Skip to main content

That kind of nonsense can come back and haunt you down the road. If you killed her, I mean.

Suburbicon
(2017)

(SPOILERS) I wonder what the Coen brothers really thought of George Clooney (and Grant Heslov) rewriting their long-on-the-shelf screenplay. Clooney’s record with such tampering isn’t exactly spotless (Charlie Kaufman was most unimpressed with the changes he made to Confessions of a Dangerous Mind), and his decision to mash up their '50s-set crime story with their own segregation drama, as a reaction to Trump, is only deleterious to the whole. Apparently the Coens gave him their blessing, but they were probably just being polite.


Because everything about the Mayers plot, in which a black family moves to the whites-only Suburbicon community and ensuing tensions that erupt – based on Clooney and Heslov studying the Levittown, Pennsylvania case – feels awkwardly grafted onto the main meat. The family are nothing more than cyphers, with no story or characters of their own beside the functionality of representing the issue under discussion; Clooney makes his point about the scapegoating of minorities, but when it's this cack-handed, he'd have been better off just holding a press conference (he'd certainly have reached a larger audience). 


As a consequence, the subplot is well-intentioned but trite. Which is a shame, as the Coens side of the movie is entirely engrossing, twisted and full of dark wit (it also cannot have gone unnoticed by Clooney that overtly political statements are pretty much anathema to the brothers). It has common DNA with their other botched murder tales Blood Simple (which it was written subsequently to) and Fargo. Particularly Fargo, with Matt Damon's idiot husband thinking he can get away with murdering his wife bearing more than a passing resemblance to William H Macy thinking likewise. 


This plotline doesn't just concern a bumbler, though; Gardner Lodge (Damon) and his sister-in-law Margaret (Julianne Moore) are full-blooded sociopaths, mutually dependent, but if one or the other's survival hinged on the other’s not, they'd probably persuaded themselves it was for the best. Certainly, that's the crux of the opening scene, in which robbers break in to the family home and chloroform them, including son Nicky (Noah Jupe) and his wheelchair bound mother Rose (also Moore) who dies from the overdose. It looks iffy from the off, and a few scenes later it's confirmed that Gardner and Margaret concocted the scheme together. Unfortunately for Gardner, he hasn't paid the robbers (Glenn Fleshler and Ale Hassell) and he's careless enough to let Nicky see the police line-up, during which he and Margaret deny they’ve ever seen the perps before. Then there's the police chief (Jack Conley), who knows something ain't right.


The coup here is that much of the unfolding is from Nicky's perspective, and Clooney has fortunately picked a fine performer in Jupe, who can more than carry the material. He comes to realise there are murderers in his midst and can't disguise the fact, to the point where Margaret is intent on poisoning him. It's nightmarish stuff, and because of that perspective, even with Damon being a doofus, Suburbicon lacks the lightness and warmth of Fargo. It takes the entrance of Oscar Isaac as a cocky insurance investigator, intent on getting his cut or sending Gardner and Margaret down, to add a dash of the flippantly anarchic. It's great to see Isaac playing something worthy of him, since he's been served a spate of vanilla leads of late that tend to make you forget what all the fuss was about.


His is a pure Coens role, and the best thing about this movie is recognising the rhythms of their dialogue when they’re uninterrupted. "I love my sister and I love my son" protests Margaret. "You love her husband too" shoots back Isaac, not missing a beat. The police chief thinks Lodge's name sounds Jewish, to which he frustratedly responds "I'm an Episcopalian" (I'm sure they simply thought the way the word rolls around the tongue was funny enough in itself to include it). 


And to be fair to Clooney – not that there's any upside to his script meddling – he rises to the challenge of directing the material in a manner not seen since his debut, probably because it's the most energetic screenplay he's come across since then. Isaac's demise, having run from the Lodge house with a belly full of lye, comes in a deserted street – everyone is off rioting – via a poker, and it's queasily off-kilter. Then there's the climax, with Uncle Mitch (Gary Basaraba) coming to Nicky's rescue, and the action taking place entirely from Nicky's perspective under the bed. The subsequent father-son talk is also duly disturbing, and I'd much rather see Damon essaying this kind of part than his overdose of everyman charm in The Martian.


Clooney and Heslov should probably swear off the writing gig, if their work here is anything to go by, but they'll probably keep getting projects off the ground – this one was a resounding flop – on the basis that their last The Monuments Men, did pretty well despite being as dramatically inert as his earlier Leatherheads. George has made a pretty decent Coens brothers movie in Suburbia. Unfortunately, he also made a Heslov/Clooney one.




Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

If a rat were to walk in here right now as I'm talking, would you treat it to a saucer of your delicious milk?

Inglourious Basterds (2009)
(SPOILERS) His staunchest fans would doubtless claim Tarantino has never taken a wrong step, but for me, his post-Pulp Fiction output had been either not quite as satisfying (Jackie Brown), empty spectacle (the Kill Bills) or wretched (Death Proof). It wasn’t until Inglourious Basterds that he recovered his mojo, revelling in an alternate World War II where Adolf didn’t just lose but also got machine gunned to death in a movie theatre showing a warmly received Goebbels-produced propaganda film. It may not be his masterpiece – as Aldo Raines refers to the swastika engraved on “Jew hunter” Hans Landa’s forehead, and as Tarantino actually saw the potential of his script – but it’s brimming with ideas and energy.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994)
(SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump. And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

Hey, everybody. The bellboy's here.

Four Rooms (1995)
(SPOILERS) I had an idea that I’d only seen part of Four Rooms previously, and having now definitively watched the entire thing, I can see where that notion sprang from. It’s a picture that actively encourages you to think it never existed. Much of it isn’t even actively terrible – although, at the same time, it couldn’t be labelled remotely good– but it’s so utterly lethargic, so lacking in the energy, enthusiasm and inventiveness that characterises these filmmakers at their best – and yes, I’m including Rodriguez, although it’s a very limited corner for him – that it’s very easy to banish the entire misbegotten enterprise from your mind.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

I am forever driven on this quest.

Ad Astra (2019)
(SPOILERS) Would Apocalypse Now have finished up as a classic if Captain Willard had been ordered on a mission to exterminate his mad dad with extreme prejudice, rather than a mysterious and off-reservation colonel? Ad Astra features many stunning elements. It’s an undeniably classy piece of filmmaking from James Gray, who establishes his tone from the get-go and keeps it consistent, even through various showy set pieces. But the decision to give its lead character an existential crisis entirely revolving around his absent father is its reductive, fatal flaw, ultimately deflating much of the air from Gray’s space balloon.

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

The adversary oft comes in the shape of a he-goat.

The Witch (2015)
(SPOILERS) I’m not the biggest of horror buffs, so Stephen King commenting that The Witchscared the hell out of me” might have given me pause for what was in store. Fortunately, he’s the same author extraordinaire who referred to Crimson Peak as “just fucking terrifying” (it isn’t). That, and that general reactions to Robert Eggers’ film have fluctuated across the scale, from the King-type response on one end of the spectrum to accounts of unrelieved boredom on the other. The latter response may also contextualise the former, depending on just what King is referring to, because what’s scary about The Witch isn’t, for the most part, scary in the classically understood horror sense. It’s scary in the way The Wicker Man is scary, existentially gnawing away at one through judicious martialling of atmosphere, setting and theme.


Indeed, this is far more impressive a work than Ben Wheatley’s Kill List, which had hitherto been compared to The Wicker Man, succeeding admirably …