. When I took a linguistics class, I learned about the cultural impact of speech and why some folks talk faster or hesitate when trying to catch up. Mamet took all the conventions and reworked them to fit his view of humanity - as society's puppets trapped in the confines of morality. When you step outside what's expected of you, for personal gain, then you're bound to get scorched. It's nothing i totally agree with in all cases. In fact, a few of his commentaries paint him as I expected - kind of an arrogant elitist. House of Games is Mamet at his best because it takes a familiar archetype - the con artist - and spins it around. On top of that, he successfully attempts to intertwine psychology with the methodology of conning people. That to me, is endlessly interesting. Plus I just love Joe Mantegna in everything he's done with Mamet, including a very brief appearance in Edmond, in which he essentially plays Tyler Durden to William H. Macy's character (not a spoiler). Mamet's other work - Heist, State & Main, Spanish Prisoner, were all just reasonably enjoyable entertainment. I dug them for what they were, but also didn't think they were as profoundly interesting as his earlier stuff.

I swear to god that I made a thread about this ages ago, but I may have just blabbed about how great it is in one of those film noir-y threads. It's probably my favorite Mamet, which is saying a lot, because I love the heck out of Spartan, and those two movies are also among the purest examples of Mamet's directorial approach and aesthetic. This is also a fucking gorgeous movie. It and Color of Money occupy a lot of the same worlds, in terms of low-rent, gritty, smoky parlors in the Midwest, but Mamet and his cinematographer make this one look absolutely gorgeous and very Edward Hopper. There's a lot I've stolen from this picture.

Oh god, you NEED to see it in widescreen. It's amazing. (Also I wasn't busting on you for not doing a google search, since I did one of my own and came up with nothing.)

Here's a Roger Ebert essay on the film as way of atonement: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...910310301/1023

I had a college English class where we actually studied this screenplay along side works of Hemingway, Elliot, Faulkner, Morrison, Albee and the like. Great movie, and its good to see Mamet getting so much discussion round these parts lately.

I was bummed to hear his Anne Frank movie (which from the sound of it wasn't about Anne Frank at all, but instead a young girl in modern Israel) got rejected by the studio. I don't always agree with his hawkish political views, but I would have loved to have seen what he'd have made of that.