Sunday, November 20, 2005
THE LIFE AQUATIC
Saw Noah Baumbach's The Squid and The Whale at Piper's Alley about a week and a half ago. Hadn't been there in about ten years. It's in the same complex as Second City, Tony and Tina's wedding, a running store, and a bunch of other crap. Needless to say, it's not the most impressive venue in which to see a movie in Chicago.
Plot: The film takes place in Brooklyn in the mid-80s. Kaura Linney and Jeff Daniels are Joan and Bernard Berkman, the Jewish intellectual parents of two boys, Frank, about sixteen, and Walt, about thirteen. Early on, Joan and Bernard announce that they're getting a divorce. The rest of the film chronicles how the family deals with this.
I liked S & W, but probably not for the same reasons as other people. I'm guessing that many liked the film for the performances of Jeff Daniels and Laura Linney, and I'd be partly in agreement there. I thought Jeff Daniels was very good at portraying a man who's a bastard, but has enough intelligence and charm that he could fool some people into sympathizing with him, particularly his elder son. Frank idolizes his father, parroting his opinions on art and literature, blaming his mother for the divorce. Daniels does an epert job of showing us how Bernard 's simmering resentment at his lack of recognition from the world has corroded his soul.
However, I didn't care for Laura Linney as Joan. Has an actress ever received such a free pass? She's consistently in films that critics and and Academy Award voters like, so she's built up a reputation as a very good actress, but I don't see it. She's just pleasant and adequate. She never does anything that interests or surprises. I thought she was awful in this film in particular. I don't believe her Joan, don't believe that Linney knows anything about her. When Joan affectionately calls her sons "Chicken," it sounds repellently false in Linney's mouth.
What I liked about S & W was Baumbach's sentiment and self-pity free portrait of himself. Frank, in his desire to be his father, becomes just as much of an asshole. He provides put-downs of books he's never read, pawns off a song by Pink Floyd as one of his own, and contemplates cheating on his girlfriend because he thinks he can "do better." Frank's deplorable behavior is tempered by the fact that he's a teenager. He doesn't really know how much of an asshole he is, he thinks that he's acting like an adult. I'm not saying that his behavior is that much worse than many adults, only that what makes it poignant is that Frank thinks that he is being mature. I appreciated how matter of fact Baumbach was about his treatment of Frank. He doesn't make Frank into a villain and doesn't empathize with him too much. Indeed, the film could just as well been called "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Douchebag." ¶ 7:00 PM
Plot: The film takes place in Brooklyn in the mid-80s. Kaura Linney and Jeff Daniels are Joan and Bernard Berkman, the Jewish intellectual parents of two boys, Frank, about sixteen, and Walt, about thirteen. Early on, Joan and Bernard announce that they're getting a divorce. The rest of the film chronicles how the family deals with this.
I liked S & W, but probably not for the same reasons as other people. I'm guessing that many liked the film for the performances of Jeff Daniels and Laura Linney, and I'd be partly in agreement there. I thought Jeff Daniels was very good at portraying a man who's a bastard, but has enough intelligence and charm that he could fool some people into sympathizing with him, particularly his elder son. Frank idolizes his father, parroting his opinions on art and literature, blaming his mother for the divorce. Daniels does an epert job of showing us how Bernard 's simmering resentment at his lack of recognition from the world has corroded his soul.
However, I didn't care for Laura Linney as Joan. Has an actress ever received such a free pass? She's consistently in films that critics and and Academy Award voters like, so she's built up a reputation as a very good actress, but I don't see it. She's just pleasant and adequate. She never does anything that interests or surprises. I thought she was awful in this film in particular. I don't believe her Joan, don't believe that Linney knows anything about her. When Joan affectionately calls her sons "Chicken," it sounds repellently false in Linney's mouth.
What I liked about S & W was Baumbach's sentiment and self-pity free portrait of himself. Frank, in his desire to be his father, becomes just as much of an asshole. He provides put-downs of books he's never read, pawns off a song by Pink Floyd as one of his own, and contemplates cheating on his girlfriend because he thinks he can "do better." Frank's deplorable behavior is tempered by the fact that he's a teenager. He doesn't really know how much of an asshole he is, he thinks that he's acting like an adult. I'm not saying that his behavior is that much worse than many adults, only that what makes it poignant is that Frank thinks that he is being mature. I appreciated how matter of fact Baumbach was about his treatment of Frank. He doesn't make Frank into a villain and doesn't empathize with him too much. Indeed, the film could just as well been called "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Douchebag." ¶ 7:00 PM
Comments:
<< Home
I kind of see what you're saying about Laura Linney, though I thought that was her appeal. Many actresses feel they have to be overemotional to get recognition as master thespians, but Linney isn't like that. She usually gives pleasantly understated performances that are a relief from the rest of the Oscar competitors.
I really liked this film. I thought it was the most honest and believable coming-of-age film I had ever seen. It made me feel really uncomfortable at times, which is a good thing when a film is trying to portray the pain of adolescence. I didn't feel that there was a false moment throughout the entire movie.
This film had a special place in my heart for two other reasons, though. First, it takes place in Brooklyn in 1986, which is the last year that I lived there as a child before moving to the suburbs. Though we didn't live in Park Slope, I had many friends there and was quite familiar with the neighborhood. Second, this is the only film that I have seen (or will probably ever see), that takes place at my alma mater SUNY-Binghamton. Sure, the film co-stars one of our more distinguished(?) alumnae, Billy Baldwin, and perhaps that is why Noah Baumbach decided that a scene would be set there. I should note, however, that it was not actually filmed on the SUNY-Binghamton campus. I am still trying to figure out where they actually filmed that scene.
Finally, on an unfortunate note, I must end my comment by stating that I once again saw this film at one of Richmond's free previews. For many of Richmond's residents, free previews are a means of cheap entertainment and so they will see a film without caring what the film is. As a result, many of the people in the theater with me were disappointed with the film and began complaining during the show, completely forgetting that they had paid NOTHING to see it. Leaving the theater I made a vow to never again attend a free preview and decided that saving $6 was not worth the price.
Post a Comment
I really liked this film. I thought it was the most honest and believable coming-of-age film I had ever seen. It made me feel really uncomfortable at times, which is a good thing when a film is trying to portray the pain of adolescence. I didn't feel that there was a false moment throughout the entire movie.
This film had a special place in my heart for two other reasons, though. First, it takes place in Brooklyn in 1986, which is the last year that I lived there as a child before moving to the suburbs. Though we didn't live in Park Slope, I had many friends there and was quite familiar with the neighborhood. Second, this is the only film that I have seen (or will probably ever see), that takes place at my alma mater SUNY-Binghamton. Sure, the film co-stars one of our more distinguished(?) alumnae, Billy Baldwin, and perhaps that is why Noah Baumbach decided that a scene would be set there. I should note, however, that it was not actually filmed on the SUNY-Binghamton campus. I am still trying to figure out where they actually filmed that scene.
Finally, on an unfortunate note, I must end my comment by stating that I once again saw this film at one of Richmond's free previews. For many of Richmond's residents, free previews are a means of cheap entertainment and so they will see a film without caring what the film is. As a result, many of the people in the theater with me were disappointed with the film and began complaining during the show, completely forgetting that they had paid NOTHING to see it. Leaving the theater I made a vow to never again attend a free preview and decided that saving $6 was not worth the price.
# posted by 
: 3:20 PM
: 3:20 PM<< Home
