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

If you never do anything, you never become anyone.

An Education (2009)
Carey Mulligan deserves all the attention she received for her central performance, and the depiction of the ‘60s is commendably subdued. I worried there was going to be a full-blown music montage sequence at the climax that undid all the good work, but thankfully it was fairly low key. 

Alfred Molina and Olivia Williams are especially strong in the supporting roles, and it's fortunate for credibility’s sake that that Orlando Bloom had to drop out and Dominic Cooper replaced him.
***1/2

Can you close off your feelings so you don’t get crippled by the moral ambiguity of your violent actions?

Spider-Man Worst to Best

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…

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

You're always sorry, Charles, and there's always a speech, but nobody cares anymore.

X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019)
(SPOILERS) To credit its Rotten Tomatoes score (22%), you’d think X-Men: Dark Phoenix was a travesty that besmirched the name of all good and decent (read: MCU proper) superhero movies, or even last week’s underwhelming creature feature (Godzilla: King of Monsters has somehow reached 40%, despite being a lesser beast in every respect). Is the movie’s fate a self-fulfilling prophecy, what with delayed release dates and extensively reported reshoots? Were critics castigating a fait accompli turkey without giving it a chance? That would be presupposing they’re all sheep, though, and in fairness, other supposed write-offs havecome back from such a brink in the past (World War Z). Whatever the feelings of the majority, Dark Phoenix is actually a mostly okay (twelfth) instalment in the X-franchise – it’s exactly what you’d expect from an X-Men movie at this point, one without any real mojo left and a variable cast struggling to pull its weight. The third act is a bi…

I should have mailed it to the Marx Brothers.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
When your hero(es) ride off into the sunset at the end of a film, it’s usually a pretty clear indication that a line is being drawn under their adventures. Sure, rumours surfaced during the ‘90s of various prospective screenplays for a fourth outing for the whip-cracking archeologist. But I’m dubious anyone really expected it to happen. There seemed to be a natural finality to Last Crusade that made the announcement of his 2007 return nostalgically welcome but otherwise unwarranted. That it turned out so tepid merely seemed like confirmation of what we already knew; Indy’s time was past.

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

Everyone who had a talent for it lived happily ever after.

Empire 30:  Favourite Films of the Last 30 Years
Empire’s readers’ poll to celebrate its thirtieth birthday – a request for the ultimate thirty films of the last thirty years, one per year from 1989 – required a bit of thought, particularly since they weren’t just limiting it to your annual favourite (“These can be the films that impressed you the most, the ones that stuck with you, that brought you joy, or came to you at just the right time”). Also – since the question was asked on Twitter, although I don’t know how rigorous they’re being; does it apply to general release, or does it include first film festival showings? – they’re talking UK release dates, rather than US, calling for that extra modicum of mulling. To provide more variety, I opted to limit myself to just one film per director; otherwise, my thirty would have been top heavy with, at very least, Coen Brothers movies. So here’s they are, with runners-up and reasoning:

What, you're going to walk in there like it's the commie Disneyland or something?

Stranger Things 3 (2019)
(SPOILERS) It’s very clear by this point that Stranger Things isn’t going to serve up any surprises. It’s operating according to a strict formula, one requiring the opening of the portal to the Upside Down every season and an attendant demagorgon derivative threat to leak through, only to be stymied at the last moment by our valorous team. It’s an ‘80s sequel cycle through and through, and if you’re happy with it functioning exclusively on that level, complete with a sometimes overpowering (over)dose of nostalgia references, this latest season will likely strike you as just the ticket.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …