Best F(r)iends: Volume 1 (2017)

Good concept, poorly executed.

Admirable film.

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

** Official Selection - Screened at Cinedelphia Film Festival 2018 ** Though both a perfect companion to "The Room" and a standout film in its own right, "Best F(r)iends" overall seems to be a meditation on the past fifteen years of Greg Sestero's life. But, that sentence should mean something to you before you watch this movie. Don't see this film yet if you haven't. It won't do anything for you, and worse, you'll never appreciate what inspired it. It says so right at the beginning of the film -- "Based On True Events."This two-volume film (which has a clear "intermission" moment at the end of Vol. 1) is really the final film in a loosely bound trilogy, which came together accidentally and incredulously. Now, if you are already well-versed in the mythology behind Sestero and his unforgettable counterpart Tommy Wiseau, you should see this film. I would go into it not knowing anything -- but the plot is classic California neo-noir and involves detailed, interwoven subplots. It's also a tribute to the beautiful city of Los Angeles, and the significance of Sestero's time there versus his time in San Francisco.Despite being a cult figure for fifteen years, this is Sestero's debut screenplay. At the wonderful Q&A I attended, he admitted that the script was written in only a few days, and inspired by both a fond (yet bizarre) memory and a cannabis edible. It lives up to this story and unfolds in a dreamlike manner, in which situational tones change rapidly and unexpectedly. Although clearly made on a limited budget, the film has simple yet effective cinematography. The direction is perfectly suited for both Sestero's script and Wiseau's acting, and there is a surprisingly great score by Daniel Platzman (of Imagine Dragons). It's a good movie. It's not an amazing movie, but that hardly matters. The important part is that you will discover there is major talent behind Sestero (who hopes to next write an unrelated horror-thriller). It's clear that he has the capability to become more than "the guy who played Mark," and this is him getting his feet wet. This his him laying "The Room" to rest. It's a first effort, and an impressive one.At the Q&A, Sestero explained that he wrote the characters of Jon and Harvey to be played specifically by himself and Tommy Wiseau. It was actually initially inspired by a memory of the two of them taking a road trip up the California coast, and Wiseau becoming paranoid that Sestero was going to kill him. Let me make myself abundantly clear -- there is absolutely no possible way for the characters in "Best F(r)iends" to be portrayed by other actors. The film would never work. To this point, it is clear that the film is a deep meditation on the complex relationship between these two men; one that has not always been great. Given this context, I personally found the first volume of "Best F(r)iends" to be beautiful and poetic. It's somewhat over-the-top; Wiseau really shines when he is playing a character that was (quite literally) written for him -- it's clear he's having fun, and it's refreshing to see him take on a more serious form of acting. He also seems to be acutely conscious of his image and the way his adoring fans see him, and is embracing his naturally eccentric personality. It's not ridiculous to say he can and will appear in more films in various roles. And the guy earned it."Best F(r)iends" seems to suggest there is not much more to be said about the friendship between Sestero and Wiseau. It will always be there, and this two-part epic is its tribute. At the same time, it is being laid to rest in the cult circuit -- the memories will be there forever, but it's time to part ways and focus on the potentially incredible things that they create independent of one another.I am enthusiastically looking forward to Vol. 2.

