Tag Archives: Paterson

Marriage Story (2019): The Messiness of Divorce

Inspired in part by his own divorce, Noah Baumbach (Frances Ha) writes and directs the story of an artist couple at the end of their marriage. Charlie (Adam Driver; Paterson) is a play director and Nicole (Scarlett Johansson; Jojo Rabbit) is an actress in New York. They have a young son together, but, due to differences in long-term goals, have decided to divorce. There was no inciting incident, just a gradual diverging that has led to their current situation with no visible hostilities from either party.

While Baumbach gives both parents plenty of attention, he isn’t completely even-handed. It may be due to personal biases or due to Charlie being partly based on Baumbach himself, but the film places more blame on Nicole. Neither lead is a villain here as both husband and wife make mistakes, but Nicole escalates the situation by hiring a vicious divorce attorney named Nora (Laura Dern; Blue Velvet). They had initially agreed to using a mediator to keep lawyers out of the picture, but when Nicole violates that agreement it makes her initially appear like the aggressor. Charlie is served with divorce papers and, without representation of his own, is put in a vulnerable position as Nora threatens to take everything.

Nora is an utterly reprehensible character.

If nothing else, the film will make every viewer hate divorce attorneys. Charlie’s initial lawyer is an older man that gives him circular contradictory advice and seems partially defeated before even starting. When Charlie switches to a high-end option (Ray Liotta; Goodfellas), he is stuck with an effective but overly aggressive lawyer that curses with every breath about how Charlie is damaging his own position. As bad as Liotta’s character is, he is at least upfront with his hostility. Nora is an absolute abomination. Dern, who is normally immensely likable in all her roles, plays Nora as a slimy, two-faced villain that will politely screw you over while brandishing a fake smile. In both cases the lawyers end up costing tens of thousands of dollars to the detriment of the family. One character notes that they’re taking from their son’s college money to pay for legal fees.

After the lawyers become involved, Marriage Story is able to effectively show the emotional strain caused by the divorce. Charlie and Nicole’s divorce is initially completely amicable. They know they need to separate, but there is no bad blood until attorneys start making demands. Both threaten to claim spousal support, something neither originally wanted, and slander each other using inconsequential facts to portray the other as an irresponsible parent. This creates resentment between Charlie and Nicole and results in hurtful screaming matches where long buried thoughts surface as devastating insults. Every part of their arguing feels raw and unfiltered, like pent up frustration rather than dramatic dialogue. The legal maneuvering and the following emotional harm warps their priorities and causes them to fight for minor wins instead of creating the best situation for their family. By showing how Charlie and Nicole’s relationship is upended by the legal process, Baumbach succeeds in making Marriage Story a sensitive and realistic examination of the messiness of divorce.

4/5 stars.

The Report (2019): As Diligent and Thorough As Its Protagonist

The Report is a procedural about the writing of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture led by Daniel Jones (Adam Driver; Paterson), a member of Senator Dianne Feinstein’s (Annette Bening; The Kids Are All Right) staff. Directed and written by Scott Z. Burns, the writer of Contagion, the film uses a similarly methodical pace and approach to the material. Like Steven Soderbergh, who is also a producer on this film, Burns invests time in the minutiae of bureaucracy and is able to depict the gargantuan effort required to review millions of documents, create a 6,700 page report, and get it released without exhausting the audience’s patience.

Driver is perfect for the role of Jones. He has a cool demeanor and the commitment of a focused, tireless worker. He comments on how he used to be in a relationship, but the writing of the report didn’t allow enough time to maintain it. In his interactions with the CIA and senate staff, Driver emphasizes Jones’s persistence and later his emotional investment. As he faces more scrutiny, Driver’s responses become faster and more forceful and make it obvious the opposition’s arguments are fallacious. His immediate retorts show the depth of his knowledge and the passion he has for publishing the truth.

Driver shows Jones’s extreme attention to detail and commitment.

The depiction of torture is likely to cause some controversy. Burns does not sugarcoat any of the grisly aspects of how prisoners were treated. The chief antagonists are the self-proclaimed interrogation experts that developed the enhanced interrogation techniques (EIT). These two come from military backgrounds but are revealed to have never participated in any type of interrogation. They act as contractors, instructing others to undress, beat, sleep deprive, and waterboard their detainees until they talk. Alongside them are several CIA staff that support their methods. The prevailing notion is to extract info and prevent future attacks “by any means necessary”. Burns shows how the fear created by 9/11 and the desire for some sense of justice morph into cruelty and how unchecked support of the CIA led to unspeakable acts, made easier by the fact that the detainees were foreigners.

The film places significant blame on those that cover up their mistakes. The CIA is shown going to great lengths to sell enhanced interrogation to the public. They have agents do interviews claiming that EIT directly led to the killing of Bin Laden, using their major success to justify their wrongdoings despite the fact that internal reviews showed that the techniques did not produce any unique information. As sick as the torture is, the degree to which an organization will protect its reputation above any moral responsibilty is perhaps the most loathsome aspect of the story.

Burns’s ultimate goal is not just an indictment of torture, but a reaffirmation of what are United States government is supposed to represent. Committing torture is a terrible mistake, but hiding its use from the public is an act of deception. Using rousing speeches from Benning and real life clips from Senator John McCain, Burns reinforces the importance of accountability, admitting to mistakes, and improving over time. He as created a detailed film about a difficult part of American history that is as diligent and through as its protagonist.

4/5 stars.

BlacKkKlansman (2018): All Power to All the People

Who better to go undercover in the KKK then a black cop? As ridiculous as it seems (resist the urge to reference the famous Dave Chapelle sketch), BlacKkKlansman is based on the true story of the first black cop in Colorado Springs and his infiltration of the local KKK chapter. Ron Stallworth (John David Washington; Ballers) plays a rookie cop who responds to an ad for the KKK in the newspaper, posing as a racist white man, but mistakenly gives out his real name. He continues his conversations on the phone and uses a white peer (Adam Driver; Paterson) to attend meetings in person to investigate their potentially violent plans. As director Spike Lee (Chi-Raq) notes in the opening titles “dis joint based upon some fo’ real, fo’ real shi*t”.

In his first leading role, Washington’s performance leaves room for improvement. He is at his best when on the phone with klansmen and directing the investigation. In these moments, he takes an active role in the film and shows his character’s personal passion for this particular job. However, throughout most of the runtime, his performance is strangely distanced. In many scenes that should call for a strong emotions, he has a blank, almost confused look on his face. His wide-eyed expression may be meant to convey his lack of experience as a police officer, but the unintended effect is that is reduces his agency within the story. It’s a shame that a character who takes such a daring leap is attached to a performance that doesn’t do his courage justice.

This deer in the headlights look comprises too much of Washington’s acting.

The 70s setting provides plenty of material for Lee to pump up the film’s style. The cast, particularly the black leads, are shown in bold outfits with bright colors, bell bottoms, paisley shirts, and with plenty of facial hair to go around. He also taps into the Black Power movement of the time and contrasts it with the KKK’s white supremacy. While the klansmen shout derogatory screed and exclusive benedictions like “God bless White America”, the Black Power leaders decry “All power to all the people”. In one of the film’s most powerful moments Lee juxtaposes the Klan’s initiation ritual and celebration with a Black Power meeting where a character recounts a case of sickening injustice and cruelty. The film’s greatest triumph is how it contextualizes the Black Power movement (and other equality initiatives), often miscast as radical or extremist, as striving for standard, humane treatment of all individuals in the face of the Klan’s ignorance, prejudice, and fearmongering.

Spike Lee’s films are inextricable from his personal politics and with BlacKkKlansman it feels like he has finally found the story where his message and movie are complimentary. His talents as a director are indisputable but too often his political voice has been problematic, inconsistent, or unsuited to the story at hand. This was apparent in Chi-Raq where he sincerely believed his ideas about gang violence and guns were going to cause social change, but muddled his message with lowbrow humor and precarious implications about gender roles. With his new film, Lee’s favorite topic of race relations in America is his, and his characters’, center focus. The script weaves in enough language mimicking contemporary politics that the film’s story feels relevant. This is sometimes done to comedic effect with the striking similarities between the KKK’s hateful rhetoric and modern day campaign slogans but Lee, never one for subtlety,  doesn’t hold back any punches. When it seems like he will resign himself to parallels and allegory, Lee comes out in force and makes his points explicit. As always, Lee isn’t just releasing a movie, he’s making a statement – and a loud one at that. His style and commentary on the present environment fill the story with enough panache and thematic contrasts to create one of his most effective films ever.

4/5 stars.