Skip to main content

Did you not just hand over a chicken to someone?

The Father
(2020)

(SPOILERS) I was in no great rush to see The Father, expecting it to be it to be something of an ordeal in the manner of that lavishly overpraised euthanasia-fest Amour. As with the previous Oscars, though, the Best Picture nominee I saw last turned out to be the best of the bunch. In that case, Parasite, its very title beckoning the psychic global warfare sprouting shoots around it, would win the top prize. The Father, in a year of disappointing nominees, had to settle for Best Actor. Ant’s good, naturally, but I was most impressed with the unpandering manner in which Florian Zeller and Christopher Hampton approached material that might easily render one highly unstuck.

The key qualification to the effectiveness of The Father as a piece of cinema, I think, is that it’s clearly the work of someone whose craft is the theatre. It’s this factor, for all that the film is well made, that prevents it from achieving any real added depth or dimension from use of the medium. You’ll doubtless be minded of Polanski’s Repulsion at times, as Zeller places you in the subjective position of Anthony’s progressive dementia, but you’ll rarely feel truly immersed, as you would with someone who truly engages with the possibilities of the form.

There are occasions when The Father’s theatrical origins (Zeller’s 2012 play La Père) are all to evident. And yet, at times, with the almost Pinter-esque sense of dislocation of time and place Anthony encounters (for example, early on when Mark Gatiss’ shifty – is there any other Gatiss? – “intruder” announces himself in Anthony’s flat) the effect is quite palpable and unnerving, because we aren’t yet at a point where we’re keyed into the rhythms of Zeller charting his protagonist’s failing mind. Is Gatiss, perhaps, a housebreaker who has eavesdropped on Anthony’s particulars and plans to take more from him than simply a wristwatch? Even later, Zeller encourages us to question the timings and sequences we’re surveying, so jumbled are the personas and identities of those Anthony knows or doesn’t (and in contrast to a surrealist approach, where this might leave one simply disorientated, there’s never a sense The Father doesn’t ultimately cohere; it’s simply that Anthony is unable to integrate or perceive the elements).

The converse are those junctures where the performative nature of the piece is foregrounded, where Zeller, perhaps inadvertently, draws attention to this being little more than a piece of filmed stagecraft, and you feel you’re being acted “at”. Notable examples include Anthony tapdancing for Imogen Poots’ carer/daughter. Less of a failure of performance, and more of writing, is Anthony slipping into a childlike state and asking for “Mummy”; however sincerely played, it’s immediately a storytelling cliché of diminishment and degeneration.

Another cliché is the family tragedy, and frankly an unnecessary encumbrance to add “mystery” and drama where there’s quite enough already; the most enduringly sinister element of the piece is perhaps that Paul (Rufus Sewell, but amalgamating with Gatiss in Anthony’s mind) may not only have been psychologically but also physically abusing Anthony (certainly, what we see of him “objectively” suggests he’s capable of such behaviour).

Aside from allowing Anthony to grandstand a little too much at times – and obviously, his real Oscar-winning turn this year was his pretending to get the jab on camera – the cast don’t put a foot wrong. Even Gatiss, ever one to cultivate the worst kind of ham tendencies, makes a good fit (although, you wonder at the Royston Vasey qualities of any care home where Bill would be working). In particular, the schism of Anthony confusing daughter Anne (Olivia Colman) with caregiver Laura (Olivia Williams, also Poots) and care home nurse Catherine works because there’s a passing similarity between Colman and Williams. It’s very easy to see Colman’s Anne reaching the point of being unable to cope, and also the seeds that give forth Sewell’s more malignant responses.

There’s overwriting at times; the repeated punctuations of “Paris. They don’t even speak English there” and “How long do you intend to hang around here getting on everybody’s tits?” are very much stage stylings, while “I feel as if I’m losing all my leaves” is a beautiful line, but too poetic for its chosen context. Some of the transitions are superbly achieved, particularly of location (from Anthony’s flat to Anne’s to the care home), such that each progression reflects that, for all Anthony’s initial intransigence (“I’m not leaving my flat!”), he inevitably wilts in the face of failing faculties.

Ludovico Einaudi’s score evokes both Philip Glass and Michael Nyman amid classical cues, lending the piece alternatively a discordant and elegiac quality. It also underlines the inevitability of Anthony’s downturn, a kaleidoscope that will only further fracture. One might suggest creating a puzzle from Anthony’s mental state is itself insensitive on the writers’ parts, but I’d take the view that such an objection ultimately submits to The Father’s ability to inspire empathy for a situation, beyond simply demanding it in a glib “because it’s sad” manner that is Hollywood’s forte. As for the two Oscar wins, they picked correctly on both counts of the options that night (a rare thing), but perhaps more of the attention should have been focussed on the Adapted Screenplay than Ant’s record-breaking aged thesp.


The 2021 Best Picture Nominees ranked:

1. The Father

2. The Trial of the Chicago 7

3. Minari

4. Sound of Metal

5. Mank

6. Promising Young Woman

7. Judah and the Black Messiah

8. Nomadland


Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .