LFM Review: Terrence Malick’s Cannes Winner The Tree of Life

Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain lead "The Tree of Life."

By Patricia Ducey. Terrence Malick’s latest, The Tree of Life, is a movie of big ideas: the cycle of birth and death, the mystery of suffering, and especially the necessity—and tragic elusiveness—of love. All Malick’s trademark film conventions are present here: the whispered voiceover narration, the elliptical narrative, the preoccupation with what is not said, what cannot be said but only imagined or felt. Malick’s genius has always been how he reveals the ineffable through the most mundane rudiments of everyday life in his characters. As Holly in Badlands seamlessly leaves her murdering boyfriend behind and begins a new life as wife and mother, we realize she is the innocent Malick imagines, never torn from any Eden. Or when Pocahontas at the finale of The New World rises, with a joyous smile of triumph, from her curtsy to the English King, we feel a kindred joy at her discovery of that new world – not as an “other” defined by conventional anti-colonial apologia, but as her own woman.

But in this film, Malick renders explicit, with unmatched visual and aural splendor, his vision of the essential spiritual quest; his characters literally ask God, where are you, why do you make me suffer? Tree of Life is almost an experimental movie, in that it eschews traditional narrative; no alarm bell plot points or expository dialogue here. So the passages of the family’s present life or memories seem more like montage than story; no one is explaining anything or planting clues. Any “real” story thus almost disappears. It is not surprising to read that Malick is an admirer of Kubrick—Tree of Life looks and feels a lot like Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. Perhaps Malick at 67 feels ready to travel these same territories.

A saga of an American family.

We first meet the main character, Jack, as a young boy in Texas in the late ‘50s. Jack’s mother (Jessica Chastain), loving and devout, narrates the opening of the film. She tells us that there are two paths in life, one of nature and one of grace, and that we must choose which one we follow. Nature cares only for itself, while grace relies on a sense of oneness with all of existence. News suddenly arrives that Jack’s younger brother has died at age 19. We are not told how or why, but we see how grief and spiritual panic devour the family—and these questions dog Jack for the rest of his days. He grows up resenting his harsh father (Brad Pitt), longing for the love his father cannot or will not give him. Years later, as a successful architect, Jack lives and works in skyscrapers amid a sterile concrete modernity. He is as cold to his own wife and his own father was to him; this coldness is mirrored in the towering glass cities and rippling freeways that stand in stark opposition to nature. The way of the mother or the way of the father? This is Jack’s lifelong insoluble dilemma.

Malick soon interrupts the story of the family and the death of the brother, and embarks on a depiction of his own genesis story, from a cosmic Big Bang to Earth’s volcanic beginnings, to the kill-or-be-killed era of the dinosaur—all with special effects engineered by renowned veteran Douglas Trumbull. When Jack’s story resumes, we see through Malick’s expert direction, and the amazing camera work of cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, a childhood of back yards and sprinklers, running boys and budding sexuality—and, finally, all the furious civilizing that parents, knowing the alternative, try to impose. No American director could have evinced the intensity and naturalness of these childhood scenes any better. Jessica Chastain as Jack’s mother and Brad Pitt as his father illuminate their roles – especially Pitt, who artfully subsumes his soft attractiveness into a more severe toughness befitting his man-of-action character. And ever one of our most skilled actors, Sean Penn excels as the spiritually bereft adult Jack.

As always, Malick captures his audience with a whisper, from the mother’s opening narration—prayer, really—to the otherworldly climax. But Tree of Life is not an easy film. It must be seen on the big screen; no other movie this cartoon summer will look or feel anything like it. The soundtrack of largely religious music reminds us that this is a spiritual cri de coeur from someone who feels the autumn chill. When the lights came up in our theater today, the silence lingered—no chit-chat or phones chirping open. And when I turned onto the freeway, I had to click my radio off. The wind rushing by, the hum of the engine pulling me along—it seemed more fitting to turn down the noise and listen, closely for once, as the world in its magnificence flew by.

Posted on May 28th, 2011 at 7:07pm.


