Lee Daniels' The Butler has been ballyhooed as the first leading contender for Oscar this year, and unless something great comes out, it will probably clean up. The movie is pretty good, and has the capability to be great in certain parts, but falls short of the mark. Those tantalizing glimpses of greatness are what frustrate me. What could have been a great movie, and has the capability to be one, just doesn't quite make it.
The Butler is ostensibly about Cecil Gaines (another understated, but incredible performance by Forest Whitaker), a one-time son of a southern sharecropper in Georgia whose father was murdered by one of the white owners. He is brought into the house and is taught to be a house servant. He leaves there to go north and ends up working in upscale hotels until he is discovered by the White House staff at a hotel in Washington. He is then hired to be a butler at the White House from the Eisenhower through Reagan Administrations. In a parallel story, we watch the development of his eldest son, Louis Gaines, as he goes from Freedom Rider, to MLK marcher, to Black Panther Party member, to a failed run for the House of Representatives to anti-Apartheid and community activist. Finally, we see a story of the Gaines' family and the ups and downs of their life.
And this is precisely the problem. The movie cannot make up its mind what exactly it is trying to be. The story, while quite good, never adapts a continuous tone or direction. The ads, and a few remarks by MLK seem to suggest that the movie is about a man who quietly tries to change attitudes from the inside. The opening scene, with two young black men lynched underneath a waving American flag seems to suggest something more militant and outspoken, along the lines of Malcolm X or Do The Right Thing. Indeed, the most intense, affecting and effective scenes are those "on the front lines" of the young civil rights protesters during the sit-ins and the marches. In fact, it usually contrasts the violent goings-on of these scenes to the stolid state dinners at the White House. In fact, the film's narrative seems to be condemning Cecil for taking a "subservient" role; that he sells out time after time until he stands up for his fellow workers demanding equal pay and opportunity and when he finally protests and is arrested in an anti-Apartheid demonstration. At times, it threatens to become an engaging history of the civil rights struggle, but then maddeningly swerves into other territory. At times, it seems to be an ad for the Democratic Party by portraying Kennedy, and to a lesser extent, Johnson, in favorable terms and depicting Nixon as a drunk bastard and Reagan as a hypocritical charlatan. At times, it is a statement about Vietnam, especially when the Gaines' other son is killed in action. At other times it is an engaging family drama about the consequences of Cecil's long hours with his relationship with his wife (played well by Oprah Winfrey). His time away, their other son's death, and Cecil's extended estrangement from Louis, drive her to adultery and hard-core alcoholism. And finally, the film also works in the separation and then reconciliation of Cecil and his son, and the way they look at life.
All of these are fascinating. All are well-told in the time they are allotted. And all of them are criminally undone by the time they are allotted. This is too big a story to tell in the 2 plus hour length of the film. Too many elements are dropped. Too many situations are tied up and solved a little too neatly. I felt as if I was getting a Cliff's Notes version of each story. No one is examined in enough detail to really resonate, although Louis comes tantalizingly close. Ultimately, Louis' story is the more compelling, and I think Lee Daniels' would rather have made that story. At least that what shows up on screen. The movie wildly changes tone again and again. Who am I to sympathize with? Condemn? The movie is obviously trying to make a point, but it gets lost in the several byways it takes. Obviously, it is trying to say that no seemingly two-sided issue is ever that simple, that there are always shades of gray, variants that each side has and that each possess parts of the truth, and that all events, good or bad, can serve a purpose for the greater good.
Two final thoughts. Why has the definitive Martin Luther King movie not yet been made? Maybe it is because the story is also too big. Malcolm X, the criminally unheralded movie by Oscar, told a fascinating and complex story of a complex man with changing views that had reverberating consequences on our nation as a whole. It told the real story of the real man, warts and all. Now, that could be because he was so candid about his own life in The Autobiography of Malcolm X on which the movie was based. The problem with making movies about such influential people is we start believing the myths that surround them and present them as historical fact. Usually they come off as Messiahs that were paragons of virtue on Earth that did no wrong, not as flawed men or women who struggled with their times and decisions. Think of the portrayals of Lincoln, Washington, Gandhi, Elizabeth I, and yes, Martin Luther King. The only three biopics of non-entertainment figures of substance I have seen that dealt with their subjects honestly and openly were Patton, Schindler's List and Malcolm X. I would like to see a similar movie about MLK, a man who wrestled with great issues and became, I feel, one of the greatest Americans ever. Second, why is Lee Daniels getting top billing in the title? I realize he directed Precious, but he didn't write this movie. And while many people thought Precious was great (as of this writing in September 2013, I have not seen it), he hardly has amassed the portfolio that other great directors have like Steven Spielberg, Alfred Hitchcock, or even Spike Lee have obtained. It just seems a little haughty, like he is trying to overshadow his film. Usually, when I see a Directed By mention in ads, even if it is a proven director like a Scorsese or Hitchcock, it is a warning sign this film may not be that good and the producers are grasping at straws to get you in to see it.
No comments:
Post a Comment