Showing posts with label Mykelti Williamson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mykelti Williamson. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

For Better; For Worse: FENCES


Fences is the sort of smart, big hearted, densely written, deeply felt, smartly blocked, stirringly performed theatrical experience that can knock you sideways for the rest of the day.  Denzel Washington’s powerful film adaptation of August Wilson’s Tony- and Pulitzer Prize-winning play is thoughtful, patient, considered, literary. It uses the medium of cinema to recreate the full feeling of having spent and been spent by a consuming, heavy-duty, satisfying evening at the playhouse. Feeling no pressure to open up or embellish upon the text, Washington uses screen staging to bring full expression to Wilson’s writing, letting actors roam the frame, boxed in by their circumstances and holding court for each other as a way to feel heard, even and especially if they’re simply talking past each other. Here is a film with no frivolous exchanges. Every line is imbued with forceful personality and deep meaning. A complicated film, this rich text is contrary to the usual contemporary cycle of instant reaction and shallow analysis. You have to sit with it. You have to live in it. The film creates a fully formed world out of a backyard, entire lives out of conversations.

We sit in and around the home of Troy and Rose, a black couple living paycheck to paycheck in 1950s’ Pittsburgh. They have a mostly happy life, but there are unresolved dramas, neglected compromises, and lingering regrets. He (Washington) is a frustrated garbage man still hoping to get ahead, discrimination be damned. Once a potential Negro league star, he just missed the desegregation of the major leagues. He’s trapped by what could have been, caught in the tug of war between prejudice and opportunity that defined the Northern migration of African Americans looking for better futures in the time between Reconstruction and the Civil Rights Movement. And yet for as much as his circumstances defined his possibilities and his worldview, he has made progress, with a steadfast wife (Viola Davis), a loyal friend (Stephen McKinley Henderson), a troubled brother (Mykelti Williamson), and two sons (one grown (Russell Hornsby), the other (Jovan Adepo) almost there). He can’t quite reconcile his offspring’s ambitions (jazz and football) with his sense of practicality. He worries for them, and though times have changed and are about to continue changing, he can’t quite see it, because they didn’t change in time for him.

Human and humane, Wilson’s worldview makes the story and characters not a sociological specimen or mere vehicle of messaging. No, Fences is stirringly true to life, with characters full of complications. And into these people a perfect cast breathes astonishing life. In long, complicated, dense dialogues and monologues they speak. We hear them gossip, reminisce, plan and dream, and yet underneath we can hear their fears and see their foibles. Fully rounded and shaded figures, they aren’t always easy to get a read on. They reveal flaws and disagreeable aspects of themselves, sometimes through trying to hide their truth, and other times because they’ve run out of obfuscations and must now confront their human failings. There’s a core elemental quality to the film’s specificity, true to Wilson’s sharp evocation of race, class, time, and space, and his keen ear for the ways in which speech can bring people closer and pull them apart, how the sum total of a person’s experience can both expand and contract a person’s possibilities. We can see and hear how some are taken for granted, and others show affection through gruffness, how cruelty can be a kindness and how compassion can flower even in withering relational pains.

What’s most thrilling about Washington’s directorial approach here is how he turns the movie house into a playhouse, importing all the immediacy of live theater while retaining all the power of the wide big screen image. He finds large emotional scenes subtly wrought, moments of deep psychology and powerful exchanges played not to the back rows but perfectly calibrated with delicate electrifying intimacy for the cameras. He, with cinematographer Charlotte Bruus Christensen, builds frames with a proscenium in mind, not stagey but thrillingly contained. The blocking (often a lost art in a world of bland coverage and frivolous CG-assisted swoops) is thought through so deeply, each actor’s placement on the screen, as well as every element of production design, strategically situated to reveal and deepen the emotion of the moment. Watch how a fence becomes metaphor sitting unfinished behind people working to build separations. See how a tree looms above, sturdy growth, or a bat leans ready to strike, full of unspoken potential. Spot movement through a back window, a sight alternating between comfortable domesticity and intentional isolation.

A most intelligently constructed film, Washington has engineered every moment to highlight the power of the play’s text, and the impressively felt, effortlessly deployed performances by himself and his tremendous co-stars. This is a movie of small gestures, quiet revelations, sharp exchanges, quicksand confessions, and dazzling complexity. In its smallness, it grows big, breathtakingly apparent that it’s a major work. More than a surface transposition from theater to cinema, Washington (who surely knows the play inside and out, having starred with Davis in its 2010 Broadway revival) interprets, making it a vital and unshakeable moviegoing experience. He provides space for his talented cast to inhabit their characters, digging deep into their drives and desires, dramas and disagreements, hard pasts and talented possible futures. Through their conversations whole worlds open up. Without visualizing a flashback, Washington need only let the camera linger as he or one of his colleagues holds forth in colorful language, evoking whole strains of conflict and trauma or love and loss in a nod, a fleeting expression, a softly spoken word. It is a rich, dense, and hearty meal in a multiplex otherwise full of empty trifles.

Saturday, July 2, 2016

Killer Holiday: THE PURGE: ELECTION YEAR


The Purge: Election Year is further proof there’s little scarier than rich white people who are afraid they’ll have to share a modicum of wealth and respect with others. It’s the third in a series of movies about an alternate universe America where one day a year is set aside as Purge Day, a twisted national holiday celebrated with 12 hours of lawlessness. “All crime,” the official warning blares, “will be legal, including murder.” It’s always amusing to hear that last clause, the system openly encouraging murder as the one crime to prioritize. As this is a horror franchise, that’s only natural, but couldn’t there be an interesting Purge movie made out of people taking advantage of the time to get in some tax fraud or indecent exposure? Anyway, this entry is once again a murder-fest with good people struggling to survive the night. There’s not much new brought to the concept, just a reiteration that doubles down on its political subtext.

The Purge is a great concept. The first movie disappointingly steered away from its implications to become a small-scale siege picture, but the second was a tense gory actioner with sympathetic characters caught in the crossfire and a smart sense of the night’s disproportionate effects on women, minorities, and the poor. Election Year takes that political thread and runs with it. An idealistic senator (Elizabeth Mitchell) is running for president on the promise of eliminating The Purge. The polls are close, so a cabal of powerful white guys – a conference table full of religious fundamentalists, corporate cronies, and crooked politicians – decides to take advantage of the upcoming holiday to eliminate this threat to their way of life. You see, they like the annual opportunity for consequence-free murder, especially as a means of consolidating their power and of population control. The senator’s head of security (Frank Grillo) catches wind of this just in time and narrowly escapes with the candidate out into the dangerous Purge Night.

It’d be hard to miss the message, with the wealthy backroom power brokers calling a team of mercenaries, white supremacists with Confederate flag patches and Swastika tattoos, after their target, and brave working class folks of all races rising up to protect her. A tough shop-owner (Mykelti Williamson), his loyal employee (Joseph Julian Soria), and their capable vigilante friend (Betty Gabriel) are protecting their neighborhood from looters and killers when they cross paths with the candidate and her rescuer. They team up to keep her shielded, and to track down a safe zone where they can rest. This is obviously easier said then done as they encounter around every corner murdering maniacs emboldened by the night’s evil permissive atmosphere. Memorable threats include affluent foreigners on murder tourism trips to “act like Americans” for the night and a group of teen girls who roll up in a car covered in ropes of white Christmas lights, Miley Cyrus’ “Party in the U.S.A.” blaring from the stereo.

This sounds like some sick fun, and it sometimes is, but returning writer-director James DeMonaco cobbles together the setpieces with an unsteady camera, chaos editing, and a lack of cleverness. There’s little build in suspense or escalating action. Even its best moments are simply retreads of what’s worked before. Rather than improving on its predecessors or adding to the lore, it’s just more of the same. This time it’s taking the political subtext and, perhaps emboldened by its election year setting (and release), makes it simply text. Characters stand around discussing politics, making the implied points of other Purges right out loud without deepening or complicating them. If it feels like diminishing returns, it’s because the movie’s content to remake and repeat images and ideas while spelling out its point of view in broad, obvious terms. It’s an acid joke when the senator blames the night’s continued existence on it lining the pockets of the NRA and insurance companies. And the movie doesn’t play coy about the darkness of prejudice and mayhem in the populace that can be ignited by the right demagogue. But that’s also where the sloppiness of its construction starts to weigh on its moralizing.

It’s a movie ostensibly about how violence is never the answer, even ending on a triumphant note of one character convincing another that the ballot box is where the villains’ ultimate defeat will be. But this is also a movie that gets its reason for being out of the splatter moments. It’s hard to preach nonviolence mere minutes after a mass shooting is supposed to be read as some sort of catharsis. Is it seriously saying the only thing that can stop a bad Purge is a good Purge? And it’s hard to take its desire for interracial cooperation seriously when it includes several groups of Purging inner city youths coded as packs, shot in silhouette, speaking in exaggerated slang. Even our heroes get some cringe-worthy lines like, “Never sneak up on a black guy on Purge Night!” It leaves a bad taste, especially because it feels so inadvertent, an outgrowth of its well-intentioned hot-button emphasis mixed with flat dialogue and thin characterizations. It’s not fun or provocative, just mental pollution. At least the core concept of the series is strong enough and adaptable enough to survive a misfire like this one.