Experiment in Fascism at an American High School: The Lesson Plan @ The Newport Beach Film Festival

By Patricia Ducey. One day in 1967, a Palo Alto high school student asks his history teacher how the German people could have missed the signs of the ongoing genocide being perpetrated by the Nazis. This innocent question ignites an idea, and teacher Ron Jones launches a classroom “simulation,” or experiment, to illustrate how good Germans -how anyone – could fall prey to totalitarian thinking.

Forty years later, Philip Neel, one of the students who participated in that experiment dubbed The Third Wave, has produced a documentary, The Lesson Plan, featuring interviews with students who participated, and with teacher Ron Jones himself.

Jones reorganized his classroom that week into a simulation of a prototypical fascist youth group. He enforced physical discipline and uniformity in the students’ posture and speech per his first-day dictum, “Strength Through Discipline.” He meant it to end there, he now avers, but students were eager for more. He added more simplistic, effective sloganeering on the following days: strength through community, through action, through unity and finally through pride. Strength through Community meant, for instance, that students were to share grades. Top students helped the lower students. Jones was heartened by the increased level of participation of the weaker students, while he banished to the library for the remainder of the semester some more successful students – who of course resented lowering their grades so students who did not do the work could get higher grades. Similarly, anyone who spoke against The Third Wave faced a mock trial and banishment. At Jones’s urging, students secretly “informed” on other students who spoke against the Third Wave, and the car club guys appointed themselves as Jones’s bodyguards. Jones found out only at the reunion that a few of these guys beat up a student journalist who was writing a non-flattering article on The Third Wave. When an outsider student asked a Third Waver to explain what they stood for, he could not give an answer.

So in just a few days, the atmosphere of the school changed into something tense, charged with anticipation—but anticipation of what? Continue reading Experiment in Fascism at an American High School: The Lesson Plan @ The Newport Beach Film Festival

Exposing UN Abuse: LFM Reviews The Whistleblower @ The Newport Beach Film Festival

By Patricia Ducey. If Satan were to come to Earth today, he would need a cover. I would suggest he consider that of a bureaucrat – the stony-eyed glare of the city guy who cites you for running your sprinklers half an hour early, or the DMV clerk who reduces all who cross her path to beaten dogs – those suggest a certain affinity to the Devil. But these small-timers can be fired; after all, their bosses are elected (or un-elected) by the people, and up the chain of command there remains an element of accountability. By contrast, a UN bureaucrat might be just the ticket. No accountability at all, and a steady stream of money from the gullible U.S. government and the myriad side “businesses” of its minions. Potential witnesses may fall down elevator shafts – terrible accident, that – humanitarian aid may be diverted to tyrants and their democratic enablers, but you can’t change the world overnight and think of all the good the UN does!

Larysa Kondracki’s brutal and riveting film, The Whistleblower, tells the true story of Nebraska police officer Kathryn Bolkovac, who signed on for six months as a highly paid UN peacekeeper in the 1990s and found herself in the hell on Earth that was Bosnia. Officer Bolkovac soon finds that “monitoring” human rights abuses means something less than actually “investigating” crimes or “arresting” anyone, and “peacekeeping” means mostly keeping a bribe-fed lid on the quiet barbarities that sputter-on well after the big guns stop. Continue reading Exposing UN Abuse: LFM Reviews The Whistleblower @ The Newport Beach Film Festival

LFM Review: Miral, and the Envy of Suffering

By Patricia Ducey. Miral, the latest from painter turned filmmaker Julian Schnabel, strives to marry lyricism to polemic; the clumsy union fails.Written by Schnabel’s collaborator and now girlfriend Rula Jebreal from her “fictionalized autobiography,” the resulting, uneven film has been soundly rejected by both critics and audiences alike. Schnabel’s prior efforts–The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, Before Night Falls, and Basquiat–chose real artists as their subjects and these unique stories, told with his exquisite painterly vision, proved eminently watchable and thoroughly satisfying as stories. Schnabel knows the territory of artist versus society, artist versus himself, and of the ecstatic vision that can sometimes destroy–he inhabits this milieu himself. He fancies himself a bit of an artistic rebel as well, clad always in his silk pajamas, carrying on his serial marriages in the NY gossip columns, all with a carefully calibrated dash of épater la bourgeoisie. Why then veer away from this successful, tragic-Romantic vein and choose the highly politicized Israeli-Palestinian conflict instead?

It would be too easy to suggest that Schnabel’s love affair with the beauteous Jebreal that began with their collaboration entirely influenced his adaptation. Instead, I attribute this filmic failure to a common psychological characteristic of the left: a veneration of victimhood that surpasses real understanding or compassion.

The Germans call it Leidensneid, or an “envy of suffering.” Based on exaggerated idealism, those who have not suffered much at all feel somewhat guilty for their good fortune (as if freedom and prosperity were mere happy accidents) and almost inexplicably offer support to ideals that they would never countenance in their own life. Communism, radical Islam, fascism; all have been momentary darlings of the left. This envy of suffering propelled the German and Italian activists/terrorists of the ‘60s to identify with the Vietnamese or the PLO against the West, for instance, and culminated in Entebbe – with the end always justifying the means, however murderous. In the leftist moral universe, the losing side is always right. Thus in Miral, if Israelis are prosperous and free thinking, the poverty stricken and devout Palestinians must be their victims. Continue reading LFM Review: Miral, and the Envy of Suffering

LFM Review: Red Riding Hood

By Patricia Ducey. After an interminable two hours, the only mystery left for me to ponder in Red Riding Hood is what compelled actors like Gary Oldman and Amanda Seyfried to sign on to this dull, unimaginative ‘reimagining’ of the classic fairy tale. I feared intense gore and got a wan, bloodless Lifetime movie instead.

The story is set in a mythical village that is straight out of a Charles Kinkade canvas. A former production designer, Hardwicke has just phoned the production values in this time. Or perhaps the misty, mythical setting just looks dopey set against the modern tone of the rest of the film. The actors talk like present day folks, except for Oldman, who delivers another scene chewing turn as a Slavic-accented werewolf slayer who rolls into the village with a ride and entourage that would make Diddy jealous. Even Seyfried, whose ethereal pale beauty fills the screen as Valerie, is a mostly modern maiden; her main conflict is which of her two attractive suitors to choose, the poor but hunky woodcutter Peter (Shiloh Fernandez) or the rich but nice boy Henry (Max Irons, son of Jeremy). The Renaissance style costuming completes the awkward mélange of style and tone, which this movie never gets right.

Teenagers, with the usual things on their minds.

The script tries to add heft to the fairy tale but strangely tosses aside the pheromonic swoon that made Hardwicke’s Twilight movies so successful. Valerie and Peter are pretty tame as star-crossed lovers go; they reveal little of the internal conflict or fevered sexuality of the most successful teen lover tales (see Romeo and Juliet). They’re kind of into each other, but her parents want her to marry Henry, the rich boy. So they plan to run away.

Just then the Big Bad Wolf returns after a long period of laying off the villagers and kills Valerie’s sister. Valerie feels guilty, because her sister loved Henry and was devastated to learn he had been promised to Val. Now we’re getting somewhere: sex, guilt, death!

But no. Valerie gets over it pretty quickly because she has bigger things to worry about: more villagers killed by the wolf, talky visits by the wolf, and then accusations of witchcraft because she talks to the wolf, and villagers being killed by Father Solomon “for the greater good.”  Yes, the wolf shows up, kills, then stops and chats telepathically to Valerie. He wants her: come away with me or the town gets it. The wolf is pretty scary when it’s whizzing by with lightning speed killing anything in its path, but once it stops for long conversations with Val we start looking at his strange “fur” and funny little eyes and realize he is one poorly constructed monster. Exposition by puppet: a fatal distraction.

Back to the story, though. Valerie now has to choose again: go with the wolf to save the town or let the killing resume. But as Father Solomon tells them, the wolf is someone among them. Valerie suspects various townsfolk on the basis of their brown eyes— the wolf also has brown eyes—but cannot figure out the mystery. Why does it matter? What is she going to do when she finds out? The movie never answers that question. Continue reading LFM Review: Red Riding Hood

LFM Review: The Fighter

By Patricia Ducey. The Fighter opens with two brothers mugging their way through the streets of their working class neighborhood against the defiant wail of “How You Like Me Now,” and I’m hooked. I grew up in an Irish neighborhood, and I know this place. We had the fight in us too.

