The Four Word Film Review Fourum

All Forums

Film Related

Films

Rethinking "American Beauty" (1999)

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

Smilies

[quote][i]Originally posted by Joe Blevins[/i]
[br]Like most moviegoers and critics, I was wowed by [i]American Beauty[/i] when it came out in 1999 and was happy to see it win Best Picture the next year, since it wasn't the usual preachy snoozefest the Academy usually favors.  I revisited the film a couple of years later on DVD and began noticing its weaknesses, and when I saw it on TCM last night, practically all I could see were its weaknesses.  What impressed me so much back then seemed false and contrived now.

Not that it's without merit.  Far from it.  The movie is masterfully acted (Kevin Spacey's Oscar was well-deserved) and very slickly and skillfully made, which might initially blind viewers to its flaws and trick them into thinking the movie is deeper and more insightful than it really is.  But the movie's supposed truths about suburban family life are actually facile cliches and its characters are, with the exception of Kevin Spacey's Lester Burnham, largely hateful stereotypes.  Besides that, the movie's plot becomes increasingly contrived and unrealistic, especially the events leading up to the climax which involves an almost Shakespearean tragic misunderstanding.  Annette Bening and Chris Cooper deserve special recognition here, because they do their best to find the humanity in characters which at the basic screenplay level are cartoonish monsters.  Upon my third viewing, I found [i]American Beauty[/i] trite, smug, and maddeningly condescending.

Director Sam Mendes and writer Alan Ball don't trust the audience to read between the lines, so they pound away at their basic themes with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the cranium.  Mendes wants to establish Col. Fitts (Cooper), for instance, as a rigid disciplinarian... so he composes a patently contrived shot of the Fitts family watching TV, with Cooper dead center in the middle of the frame and all the furniture exactly symmetrical on the left and right.  (Who lays out their furniture this way except in a movie?)  Ball wants to establish Ricky Fitts as a sensitive philosopher type, so he has Ricky wax rhapsodic about dead birds and plastic bags, and Mendes directs the actor to give his best "soulful, sensitive" stare into the camera at every available opportunity.  Notice that the character only goes into his poetic/artistic mode around Thora Birch, which leads me to believe that his whole "beautiful weirdo" persona is just a brilliant scam to get girls.  The humorous scenes between Ricky and Lester feel much more authentic, and there we get a sense of who the *real* Ricky Fitts is -- clever and pragmatic, not exceptionally deep and nothing like the Ricky we see elsewhere in the movie.  If the movie were being honest with the audience, it would have dealt with the fact that Ricky's supposedly artistic persona is wholly contrived instead of treating it as genuine.   ([i]Not Another Teen Movie[/i] does a nice job of deflating this pompous character.)

Everywhere I looked in this movie, I saw falseness.  I knew girls vaguely like Jane Burnham (Thora Birch) when I was in high school, and there is NO WAY any of them would have been caught dead on the cheerleading squad or befriending someone like Angela (Mena Suvari).  Angela Hayes, Col. Fitts, and Carolyn Burham are among the movie's most problematic characters.  Mendes and Bell don't know how to treat these people.  On the one hand, they want to use them as convenient figures of ridicule and scorn since they represent various negative stereotypes (conceited airhead; abusive monster; materialistic shrew), but they want to treat these same characters as full-fledged human beings when the script requires us to feel sorry for them.  The storyline to which I most strongly objected was how Col. Fitts' own self-loathing over his latent homosexuality has apprently caused him to join the Marines, collect Nazi memorabilia, and beat the living hell out of anyone convenient, especially members of his own family.  Puh-leeze.  This character, despite excellent work by Chris Cooper, is an insult both to real Marines and real homosexuals everywhere.  Ball and Mendes are guilty of dime-store psychology here.  Real-life working mothers are not much better served by the movie's token portrait of a career woman: the deeply frustrated and delusional Carolyn Burham (Annette Bening), a shrill harpie who mainly serves as the movie's convenient villain.  (The movie at least offers positive homosexual characters to offset Cooper, but where are the positive female characters to offset Bening?)

All of this might be forgiven if the movie had something new or worthwhile to say.  But it really doesn't.  What's the message here?  That life in suburbia isn't as "perfect" as it appears on the surface?  Well, duh.  Who didn't know that already?  Even a person whose only knowledge of American suburbia came from movies and TV would know that already.  But Mendes and Ball seem to think they're telling us something brand new that we've never considered before  That's why I say the movie is condescending.  "Look, these suburbanites have thoughts and feelings just like real people do!  Isn't that cute?"  They treat the suburbs like a big ant farm: a neatly enclosed microcosm of life presented for our detached amusement.  Maybe the movie is about living life to the fullest and following your passion.  But, no, that can't be it either, since Lester's way of living life to the fullest is to smoke pot, lift weights, and chase underage girls: a self-indulgent and self-serving path which leads not to happiness but to tragedy.  So is the movie's ultimate message that people SHOULDN'T try to break out of their dull routines?  Some message.

I realize [i]American Beauty[/i] is a beloved movie -- currently ranked #33 at the IMDB -- so I fully expect to be thoroughly outnumbered here.  That's okay.  I just wanted to share an alternate viewpoint of this film.
[/quote]

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.

T O P I C R E V I E W
Joe Blevins	Posted - 02/26/2007 : 00:13:40 Like most moviegoers and critics, I was wowed by American Beauty when it came out in 1999 and was happy to see it win Best Picture the next year, since it wasn't the usual preachy snoozefest the Academy usually favors. I revisited the film a couple of years later on DVD and began noticing its weaknesses, and when I saw it on TCM last night, practically all I could see were its weaknesses. What impressed me so much back then seemed false and contrived now. Not that it's without merit. Far from it. The movie is masterfully acted (Kevin Spacey's Oscar was well-deserved) and very slickly and skillfully made, which might initially blind viewers to its flaws and trick them into thinking the movie is deeper and more insightful than it really is. But the movie's supposed truths about suburban family life are actually facile cliches and its characters are, with the exception of Kevin Spacey's Lester Burnham, largely hateful stereotypes. Besides that, the movie's plot becomes increasingly contrived and unrealistic, especially the events leading up to the climax which involves an almost Shakespearean tragic misunderstanding. Annette Bening and Chris Cooper deserve special recognition here, because they do their best to find the humanity in characters which at the basic screenplay level are cartoonish monsters. Upon my third viewing, I found American Beauty trite, smug, and maddeningly condescending. Director Sam Mendes and writer Alan Ball don't trust the audience to read between the lines, so they pound away at their basic themes with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the cranium. Mendes wants to establish Col. Fitts (Cooper), for instance, as a rigid disciplinarian... so he composes a patently contrived shot of the Fitts family watching TV, with Cooper dead center in the middle of the frame and all the furniture exactly symmetrical on the left and right. (Who lays out their furniture this way except in a movie?) Ball wants to establish Ricky Fitts as a sensitive philosopher type, so he has Ricky wax rhapsodic about dead birds and plastic bags, and Mendes directs the actor to give his best "soulful, sensitive" stare into the camera at every available opportunity. Notice that the character only goes into his poetic/artistic mode around Thora Birch, which leads me to believe that his whole "beautiful weirdo" persona is just a brilliant scam to get girls. The humorous scenes between Ricky and Lester feel much more authentic, and there we get a sense of who the real Ricky Fitts is -- clever and pragmatic, not exceptionally deep and nothing like the Ricky we see elsewhere in the movie. If the movie were being honest with the audience, it would have dealt with the fact that Ricky's supposedly artistic persona is wholly contrived instead of treating it as genuine. (Not Another Teen Movie does a nice job of deflating this pompous character.) Everywhere I looked in this movie, I saw falseness. I knew girls vaguely like Jane Burnham (Thora Birch) when I was in high school, and there is NO WAY any of them would have been caught dead on the cheerleading squad or befriending someone like Angela (Mena Suvari). Angela Hayes, Col. Fitts, and Carolyn Burham are among the movie's most problematic characters. Mendes and Bell don't know how to treat these people. On the one hand, they want to use them as convenient figures of ridicule and scorn since they represent various negative stereotypes (conceited airhead; abusive monster; materialistic shrew), but they want to treat these same characters as full-fledged human beings when the script requires us to feel sorry for them. The storyline to which I most strongly objected was how Col. Fitts' own self-loathing over his latent homosexuality has apprently caused him to join the Marines, collect Nazi memorabilia, and beat the living hell out of anyone convenient, especially members of his own family. Puh-leeze. This character, despite excellent work by Chris Cooper, is an insult both to real Marines and real homosexuals everywhere. Ball and Mendes are guilty of dime-store psychology here. Real-life working mothers are not much better served by the movie's token portrait of a career woman: the deeply frustrated and delusional Carolyn Burham (Annette Bening), a shrill harpie who mainly serves as the movie's convenient villain. (The movie at least offers positive homosexual characters to offset Cooper, but where are the positive female characters to offset Bening?) All of this might be forgiven if the movie had something new or worthwhile to say. But it really doesn't. What's the message here? That life in suburbia isn't as "perfect" as it appears on the surface? Well, duh. Who didn't know that already? Even a person whose only knowledge of American suburbia came from movies and TV would know that already. But Mendes and Ball seem to think they're telling us something brand new that we've never considered before That's why I say the movie is condescending. "Look, these suburbanites have thoughts and feelings just like real people do! Isn't that cute?" They treat the suburbs like a big ant farm: a neatly enclosed microcosm of life presented for our detached amusement. Maybe the movie is about living life to the fullest and following your passion. But, no, that can't be it either, since Lester's way of living life to the fullest is to smoke pot, lift weights, and chase underage girls: a self-indulgent and self-serving path which leads not to happiness but to tragedy. So is the movie's ultimate message that people SHOULDN'T try to break out of their dull routines? Some message. I realize American Beauty is a beloved movie -- currently ranked #33 at the IMDB -- so I fully expect to be thoroughly outnumbered here. That's okay. I just wanted to share an alternate viewpoint of this film.
15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
Downtown	Posted - 08/23/2007 : 20:51:22 I just saw this movie for the third time last night. I still can't decide whether or not I feel sorry for the Colonel.
BaftaBaby	Posted - 04/19/2007 : 14:29:39 quote: Originally posted by Beanmimo quote: Originally posted by MisterBadIdea This is a minor point, has nothing to do with the movie. But I just wanna say: Men are more likely to think cheating is justified? I highly doubt it. That's a bipartisan issue, my friend. I am coming from the position that women are more emotionally tied to the act of making physical love than men and therefore place a higher value on it. Only so long as it's a cultural phenomenon, not a genetic one!
Beanmimo	Posted - 04/19/2007 : 14:13:47 quote: Originally posted by MisterBadIdea This is a minor point, has nothing to do with the movie. But I just wanna say: Men are more likely to think cheating is justified? I highly doubt it. That's a bipartisan issue, my friend. I am coming from the position that women are more emotionally tied to the act of making physical love than men and therefore place a higher value on it.
MisterBadIdea	Posted - 04/18/2007 : 03:28:01 This is a minor point, has nothing to do with the movie. But I just wanna say: Men are more likely to think cheating is justified? I highly doubt it. That's a bipartisan issue, my friend.
turrell	Posted - 04/16/2007 : 19:08:00 quote: Originally posted by Beanmimo quote: Originally posted by duh quote: Originally posted by Tori You didn't say anything about me at all. I brought me up as an example. :) I agree, Lester is the culprit. I put total blame on him. Don't forget Mrs. Burnham's torrid affair with The Real Estate King. and their untimely visit to the drive in take-away.... I love that line "You don't get to tell me what to do ever again". It is true that Lester is not th emodel husband, but his wife crossed the line far further in my opinion.
Beanmimo	Posted - 04/16/2007 : 17:20:22 quote: Originally posted by duh quote: Originally posted by Tori You didn't say anything about me at all. I brought me up as an example. :) I agree, Lester is the culprit. I put total blame on him. Don't forget Mrs. Burnham's torrid affair with The Real Estate King. and their untimely visit to the drive in take-away....
duh	Posted - 04/16/2007 : 16:35:13 quote: Originally posted by Tori You didn't say anything about me at all. I brought me up as an example. :) I agree, Lester is the culprit. I put total blame on him. Don't forget Mrs. Burnham's torrid affair with The Real Estate King.
Beanmimo	Posted - 04/16/2007 : 11:36:38 !!
Tori	Posted - 04/15/2007 : 19:51:57 quote: Originally posted by Beanmimo quote: Originally posted by Tori [quote]Originally posted by Beanmimo [quote]Originally posted by Tori [quote] So regardless of the views women and men hold about sex, trust is something that was agreed upon in the beginning. Even if she never finds out, you have broken the trust and you have done something wrong. That is something to feel badly about. But that was what I was talking about, men and women hold different views about sex. I did not say it made it an acceptable practice for either spouse to cheat on the other. I was just saying that it was more in tune with the male psyche to cheat and think it was ok than the female. Tori, I was not casting any aspersions on the sanctitiy of your marriage or on anyone other Fwiffer's marriage. Apologies if anyone took it differently. I shall rest the blame entirely on the shoulders of Lester Burnham (even though he didn't actually cheat he was going to) You didn't say anything about me at all. I brought me up as an example. :) I agree, Lester is the culprit. I put total blame on him.
Beanmimo	Posted - 04/15/2007 : 18:42:25 quote: Originally posted by Tori [quote]Originally posted by Beanmimo [quote]Originally posted by Tori [quote] So regardless of the views women and men hold about sex, trust is something that was agreed upon in the beginning. Even if she never finds out, you have broken the trust and you have done something wrong. That is something to feel badly about. But that was what I was talking about, men and women hold different views about sex. I did not say it made it an acceptable practice for either spouse to cheat on the other. I was just saying that it was more in tune with the male psyche to cheat and think it was ok than the female. Tori, I was not casting any aspersions on the sanctitiy of your marriage or on anyone other Fwiffer's marriage. Apologies if anyone took it differently. I shall rest the blame entirely on the shoulders of Lester Burnham (even though he didn't actually cheat he was going to)
MM0rkeleb	Posted - 04/15/2007 : 18:13:42 quote: Originally posted by turrell quote: Originally posted by M0rkeleb ... We've lived in the suburbs of Chicago for most of my life, and we don't know anybody at all like the characters in this film... ... Because while we live in suburbia, we and most of the people we know out there are Catholic, which gives us a strong sense of family... Which suburb did you grow up in? I am guessing DuPage County? Nope. Most of my life (except for a short stint in New Jersey where I was born) my family's lived in Lake County. Grayslake and Gurnee, specifically. I did go to high school in DuPage, though.
MisterBadIdea	Posted - 04/15/2007 : 16:01:48 Has anyone here ever been cheated on? I guarantee you that it is not a small fucking matter.
duh	Posted - 04/15/2007 : 15:07:08 quote: Originally posted by Tori Even if she never finds out, you have broken the trust and you have done something wrong. That is something to feel badly about. Furthermore, the straying spouse has endangered the health/lives of his or her family. STDs are no laughing matter.
Tori	Posted - 04/14/2007 : 18:39:51 quote: Originally posted by Beanmimo quote: Originally posted by Tori quote: Not neccesarily true, a man can love his wife and children and go and have a meaningless sexual encounter which means absolutely nothing to him but everything to his wife whose emotions are tied to her sexuality where his emotions are hardly on speaking terms with his sexuality. A man who truly loves his wife will not have an encounter like that and think it's okay. If he doesn't feel bad or thinks he is justified then he didn't love his wife. If he feels like a jerk afterwards and never does it again, that means he loves his wife. Though ideally if he loves his wife it will never happen in the first place. Sorry Tori i didn't see this until today!! I have to partly disagree with you on this. A man who loves his wife and kids can have an affair, maybe he'll feel a bit bad but if he is not found out he will live happily till his end of days in the knowlege that he loves his family and it did no harm. If he is found out he will do everything to stay with his family as it doesn't mean as much to him as the betrayal does to her. I'm not saying every family man is like this but if you consider the male vs female attitude to pornography as a metaphorically argumentitave allusion to this situation i think you may see I have a point. (I am single and have many many married friends and sometimes I borrow their children and/or pets) I guess my experience is limited and is coloring my perspective. I have a husband who if he had an affair wouldn't feel a 'bit bad'. He'd probably be suicidal. As for pornography he sees it as nothing beneficial but something dangerous. Why look elsewhere when he already has what he needs? Going beyond me is ridiculous to him and to me and therefore would be dangerous to us. When you have everything, don't try for more. I just can't see that a man who truly loves his wife would be fine with sleeping with someone else, even if it is once. I'm not saying that he should feel the way a woman feels, that is not the way we are made. Of course he will have a different perspective but I would think that a man who loves his wife would feel badly for breaking trust. Marriages are a contract with the idea that it will be monogamous unless something else is agreed upon by both parties. Therefore, going outside of the marriage for sex is breaking the contract, therefore breaking trust in the relationship which deteriorates the trust and the marriage. Trust is a necessity in this kind of relationship. So it isn't even about sex, it's about trust. So regardless of the views women and men hold about sex, trust is something that was agreed upon in the beginning. Even if she never finds out, you have broken the trust and you have done something wrong. That is something to feel badly about. If you had a colleague who had become a sort of friend who embezzled $10,000 from a multi-billion dollar company, that's not much. The loss of money won't be too significant. But you would feel betrayed both professionally and personally. It's sort of the same situation. It isn't the money that bothers you but the breach of trust.
turrell	Posted - 04/14/2007 : 00:52:50 quote: Originally posted by M0rkeleb ... We've lived in the suburbs of Chicago for most of my life, and we don't know anybody at all like the characters in this film... ... Because while we live in suburbia, we and most of the people we know out there are Catholic, which gives us a strong sense of family... Which suburb did you grow up in? I am guessing DuPage County?

The Four Word Film Review Fourum

Snitz Forums 2000