Skip to main content

You counselled him and then he shot himself.

First Reformed
(2017)

(SPOILERS) This uneven at best Roman Catholic – I know, it concerns a protestant church, but who are we trying to kid? – eco-guilt picture from Paul Schrader that has been hailed as his best in years, which it probably is, but these things are relative. Schrader has made, for the first hour or so, an engrossing study of faith, doubt and despair, but his choices after that, particularly during the last half hour, undo much of the effort.


As one of Hollywood's go-to practising Catholics (step forward also Marty) it should be no surprise that Schrader's appreciation of belief is a very literal, screedy one, where anything more nebulous and, dare I say, spiritual is left for the birds (a similar issue haunted Scorsese's otherwise sterling Silence). These filmmakers are essentially admitting to wrapping themselves in an empty shell of religion, one that offers no real comfort or solace; so why do it? Why even attach a label to oneself if it provides no fulfilment (the answer being, presumably, once a Catholic always a Catholic)? Here, Schrader's cinematic surrogate is Ethan Hawke's severe and introspective Reverend Toller, wrestling with his faith even before the husband (Michael, played by Philip Ettinger) of one of his congregants (Amanda Seyfried’s Mary – who is pregnant! Of course she is!) blows his brains out after receiving counsel from him.


Michael, neither a believer nor scathing of the pastor's views, confessed his environmental woes to Toller, how he considered it wrong to bring a child into a planet bent on destruction. "Can God forgive us? For what we’ve done to his world?" he asks, to which Toller is diplomatically neutral because he has no idea ("Who can know the mind of God?"). Michael also informs Toller that the world has reached its tipping point and that collapse isn’t in some distant future; "You will live to see this". 


It seems Michael's demise is Toller's personal tipping point, but in his depiction of this, or lack of depiction thereof, Schrader allows his film to get away from him. Toller rather abruptly assumes the mantle of deranged enviro-activist when he retains rather than disposes of Michael's suicide vest. Yes, Schroder has summoned the ghost of Travis Bickle.


This Taxi Driver impulse entirely gets in the way, and makes what had the makings of a mature, reflective work seem rather silly and worse lazy. Father Toller taking on Michael's environmental cause is the least effective way of Schrader broadcasting a big issue, since it undermines the character and the sense that the writer-director is able to tell his story in any kind of measured way; now he has another string to his doom-laden bow besides despair at religion: despair at the future of the planet (why only now?) When Toller then dons a suicide vest, ready to blow away a church full of unworthies, we lose any sense that Schrader thought his character through at all. 


The result is that Toller's an incoherent mess, and the solid work put in by Hawke comes to naught. There’s no grounding whatsoever for the leap Toller makes from troubled pastor to someone ready to kill a congregation. Yes, he's depressed, has lost his son, his marriage, has (most likely) stomach cancer, a drinking problem and is seeking answers to his crisis of faith through the study of deep religious thinkers. And he feels in some way responsible for Michael's suicide. But does any of that suddenly flick a switch to make him a mass murderer (or, as I guess we're intended to see him seeing himself, a self-appointed martyr to a cause)? With Taxi Driver, the millstone of quality around Schrader's subsequent career, we are aware of Travis Bickle's psychotic break from the start. It's never in any doubt that he's unable to track a common wavelength. In contrast, it's never less than clear that Toller knows precisely moral right from wrong, so the adjustment Schrader makes seems almost puerile. Almost as puerile is Toller symbolically wrapping himself in barbed wire before failing to administer a fatal dose of drain cleaner. 


The best sequences come early, as the pastor engages in philosophical debate with Michael. Schrader can't hide how this invigorates him as a writer, such that he has Toller comment as much in his journal ("I felt like I was Jacob wrestling all nightlong with the angel. It was exhilarating"). It's rarely a good idea to become too wrapped up in what you think a film should be, rather than what it is, but if Schrader had resisted the inclination to pursue dramatic hyperbole, and maintained these low-key contemplative lines instead, he might have come up with something really special (particularly since Toller struts forward an interesting philosophical line that invites further discussion, with regard to hope and despair and how "Holding these two ideas in your head is life itself"). 


Instead, we quickly lose the thread of inquiry, and we’re left with more familiar tropes, of corrupt corporations and opportunistic ministers. There's the occasional gimmer of the same interrogatory spirit, such as with the angry young support group attendee set on denouncing the poor, Toller given to opine how all responses have become ones of extremes, but it’s only occasional. Perhaps the best is Reverend Kyles (Cedric the Entertainer) calling out Toller for being such a misery guts (seriously, it's no surprise his church is all but empty) and responding to the pastor's "You think God wants to destroy his creation?" with a scriptural trump card "He did once for forty days and forty nights". Much as it may sound like anathema, it's (contextually) a reasonable argument, certainly no less valid than Toller's responding to requests to understand why bad things happen to good Christian people. 


But Schrader sacrifices this for something altogether more emptily cathartic. He chooses to grant Toller salvation through the laziest of devices, a woman half his age barely given a character of her own; the substitute "spiritual" experience of the film is his non-sexual union with Mary, in which he flies over an unspoilt natural landscape, only for it to descend into a hell of belching chimneys, toxic waste and rubbish. Subtle it ain't. Toller finds "redemption" in the advice he gave Michael in relation to bringing new life into the world, his self-preservation instinct winning out (we could call it love, but Schrader has already rejected spirituality as attainable, so this must just be death as an aphrodisiac, infatuation spurred by the thought of imminent demise). He has, after all, rejected old maid Esther ("I despise you. I despise what you bring out in me"). Ultimately, he rests easy in the shallow, which is what Schrader does in the dramatic – or banal – fireworks of his finale.


First Reformed is an austere, bristly film, so reflecting Schrader's temperament (he prefers those empty, desolate churches to the charismatic ones), and if it had maintained that tone, keeping to a straight- and-narrow thematic and philosophical line, it might have been a good one. But the lurch into melodrama is fatal; the worst thing you can say about such a sombre picture is that it ends up rather silly, but it does.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.