REVIEW: Nebraska (2013)

After a long, seven year hiatus following his best work, Sideways, Alexander Payne has delivered two films in as many years, both funny yet ruminative and thoroughly likable – first The Descendants and now Nebraska.

Nebraska is his fourth feature in a row to focus on a road trip. Woody Grant (Bruce Dern) has won a million dollars, though it is according to some junk mail. Nonetheless, he believes it and he is desperate to get to Lincoln, Nebraska in time to claim his prize. A little confused, he takes to walking on the roads in order to get there. His son David (Will Forte) and his wife Kate (June Squibb) are worried about him and try to convince him that he hasn’t won the money. Woody remains adamant and so David decides that driving him to Lincoln is the only way for him to see the light. Along the way, they stop off in Hawthorne for a family reunion. Woody soon becomes a celebrity in the small town as the word spreads of Woody’s good fortune.

With Nebraska, Payne continues his peculiar blend of melancholic comedy. Nebraska is slow-paced, contemplative, sad and very, very funny. It is a slight, rather whimsical story upon which is hung a poignant, nostalgic portrait of small-town America shot in grainy black and white to extenuate a feeling of loss and time passing. Payne delights in showing wide, open spaces, bare landscapes and quiet, easy-going people with simple pleasures. The film is rarely patronizing and, where a film by a different filmmaker would laugh at these characters and their foibles, Payne brings to Nebraska a lived-in, charming atmosphere. The script is left refreshingly unrushed, allowing the characters their individuality and, most importantly, their dignity. Even two minor characters introduced for a comic set piece, the Westendorfs for example (played, incidentally by a real life married couple who have never acted before), are given time to fill out their roles, becoming likable and convincing characters. What makes Nebraska work is that, despite its themes and its artistry, it is thoroughly plausible and inhabited with real people. For the majority of its running time, it does not feel like fiction.

Given this space, practically every actor shines. Bruce Dern has already won the Best Actor prize at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, while Will Forte very ably meets him in a less awards-friendly role. June Squibb is very funny, performing possibly the film’s most outlandish role believably. The supporting cast are generally fantastic and some scenes work simply by letting them sit and talk. One conversation between two of Woody’s brothers is rich, hilariously funny and a conversation we have probably all been a party to – finished off with a great punchline. It is the performers that ensure that Nebraska does not become mocking or insincere, instead allowing it to be such a pleasant experience.

Though moving and emotional, the film is rarely sentimental with possibly the ending being the film’s sole diversion into the mechanics of conventional fiction, though this slight implausibility may have something to do with fantasy. Nevertheless, the film is realistic in its treatment and even has a moment now typical in Payne’s cinema, in which the protagonist does something that risks alienating some of the audience. Like Miles (Paul Giamatti) stealing money from his mother in Sideways or Matt (George Clooney) kissing another man’s wife in a rather misogynistic act of revenge in The Descendants, there is a moment in Nebraska that is deeply questionable and rather difficult to shrug off entirely. Yet this makes the film all the more believable since people habitually do things they will later regret, especially when caught up in the moment. So, while Nebraska may seem (from reading this anyway) as a harmless and sentimental old tale, it remains realistic, morally complex and far from contrived or one-note emotionally.

Nowadays, films focus on the lives of normal people so rarely that they are nearly always worthy of acclaim. Nevertheless, Nebraska is so well made and so likable that it is worthy of praise entirely on its own merits. It is remarkably refreshing to see a fiction film without murders and big dramatic scenes, but a nice, easy-going pace and a humane respect for character. To an extent, it is a difficult film to write at length about since its pleasures are only truly apparent when watching the film, making any analysis seem redundant and unhelpful. Suffice to say that it is an incredibly likable film that may even restore your faith in the decency and integrity of humanity and is, hence, a very valuable and important one.

REVIEW: The Descendants (2012)

  It has been seven years since Alexander Payne’s last film Sideways and while that film is probably good enough for Payne to hang his hat up forever (especially since he also has Election and About Schmidt to look back on), another will always be welcome. The Descendants is his new film, already a big winner at the Golden Globes and one of the favourites at the Oscars. But does it match up with Payne’s greatest work?

  George Clooney plays Matt King, a wealthy landowner living in Hawaii who works tirelessly at a law firm until an unfortunate accident forces him to re-evaluate and reshape his life. Following a speedboat accident, his wife Elizabeth is in hospital in a coma. It is unlikely that she will come out of it, and King must prepare for the worst as well as reconnect with his two daughters Alexandra (Shailene Woodley) and Scottie (Amara Miller) from whom he has become estranged.

  In a way, The Descendants is typical Alexander Payne material, with a normal, middle-aged guy forced by circumstances beyond his control to reassess his life. The film is full of the bittersweet comedy and pathos that one would expect, though The Descendants might just be Payne’s most humanist work. While Sideways puts Miles and Jack through the wringer in order that they might come out the other end with slightly more wisdom than they had before, The Descendants is much more about a character opening up and seizing what is really valuable in life. Where before Payne may have verged on the misanthropic, here he offers a film about a man rediscovering his priorities in life that is much more conventional than his previous films.

  However, The Descendants is far from the typical feel-good Hollywood of forced smiles and empty, hectoring life lessons, if not in its subject matter, then in its approach. Payne underplays everything, not unlike in Sideways. Where certain scenes would surely be loud and hard to bear if played as Hollywood deems they should be, Payne substitutes silences, gestures and a palpable and infectious love and understanding for his characters. The film can be funny and cynical, but it refuses to either judge or sentimentalise. The film does tug at the heartstrings, but it is the kind of film that does so quietly and with subtlety, sneaking up on you rather than pushing the obvious buttons. Ultimately, it is a slow, somewhat melodic film, one to which it would be doing a disservice to assign basic genre categories and conventions. Through great pacing, brilliant writing and great performances, it is a film that defies its simplistic storyline and its generic trappings, becoming a much more profound, truthful and effective film.

  The Descendants works because it is sincere about what it is telling us. It is also beautifully paced and shot and filled with excellent performances from all the actors, working on what might be the best script in the last few years. It will surely divide audiences as many may find themselves immune to its charms, but as a simple, immersive and touching film with real characters and maybe even with something to take away and apply to your own life, it is hard to beat and might very well end up as the film of the year.