Director David O. Russell pays homage to all that life-affirming fight in his raucous, memorable The Fighter, the story of how one man comes into his own against all the odds, great and small. “Irish” Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) lives in the shadow of half brother Dick Eklund (Christian Bale), once a champion boxer, now a crackhead and neighborhood goof. Micky, an up and coming fighter himself, trains with Dick, still an able coach (when he shows up), while mother Alice (Melissa Leo) manages his budding career along with Dickey’s “comeback.” Not surprisingly, the chaos of his dope-addled brother, grasping mother and passel of sisters drowns out Micky’s own aspirations.

The movie opens as Dickey, partying at the crackhouse, almost misses the flight to one of Micky’s out-of-town bouts. Micky and his mother drag him to safety, again. Alice treads lightly on his drug problem, however, hoping he will just get over it–an HBO crew is filming a documentary on Dickey’s comeback and she doesn’t want to jinx it. She also needs Micky’s career to save Dickey; and, for now, dependable, stalwart Micky accepts his role as actor on Dickey’s stage.

But then he falls for sexy redhead bartender Charlene (Amy Adams), and she eventually for him. After he takes a bad beating in a mismatched bout his mother and brother set up, she is the one to voice what he cannot: he has to stop allowing his family to wreck his life. When Micky and Charlene take the first steps away from the family, this sparks the conflict that forms the rest of the film. Gone is the “ticket out of poverty” meme and the class struggle meme. It’s not about race either, as Russell notes with humor: as Dickey negotiates an alliance with a Cambodian clan in some petty criminal enterprise, the Cambodian spokesman accuses him of cheating him because of race. “No, no,” Dickey’s associate assures him, “We don’t hate Cambodians. White people do this to other white people all the time.”

Mickey is simply a man who must put his own life in order. He has to be willing to fight for his independence from anything that will drag him down – even a beloved brother. He is not a victim of drug abuse or of political oppression or the church or the mob or anything else outside of his own self-doubts. His family uses him because he lets them. Micky has to earn his freedom himself—and this is a deeply conservative, even ‘objectivist,’ narrative. Russell and his actors keep that idea at the forefront with ruthless precision.

The Fighter, as a boxing movie, is refreshingly absent the sentimentality of Rocky or the chilly artiness of Raging Bull. Micky and his brother simply love their sport, and are good at it. They have the physical strength to overpower and the mental acuity to out-strategize their opponents. Boxing is their work, and Russell thus limits the boxing scenes to two pivotal fights and does not fetishize the physical spectacle. As an aside: boxing, in my mind, does not glorify violence so much as the sense of fair play and courage that help restrain violence. Yes, boxing (like all sport) is ritualized mayhem, but it’s a celebration of a process that marks civilization’s triumph, however temporary, over our animal natures.

Russell also comments on a predatory media’s exploitation of people outside the intellectual space of the upper classes. He frames the story with an HBO crew filming a documentary about Dickey. The family think it’s about a fighting comeback, but that’s subterfuge. Eventually they see, to their horror, that it’s a cautionary fable about another lower class guy’s fall from grace into addiction. It “fits the narrative,” and Russell rightly mocks the media’s condescension.

Mark Wahlberg moves in for the knockout punch in "The Fighter."

The cast excels. Christian Bale transforms himself (without going overboard) into the part as big brother, part-crackhead Dickey, and a bleach-blond Melissa Leo terrifies us with her tiger mother Alice. At first, next to these two wild and voluble characters, Mark Wahlberg’s performance may appear muted, but suddenly we realize we can’t take our eyes off him. That’s how he catches and holds our attention—by whispering, by making us come to him. His small smile, for instance, when he finally convinces Charlene to give him her number, lights up the room.

But the script by 8 Mile’s Scott Silver (and three other WGA-credited writers) and director Russell’s work gave them the goods. Russell has said he wants to grab you by the throat and heart at the beginning of this movie, and he accomplishes his mission.

We recognize Micky’s conflict; we know it and feel it in our gut because it is so essentially human. We are almost afraid to root for him, let alone his brawling kin, but we watch and hope still. Filled with humor and pathos and a winning cast, The Fighter’s “message,” if there is one, is: stay off the ropes, get in the fight.

Posted on January 24th, 2011 at 11:56am.