You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.


  • Films piling up
    Unable to find her second directing project, Angelina Jolie took to sifting through “generals.
  • Spy tale's gritty reality unthrilling in best way
    'A Most Wanted Man' Gunther Bachmann may pull a lot of strings as the head of a Hamburg-based anti-terrorism unit, but to call this schlubby, chain-smoking, hard-drinking German intelligence
  • Filmmaker's agenda stands in way of smoother story
    'Calvary' When Father James, the shambling, deeply humane protagonist of “Calvary,” returns to his monklike living quarters after celebrating Mass or making parish visits, he's greeted by
movie review

Chomsky fans, get your groupie on


‘Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy?’ * 1/2

Does anyone remember “My Dinner With André,” Louis Malle’s 1981 film capturing a brainy, wide-ranging conversation between playwright/actor Wallace Shawn and theater director André Gregory?

Okay, relocate the setting from a Manhattan restaurant to an office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and replace the urbane aesthete Gregory with cranky linguist and political curmudgeon Noam Chomsky.

Next, imagine Shawn as a Frenchman with an accent so thick that it can be understood only with subtitles, written on the screen in his own scratchy, cursive handwriting.

Finally, pretend that the whole thing, instead of being filmed on camera, is an audio recording animated with drawings that alternate between childlike doodles and acid-induced hallucinations.

You’ll have a pretty good idea of what watching “Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy?” is like. Directed by Michel Gondry (“Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”) from a series of conversations that Gondry audio-recorded – and partly filmed on a noisy, antique, wind-up camera – the film is probably of interest only to those viewers who, like Gondry himself apparently, already have an obsession with Chomsky.

I’m not saying the man isn’t wicked smart or interesting, but I could live a happy life without knowing that Chomsky’s earliest memory involves a 1 1/2 -year-old version of himself sitting on a kitchen counter, refusing to eat his oatmeal.

Although that tidbit is a prelude of sorts to a deeper discussion that lurches from language acquisition to the nature of consciousness to the history of science to epistemology to religion to Chomsky’s fearlessness about dying, too much of the film involves Gondry inquiring, like a breathless fan, about things nobody except a groupie would care about.

So Chomsky experienced anti-Semitism in Philadelphia growing up. It’s regrettable, but so what? That anecdote is presented as neither formative nor illuminating.

Gondry’s whimsical animations aren’t bad, and they sometimes help to clarify a few of the more abstract ideas that Chomsky brings up, seemingly haphazardly at times.The truest words in the film are Gondry’s when he says, apropos of yet another one of his subject’s conversational digressions, “Noam took the conversation to a different place.”

Whether that’s a place you’ll want to go is not for me to say. Know only this: The title of the film refers not to the nature of happiness, but to the nature of our linguistic hard-wiring.

How is it, Chomsky wonders, that a child learns that the interrogative form of the statement, “The man who is tall is happy,” is, “Is the man who is tall happy?” and not “Is the man who tall is happy?

Our understanding how you turn it into a question illustrates our instinctual grasp of the difference between what Chomsky calls structural proximity and linear proximity.

Food for thought? Maybe so, Noam, but I say it’s spinach, and I say the hell with it.