| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Joe Blevins 
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
 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. |
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 02:59:22
|
Interesting points, Joe. I've seen this a couple of times and agree with some points but don't remember enough details to comment on others. Some points:-
a) Col. Fitts' homosexuality. This also didn't appear plausible to me. Latent homosexuality did not appear compatible with a macho military figure. But... is that simply my bias? Perhaps moviegoers expect fictional homosexuals to be camp and effeminate, and scoff when they're tough guys. I don't personally know any 'gay tough-guys' but this doesn't necessarily mean they can't exist. Take John Wayne Gacy for example.
b) Mena/Thora friendship. I agree that this may have been implausible. (I had the same thought about the two protagonists in Sideways, but this didn't stop it from being entertaining; in fact much of the humour came from their incompatibility). This is the world of fiction, after all.
c) The Message. In true Hollywood style, the message of this movie would have been "If you break out of boring, pointless suburbia, you'll save the world from an alien invasion / develop a cure for cancer / catch a serial killer before he kills the female protagonist" etc etc. Beauty bucked the trend somewhat, so perhaps the 'message' was something like "If you're a boring nobody existing in suburbia, break out of your pointless existence and replace it with selfish hedonism (as Lester did) then you are doomed. You CAN'T break out." |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 09:36:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
a) Col. Fitts' homosexuality. This also didn't appear plausible to me. Latent homosexuality did not appear compatible with a macho military figure.
Hhmmm, I'm not sure that there is any good basis for thinking that.
However, I cannot remember that aspect of the film or almost any other. When I watched it, I found it to be very overrated and fairly pointless. |
|
|
|
Conan The Westy
"Father, Faithful Friend, Fwiffer"
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 10:25:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
When I watched it, I found it to be very overrated and fairly pointless.
I'm with Sal & Joe... I never enjoyed this movie. I couldn't find any sympathetic characters to like.  |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 10:44:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
When I watched it, I found it to be very overrated and fairly pointless.
I'm with Sal & Joe... I never enjoyed this movie. I couldn't find any sympathetic characters to like.
True, nobody was likeable in this. But, same for Pulp Fiction and Sideways and stuff like Lock, Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels, all of which I liked. Lack of a likeable character to identify with doesn't bother me.  |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 11:15:41
|
There were a few other 'flaws' in this. E.g., tough guy who happens to be a closet homosexual accidentally reveals his sexuality, then decides he has to kill the guy to avoid being exposed? This isn't exactly plausible either.
Character development and/or interaction is often less than plausible in fiction (as is plot development) otherwise every story is simply going to be a 'slice of life' and generally uninteresting. Obviously people have differing levels of tolerance for implausibility in fiction, apparent implausibility may spoil it for some. I have zero tolerance for techno-thrillers that take liberties with physical reality for shock value or plot development, but the creation of "somewhat unnatural friendships" for plot development doesn't bother me so much. If it did I'd rate Psycho and Silence of the Lambs very poorly, as Norman Bates and Hannibal Lector are quite implausible characters, no such people could exist.
I think Beauty was most enjoyable on it's first viewing, but there were no hidden levels to be uncovered with a second viewing, i.e., there was nothing left to see. And, the closer one looks the more flaws one will find. You could do this with just about any movie though, so does it make it a bad film? I've judged this one on the enjoyment I got from it the first time I saw it (which mainly came from the unravelling of Spacey's character, the likes of which I'd never seen in a movie, it was original). The fact I don't feel the need to watch it a few more times to 'get more out of it' doesn't make it a bad film. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 11:19:49
|
I can't say I remember all the details from this movie, but I recall it was packed with a kind of "philosophical" pretensiousness much lauded by Hollywood.
Magnolia was of the same ilk, although at least AB spared us the frogs.
Even worse examples were the sickening What Dreams May Come and the risible I Heart Huckabeeswhere I would happily machete anyone involved in the production.
|
|
|
|
rabid kazook 
"Pushing the antelope"
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 11:35:42
|
Pretencioussnessensnes, schmessnessensnes... What a sucky word... 
And I never thought of Huckabees or Magnolia being "the lauded by the Hollywood flicks". Must be the very "indie" feel to them, I got through my system. |
Edited by - rabid kazook on 02/26/2007 11:38:33 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 14:25:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
Pretencioussnessensnes, schmessnessensnes... What a sucky word...
And I never thought of Huckabees or Magnolia being "the lauded by the Hollywood flicks". Must be the very "indie" feel to them, I got through my system.
My point, little Kazook, is that they all aspire to be philosophical and its a load of garbage.
Plain enough for ya?
|
|
|
|
Paddy C
"Does not compute! Lame!"
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 15:56:59
|
I'm not a big fan of American Beauty myself, but isn't the main theme one of emotional repression, and outward appearance vs. reality? Many of the characters have mental problems as a result of a long history of suppressing emotions, and this cycle is essentially what Kevin Spacey is rebelling against.. (Hi, I'm Dr. Phil...  )
Annette Bening: vainly chases a successful career at the expense of her family to the point of mental illness, admittedly not a likeable character, but why should she be likeable? Male characters are portrayed this way all the time. While she chooses to project an image of success, her family is crumbling, and she can't accept responsibility, to the point where she considers killing her husband.
Chris Cooper: Expresses rage at the illness of his wife quite readily at the expense of his son, but his military approach to organising his house is an extension of his repressed 'lifestyle choice'  i.e. the more things appear to be in order, the less chance of discovery.
Ricky Fitts: represses his true personality, but only to his father - this is the important relationship for this character. He's just a buddy to Lester and a boyfriend to Thora Birch, I didn't see anything wrong with that... like most blokes really.
Mena Suvari: lies about relationship experiences, then eventually reveals the truth to Lester in a cathartic moment. The least believable character in the movie for me, mainly, as others have said, because of her friendship with Thora Birch's character.
Thora Birch and Kevin Spacey appear to be the only characters really behaving without regard to external appearances...
The final outcome of Spacey's character is irrelevant to the main theme. I reckon important point to remember is that he was happy in the end, by contrast with Cooper and Bening...
It's a flawed movie, but i think it makes that point well enough.. just my tuppence worth.. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 23:31:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paddy C
Mena Suvari: lies about relationship experiences, then eventually reveals the truth to Lester in a cathartic moment.
I understood this the other way around; that she was lying to Lester, presumably as she thought this was what he would have wanted to hear. Did I get this wrong?  |
|
|
|
Paddy C
"Does not compute! Lame!"
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 23:44:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Paddy C
Mena Suvari: lies about relationship experiences, then eventually reveals the truth to Lester in a cathartic moment.
I understood this the other way around; that she was lying to Lester, presumably as she thought this was what he would have wanted to hear. Did I get this wrong?
Hmmm, I never thought of it that way, but you might have a point there.. I presumed she was spinning yarns to Thora Birch about all her experience (appearance), but when it came down to the moment with Kevin Spacey, she got the fear because the stories were an act (reality).. but you know, she could have been telling the truth to Thora Birch and lying to Kevin Spacey... i'm confused now |
|
|
|
silly 
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 02/27/2007 : 01:23:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paddy C
but you know, she could have been telling the truth to Thora Birch and lying to Kevin Spacey... i'm confused now
That was Wedding Crashers
 |
|
|
|
duh
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 02/27/2007 : 03:20:50
|
I can understand why other folks may not like American Beauty.
It remains one of my favorite films.
To me, visually it is very beautiful, to begin with.
I enjoy the Lester's character very much. I find that the scene wherein he imagines naked Mena covered in rose petals gives me some insight into male sexuality. I see how for men, lust and love are very close to the same thing.
I think I've met women like Mrs. Burnham, who are all about facades and having everything look just perfect constantly even while they drive their families fucking nuts.
I can think of one man I know who had a military career, who is gay. He's very macho, but not conflicted like Cooper's character was.
I suppose a big part of my enjoyment of the movie is that I don't concern myself with plausibility. I just sit back and watch and enjoy. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/27/2007 : 04:05:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by duh
I find that the scene wherein he imagines naked Mena covered in rose petals gives me some insight into male sexuality. I see how for men, lust and love are very close to the same thing.
Wrong, they're completely different for us males.
Love - imagining naked Mena covered in rose petals. 
Lust - imagining naked Mena not covered in rose petals. 
|
Edited by - Sean on 02/27/2007 04:07:28 |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 02/27/2007 : 04:49:02
|
I don't know that I can wax poetic about why I never liked this film, but I didn't on the first view and the two times I've seen it since didn't improve my opinion. Mostly, I found the characters shallow and self-consumed.
Now to reveal what a schmuck I probably am: I thought Spacey was a thousand times better in (well, almost everything I've ever seen him in.. BUT) Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil (one of my more favored films), The Usual Suspects, Se7en, or K-PAX (!). He is terrific at creating surprisingly deep and interesting characters, but I thought Lester wasn't one of those.
I was obligated to see American Beauty because of my own self-imposed adherence to "my record*" Otherwise, I would have passed.
* At some point in my life, I came to the realization I'd seen every Best Picture and all 4 categories of Best Acting Oscars and realized it may well be the only perfect record I'd ever have. Thus, there are years I find myself keenly hoping for a sweep... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Rethinking "American Beauty" (1999)