I'd like to preface this review by saying that the version of 'Best F(r)iends' I saw was a work in progress, so much of what I write might no longer be relevant by the time the completed version is released, as, presumably, it's all subject to change. This also, of course, means that the final product is likely to be significantly better than what I saw.Having read and enjoyed Greg Sestero's excellent book 'The Disaster Artist' I was very excited to learn that he'd written a screenplay, and that he would be starring in it alongside his old companion, the ever-inscrutable Tommy Wiseau. Greg's book is thoroughly demonstrative of his ability to write extremely well - his eloquence, perceptive wit, and remarkable gift for description are all apparent in every page of his economically structured account of the making of 'The Room'. It was also made clear at the screening (attended by Tommy and Greg themselves) that 'Best F(r)iends' was to be considered something utterly separate from 'The Room'. Greg even stated at the screening that he felt Tommy hadn't been given a real chance to shine as an actor, and wanted to write him a part that he could really sink his teeth into.So, knowing how good a writer Greg is, how good the trailer looked, and how keen the pair were to distance themselves from the infamous cult classic film that has followed them for so long, I was expecting something unique, profound, and haunting.And that's what I got! Here and there, at least. It's tough to give this film any rating at all to be honest, as it seems to fluctuate between something highly competent in its style and themes, and something amateurish in terms of writing, technicalities, and sometimes acting.The overall feel of the film is great, especially in its early stages. The use of dialogue is minimal, to begin with at least, as we see a blood-stained and bruised John (Greg Sestero) wander aimlessly through the city until stumbling upon a quirky mortician with a love for life (and death), Harvey (Tommy Wiseau). The cinematography is beautiful in these first 10 minutes or so, and the soundtrack, eerie and ominous. We also see great performances from both Greg and Tommy in their first scene - Greg's portrayal of the silent and wayward John is pleasingly nuanced, and contrasts perfectly with Tommy's idiosyncratic and unconventionally wise Harvey. Everything works so well at this point, even down to costume design, but before long the film's faith in the implied seems to run dry.The initial cracks show when the dialogue becomes more extensive and we see John conversing properly with Harvey for the first time. Not only does most of the dialogue throughout the film feel improvised and overly-expositional, but it seems that the cinematographer knew how to shoot everything except dialogue. Firstly, the dialogue shots appear poorly lit and framed (in fact the lighting state seems to change from shot to shot), and secondly I think I'm right in saying that the camera actually 'crosses the line' at one point when John and Harvey are throwing a basket ball back and forth - a truly amateur mistake to make. This, coupled with the shot of John being over-exposed, was so jarring and uncomfortable to look at that it completed distracted from what they were saying - I cannot for the life of me tell you what was said during that exchange.It also suffers from the occasional continuity error, generally speaking these are negligible, but one that stands out in my mind was when John and Traci (Kristen StephensonPino) were watching 'Sunset Boulevard'. We see the words 'The End' appear on the screen, it then cuts to John saying he enjoyed the film, and Traci recommending 'Double Indemnity', it cuts back to the TV screen and we see Gloria Swanson creeping toward the camera in the iconic final moment of the film. Needless to say, in reality, that iconic moment happens BEFORE we see the words 'The End' on the screen, not after. Maybe this was intentional as it seems too obvious to miss, but it didn't come across that way.I found myself constantly baffled by this film's ability to come across so cool and calculated in one moment, and completely unsure of itself in the next. In fact, I can't help but feel slightly frustrated by the whole thing because the basic skeleton of the film seems brilliant, it's just distractingly rough around the edges - the plot is somewhat conventional and classic, taking after the kinds of films to which it so fondly refers ('Double Indemnity', 'Sunset Boulevard' etc), the difference being that it's layered with a fresh and unfamiliar paint that brings into play questions of loyalty, identity, greed, the macabre, and the fickle nature of icons and their worth.The film does so well in expressing these things through images, take when John discovers Harvey's necrophilia allegations (a moment I audibly gasped at), or when Harvey is wearing the mask he made of John, or simply being shown the images of film icons that Harvey has adorned his work space with (Charlie Chaplin, Brigitte Bardot etc) that it's jarring when they're expressed through clunky dialogue, like when John mentions Harvey's allegations in passing during an already stilted scene.Furthermore, any characters who aren't John, Harvey, or Traci have a tendency to feel unneeded and stereotypical, serving only as vague plot functions. Although the character Traci is very convincingly performed and somewhat interesting, she does a feel a little thrown in for convenience.The film's confident use of stylised techniques is where it performs best, they might be a little over-used but the slow motion moments of emphasis, or switching quite suddenly to black and white provide the film with an unsettling punctuation that's likely leave an imprint in the mind long after viewing - Harvey dressed all in jet black, blowing out the candles on his jet black cake was particularly indelible for me personally. The key thing about these moments is that no one is talking during them! While most of these silent moments are a welcome sight, I do recall one montage of John and Harvey walking around the city with a seemingly drunk man dancing around them in slow motion as being a pointless and halfhearted attempt at something 'artsy'.Maybe I'm a little too harsh on the dialogue, for all I know it COULD have actually been improvised given that I saw a work in progress, but I did feel that it relentlessly interrupted the flow of something elegant and haunting. I suppose writing a screenplay is very much a different beast to writing an account of a series of true-life events, but I somehow struggle to believe that the scenes were all done in the way Greg Sestero had intended. The real issue at this point is not knowing what's going on behind the scenes, not knowing exactly who's responsible for what, not knowing how faithful to the script all the performances are. I only feel the need to point this out as I'm so aware of Greg Sestero's brilliant mind that I can't help but feel the need to defend him, he wrote my favourite book after all.Overall, I think the film's potential is through the roof, the execution just needs some serious work, but there's plenty of evidence that it CAN work. I can't wait to see the second installment, but am probably more excited for the final version of what I've already seen.

I am well versed in the story of the Room and Greg Sestero's acting journey. I think it is fantastic that he not only has kept his acting dream from being completely extinguished by his association with the mother of all bad movies The Room, but managed to write and act in a gem that will hopefully open up the doors to him that seemed closed permanently.It is difficult to categorise this movie into a genre. It's funny, strange, scary and silly, frequently all at the same time. If you don't know much about the plot, it makes the experience far richer, the surprises are half the fun. Greg is very good, but his reluctant life partner Tommy Wiseau is, believe it or not, actually quite good as well. I have a feeling they didn't let him go full on tyrant on this set and let him run completely amok like he did back in '03. He more or less plays a version of himself, or at least similar to how Greg describes him in the disaster artist, and is a compelling guy to watch, despite looking like dawn of the dead at whatever his age is. The production value is good. The dialogue wasn't dubbed back in. I couldn't see any green screen rooftops and the dialogue is strange at time but not exactly "Oh Hi Mark" strange if you get my drift. Even if you know absolutely nothing about the story of these 2 men and just watch this movie like any other, you will still probably enjoy it. It's never boring or repetitive. In short, it looks pretty darn good.If you really are sick of movies, even the good ones, that follow a very recognisable formula and want something truly unique and unpredictable then this is for you. It left me scratching my head, wondering exactly what it was. That is the highest compliment I can pay to a movie. In the words of harmony Korine "Please just give me something different."Best Friends is about as different as Transformers is the same.

On the 9th of September, Greg Sestero and Tommy Wiseau did a Q&A before the test screening of Best F(r)iends. A man got up and asked Sestero what inspired him to write the film. He replied that he felt no one had given Tommy the right part to play. He also told us not to expect The Room, and so I watched the film with a blank slate and tried not to make any assumptions.Best F(r)iends right from the beginning is a superb. Straight from the start, you are thrown into an emotional roller-coaster. Jon (Sestero) is homeless and is looking for money. Harvey (Wiseau) sees him from his car day after day and eventually offers him an unusual job. The two form an unlikely friendship. I will not spoil more than that, only to say that the film is much more complex than my simple summary and has so many different layers and a surprising story. What Sestero has written is truly original and unlike any film I have seen before, and when Sestero said he wanted to write the right role for Wiseau, he surely succeeded in doing so. What he's written is a work of art. It is coherent and it is beautiful.Forget what you may have thought about them from The Room: the characters in Best F(r)iends are utterly convincing and show two different but very real sides of humanity. Both Sestero and Wiseau's acting is phenomenal, gripping, and realistic. MacGregor's directing is fantastic. The filming and scenery is gorgeous.You will finish the film and you will want more.