You know how
I said I really wanted Leonardo DiCaprio to win the Oscar ®? And you know how I
said well, in fairness, Matthew McConaughey did a fine job of his part in
Dallas Buyers Club? I mean ok, I still stand behind both statements. But having
watched Nebraska I am left literally tearing out my hair going “WHY HASN’T
BRUCE DERN GOT AN OSCAR?!” I watched Nebraska in the last third of an 18 hour
flight (20 – something including stopovers). I was moved to tears regardless of
the insomnia, the jetlag that had begun to set in and the sore eyes… It may be
because stories of old folks have a special place for me (my maternal
grandparents are still alive and I am especially close to my grandmother) but
still… Some emotions are universal and the emotion here is just so strong, I
would argue you can tap into it regardless…
Woody Grant
(Bruce Dern) has a bee in his bonnet. Well, to be honest, he has many bees. He
is getting old and a little “confused”, the years of heavy drinking have not
helped. His family are finding it harder and harder to look after him and now,
he has his heart set on going to Nebraska. Woody has received a letter from a
magazine, ( and it bears all the classic hallmarks of a scam), claiming that he
has won one million dollars. So Woody wants to go to Nebraska to the
headquarters of the magazine to collect his winnings. An if this means making
the trip from Montana to Nebraska on foot, well, he’ll do that too. In the end,
his youngest son David (Will Forte) gives in. His father is clearly not letting
go of this one, so he might as well ensure he doesn’t do himself any mischief.
So he agrees to drive him down to Nebraska. But as will often happen when two
people are stuck in a small space with minimal distractions and lots of time on
their hands the past will slowly come bubbling to the surface and Woody and
David’s past is very far from being a happy one…
This film
basically hinges on how good of a job Bruce Dern does of his part. Because the
dysfunctional Woody, what we learn of him “in person” and what we pick up from
the other characters talking about him constitute the “spine” of the film. And
to give credit where it is due, it is not an easy part to pull off. He has
minimal dialogue and basically portrays a cantankerous, obstinate old man who
creates an aura around him without saying much of anything – in fact part of
the aura stems from the fact he doesn’t say much of anything. But his
performance coupled with the equally brilliant performances of Will Forte and
June Squibb who plays Woody’s long-suffering wife mean that we are pulled into
the centre of the action in no time.
What I
really love about this film is that it is a touching and realistic portrayal of
how our relationship with our parents changes as we grow older. It isn’t just
about taking on the role of caring for them as opposed to them caring for us –
although there is that too. Throughout the film, David is trying to actively
learn more about his past, his family’s past. You know that point when you
started actively asking “logical” and “adult” questions about your family and
things that happened in the family’s past? Yeah, that moment. That, combined
with the moment you realise your parents are human. We’ve all been there.
Except for David, this is a bit more complicated because Woody was far from
being a good father. In fact, from what we can gather, he was quite far from
being an average father as well. David approaches his father with a clear air
of “I’ve had enough of this” at the beginning of the film. Although, maybe
because he is the younger sibling, he has more of a “sense of duty” than his
older brother Ross ( Bob Odenkirk) who is adamant a care home is where his
father belongs. By the end of their adventure the relationship between David
and Woody has changed. Oh it is not a “fairy tale” ending. They are not “the
best of friends”. But they are the best of friends they can be under the
circumstances and that is all that matters…
Mainstream
storytelling would have us believe in a constantly loving family unit. If there
are “dysfunctional” characters they are “lovable rogues” who can, more often
than not, be “reformed” in the space of the story. What I love about this film
is that it bucks both these trends, making the entire family a lot more “real”
and the ending a lot easier to believe. Because in real life, more often than
not families aren’t “cute” awkward like mainstream movies – they are “what the
hell is wrong with you” kind of awkward. And that kind of awkward doesn’t get
all reformed and tidied away – if there is any reforming done, it gets done at
a snail’s pace and probably in bits and pieces over decades. But of course that
doesn’t actually make for a nice tidy storyline with lovable characters so
films about it are fewer and further between. But the thing is, when done
right, the films that DO portray family life warts and all do tend to get huge
acclaim. Why? Audiences bond with characters that are accurate portrayals of
themselves and events that reflect their own lives. And audiences are made up
of real people. Real people with warts.
Kayıtlar
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder