THE DESCENDANTS (Alexander Payne 2011)

[Chris Knipp]

Reprinted from Filmleaf's NYFF 2011 Festival Coverage (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3137-New-York-Film-Festival-2011&p=26904#post26904). The Descendants opened in theaters nationwide today, Friday, Nov. 18, 2011.

ALEXANDER PAYNE: THE DESCENDANTS (2011)

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/6218/descendantsgeorgecloone.jpg
GEORGE CLOONEY AND SHAILENE WOODLEY IN THE DESCENDANTS

Old money Hawaiian dad becomes mensch

Alexander Payne, returning to the big screen for the first time since Sideways seven years ago, has made a film even more intensely rooted in place than anything he's done before. And it's a film full of geniality and wisdom; funny, unpredictable, and sui generis -- while seeming on the surface remarkably like mainstream entertainment. The source is a novel by a young Hawaiian-born women, Kaui Hart Hemmings, who narrates from the point of view of a middle-aged man, Matt King (George Clooney), who comes from Hawaiian royalty, literally, but is hapa haole -- his family is a mixture of white (haole) and native Hawaiian. On the Hawaiian side, they are directly descended from King Kamehameha. And with that comes land and wealth. Matt is principal trustee of a particularly important property, 25,000 acres of unspoiled land on Kauai that the family is planning to sell.

But there are other threads in the story; Matt has a lot on his plate. Before even the titles comes a shot of his wife Elizabeth (Patricia Hastie) on a speedboat. She is in an accident in that boat and hits her head. She is lying in a hospital in a coma. Suddenly Matt, a lawyer in an office all the time managing property, escaping from everyday responsibility, must take charge of two unruly daughters, ten and 17. And shortly he must make the hardest decision of all, to follow his wife's wishes when it turns out she won't emerge from the coma. The property sale decision is looming. And then, a secret comes out about his wife that preoccupies all three of them.

The Descendants shows a new side to George Clooney, the arch charmer and megastar, a softer, more rumpled side, as his Matt approaches being a parent with his teenage daughter Alexandra (Shailene Woodley), who's had a drinking problem and been shifted from one posh school to another. After he picks her up they're joined by her friend and support, young Sid (Nick Krause), an outspoken stoner type who seems like a dope but is smart, and is the vice president of the chess club of the Punahou School. Sid exemplifies the complexity of the film's main characters. He is far more than he first appears. At home the young daughter Scottie (Amara Miller), has started to act out and to use foul language she's picked up from Alex.

Matt seems helpless at this point, not so much overwhelmed by decisions as the victim of decisions made for him. His wife's living will requires him to pull the plug on her once the doctors determine that after three weeks she has no potential life signs. Matt is the trustee with the crucial vote on the property sale, but a family majority has already voted to sell. It's not that Matt is particularly cowardly or weak, simply that his wife, a party girl who bucked him every step of the way, was also always the live wire, the provocative, energetic, take-charge one, not him. But the journey of the film leads Matt, with a little help from friends and family, to take charge, and in incredibly specific ways.

Also incredibly specific at all times, but subtly so, is the film's milieu, Hawaii, with its traditions, its almost oppressive beauty, its strong family structure and sense of identity and lineage, and the mockery of its facade of perfection when it's got the same damned problems the rest of the world has. It's an ironic place to be for Matt with all that's going on. "Paradise can go fuck itself" he says, in an early voiceover. There is nothing touristic or pretty-pretty about Payne's Hawaii. And as the sense of place is sophisticated and informed, so the contemporary social observation as revealed in the dialogue is exceptionally keen: you could call that the sense of time. Also part of the sense of place is the array of family members, notably Matt's surly father-in-law (Robert Forster), who socks Sid for laughing at his senile wife; and the jovial long-haired cousin Hugh (Beau Bridges), who reveals astonishing information at a bar.

The voyage (as in Sideways and About Schmidt there is one, or are several) is toward unearthing information, and then deciding what to do about it, and toward mensch status for Matt. Characters turn out to be more than they seem. Alex emerges as sharp and savvy. The dumbo Sid turns out to be someone Matt is not stupid to ask serious advice from.

The Descendants is deceptive. One can't do justice to it in a short review -- besides which it contains plot elements that can't be spoken of to readers who may not yet have seen the film. It seems genial and mainstream, but it works on multiple levels. It appears jokey and entertaining, but it deals with some of the toughest of life's issues. It might seem an unnecessary choice for the selective main slate of the New York Film Festival, except that it turns out to be one of the best American films of the year, and the first for some time from a director whose two previous works were main slate items too.

The Descendants debuted at Teluride, then Toronto, then the New York Film Festival at Lincoln Center, where it was screened for this review (it was the final night film). Limited US release by Fox Searchlight Pictures begins November 18, 2011; the UK release date is January 27, 2012. This review has also appeared on Cinescene. (http://www.cinescene.com/knipp/descendants.html)

[CHRIS KNIPP]

[Chris Knipp]

This is another one of the great American films this year.

Here are some other possible candidates:

Take Shelter
Margin Call
Martha Marcy May Marlene
Moneyball
Midnight in Paris
Warrior

That is excluding documentaries. There are not many, to be honest. I have to hope the best are yet to come

[cinemabon]

My wife and I went to see "The Descendants" last night and I found myself blown away by its plethera of excellence of performances. Alexander Payne brought back nearly his entire crew from "Sideways" (esp. cinematographer, editor, and production designer). Clooney far surpasses any performance I've ever seen of his, even "Up in the air" (although I did not see "Syriana" for which he won a supporting role Oscar). Clooney's character evolves throughout the film and emerges as a tender and understanding father through all of the film's complexity in its finish with one of the most heart rendering scenes from any actor I've seen in a very long time. If he doesn't win the Academy Award this year as best actor, then the catagory is a sham. Equally impressive was the teen daughter played by Shailene Woodly, who should be nominated for supporting actress. The film has an excellent array of supporting actors with no weak performances by anyone, elevating its status to one of the finest movies of 2011 and certainly Best Picture status. A must see by all who read reviews/postings on this website - highly recommended.

Thanks for your spot on review, Chris. I read it aloud to my wife this Christmas morning as she baked cookies for her exchange tonight at work (yes, she must work on Christmas - for cops, nurses, and many others, the world does not stop on holidays). She and I were both moved by your excellent choice of words.

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks for your very kind words at the end :)
Glad you love this film as much as I do.

[tabuno]

Personally I found this movie cloyingly manipulative of the audiences' emotions and superficial in its character development. I had problems beginning at the very beginning with the brief but unsatisfying shot of the wife which leaves out the more horrifying accident itself as if to dull our expectations of the more raw issues to be experienced, creating an uneven tone for this movie. This scene is then followed immediately by the unnecessary voice-over that seemed only to add to the haughty talk down to the audience for elementary school age viewers explanation, usually reserved for more lazy directors and which the voice-over is then left out at the end of the moive.

I never did come to have much emotional connections with most of these characters as they just seemed to suddenly appear more in order to appear to be "sophisticated" in the presentation of appealing to the audience, at least the audience is led to believe. Oddly enough, I found the attempt to provide more human depth to the primary characters to be scripted and "deliberately" motivated more to appeal the the critics and audiences as opposed to feel like authentic real life characters which I found much more compelling in George Clooney's performance in Up In The Air (2009). There were too many characters with their subplots that detracted from and diluted the substantive and comprehensive experiences that both Clooney and his character's daughter were going through.

While the director boldly included, what might be considered why this movie is receiving accolades, difficulty to hear dialogue on sensitive issues of death and infidelity, the inclusion of the boy for comic relief didn't seem real or authentic in how the storyline was presented or developed and the audience was thrown off balance a number of times as to whether to laugh, cry, or be insulted, which also I assume was deliberate and part of the supposed appeal of this movie, and during which I became angry or insulted in the presumption of the director's or scriptwriter's approach to such scenes. Overall, the movie had its emotional and pointed story plot points, but the movie didn't ring true for me and, therefore, it seemed more like an overly-ambitious and superficisal attempt at appeariing to be sophisticated and lofty in its presentation.

[cinemabon]

I was wondering, Tab, if you ever saw Payne's other successful film, "Sideways" directed with the same style as he directed this film. Payne tends to use hand-held shots within the interior of small spaces placing his characters in close proximity. While many of his critics come away with a clostraphobic feel (which may account for your repulsion) others tend to believe this style of filmmaking brings them into the story. Personally, I found the film engaging.

Your objection to how the characters are introduced sounds obtuse. I can't think of another way to introduce characters that would seem natural without feeling sophisticated in a way that is unobtrusive. Naturally, upon learning of his wife's impending death, Matt King (George Clooney) would want to inform his immediate family. His disconnect to being the ideal father or husband is not foreign to many families. In fact, I would say that is one of its mass appeal points - the nuclear family is dead. Fathers work, mothers work, the kids go to school, and many families grow in ways that keep them separated, their lives more parallel than convergent. Today's kids spend hours on their electronic devices and parents spend hours working to pay for them. Who has time to sit down and talk about the news of the day or how each person is feeling? In an ideal world, the child is understanding when the parent turns off the device and says, "Let's talk." In the real world, the child resents the intrusion and alienation starts. How does communication begin? Where does discipline begin and intrusion end? How does one "parent" a rebellious child? You can't force a child to love you because you want it to be that way. I've raised three children and I have no answers as to how one should parent a child. One child turned out great. Another turned out bad. For the last one, I'm holding my breath. I thought I treated all three the same, gave them love, understanding and support. Sometimes, that isn't enough to keep a child from going astray. "The descendants" points that out - families are full of people with faults; some get along, others do not. It's a give and take situation where some families members seem to receive more than others, which tends to make siblings jealous and sometimes greedy (as in the land deals that Matt King must contend with while at the same time, dealing with his rebellious teenager).

Clooney's character has no answers when it comes to parenting, only attempts to do the right thing at the time. That is all any parent can hope for. In the end, he made some bad choices and some good ones. The character of Matt King is all too human and all too real and not to be shuffled off to some catagory of failure. Paynes' direction makes me feel that his dilemma is my dilemma. But the big question remains: how do we handle life when it goes wrong? There are no right answers, only attempts to do the right thing and anticipate the outcomes are favorable ones. "The Descendants" conveys those difficulties that at the end of the day, all we can do is try our best effort and hope everthing will balance in the end. George Clooney and his very talented cast of actors come across as real to me, real people striving to find real answers, and that makes for great cinema.

[Chris Knipp]

I appreciate your heartfelt defense, which I of course agree with. I consider The Descendants to be one of the best movies of the year. Despite a generally very high critical rating, naturally all viewers or critics agree, but most acknowledge the level of craft here and the good performances, particularly Clooney's very fine one.

[tabuno]

I previously expressed my problems with the beginning voice-over in The Descendants as being cloying elementary and unnescessary. The voice over in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (2011) only serves to demonstrate how badly the voice over in The Descendants was done, unncessarily so and how great and valuable a voice-over can be to the narrative in a movie such as Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, perhaps on of the most under-rated and overlooked movie of the awards season except by the Broadcast Film Critics Association. The internal narration in this movie is both wonderful to listen to as it both talks to the charater himself as well as the audience. In The Descendants, George Clooney's voice over is achingly basic explanatory that would have been better served in the visual portrayal of the acting and setting instead of a verbal itemization list of what's going on in setting up the movie. The intensely emotive connection between wife and son and their husband's death was so much more tightly bonded as depicted in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close than in the death of a mother and wife in The Descendants that that movie kept a thin veneer of distance between the characters and the audience.

[oscar jubis]

It is hard to avoid having high expectations of The Descendants when it has just won a Golden Globe for Best Picture, Drama, and received Oscar nominations for Best Film, Best Director, Best Screenplay, and Best Actor in a Leading Role. Then again, in my opinion, The Descendants is among the most recent in a long list of films that have received more recognition and accolades than their merits warrant.

The Descendants strikes me as a film limited by the premise that Elizabeth, the wife of the protagonist husband/father played by George Clooney, is terminally comatose. The characters who are angered by her infidelity accost her with their soliloquies or rants, a poor substitute for conversation. The problem is exacerbated by an inconsistent screenplay that includes groan-inducing moments such as Clooney advising his inert wife to “try to be nice” to their teenage daughter Alex (Shailene Woodley), who awaits her turn to vent her anger at the unfortunate woman. Writer/director Alexander Payne resorts excessively to a first-person, voice-over narration that is often redundant. Moreover, the Clooney character is not interesting enough relative to his centrality within the narrative. At the onset of the plot, he pronounces himself guilty of neglecting his family and proceeds to expertly handle a number of parenting challenges. He, rather swiftly, comes to terms with his wife’s infidelity and his share of the responsibility. I found Payne's About Schmidt more satisfying than this latest effort because the protagonist played by the great Jack Nicholson has to grow and he also has to grow on you, so to speak. Whereas the Clooney character has already figured out what he did wrong at the onset of the film and proceeds to act like the full-time father he should have been all along. Our sympathies are squarely with him from the start.

There are a number of effective passages in The Descendants that sustain interest. I was particularly fond of the pool scene in which Clooney reveals to Alex that mother won’t come out of her coma, and the subsequent scene in which Alex tells him that mom was unfaithful. The performances are quite good too, with a surprising turn by Woodley, an actress who, heretofore, had worked almost exclusively on television. However, The Descendants ultimately registers as a disappointment and further proof that Hollywood and the Academy cannot be trusted to select the films that deserve our attention, much less canonical status.

[Chris Knipp]

I have to see it again, to find out if I like it as much as I did when it came at the end of the NYFF. MELANCHOLIA and TREE OF LIFE, THE ARTIST and MY WEEK WITH MARILYN and MIDNIGHT IN PARIS -- I"ve re-watched more films than usual this year and they've all held up. And I'd really like to re-watch all on my Best American list, which is a good sign. This is longer than your usual treatment but still pretty cursory, and I'm sure THE DESCENDANTS is worthy of a more detailed discussion than this. But then you made short shrift of MELANCHOILA, as I recal, almost angry even to be talking about it at all. And you found MIDNIGHT IN PARIS very overrated, and again had little time to devote to it.. Is there any one of the much admired American movies of 2011 that you really like or even really have time for? Maybe you spend so much time with the classics these days that you can't bear to watch contemporary American stuff. Did we agree on MARGARET? I think only partly.

I think if you were watching new movies of January, as I am, you'd find THE DESCENDANTS pretty "canonical," but really, nobody is making that claim for it. It's just an unusually good, grown up, and interesting movie by one of our best directors. I personally like films made in 2D for adults. And I think this is a good current example of one. But I agree, Oscar, with your assessment in general that Hollywood as represented by the Academy can't be counted on to choose the best American films. That's because of the makeup of the body of voters.

Of course I always listen with interest (even if sometimes with dismay) to your opinions and value your ever-growing expertise. I still hope you'll have time to go over my 2011 'Best Lists' and offer your usual helpful comments and corrections.

[cinemabon]

Considering that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science is comprised of artists and not critics should tell you something about what kind of film is nominated. The people who work on the sets, who work with the actors, the directors, the producers, and the crews nominate the films. They do not look at movies the same way critics do. Having lived in that community (LA) for many years I can tell you their mind set is one of laissez faire. They resent any outside influence, especially New York critics who look down their noses and tell Hollywood who is worthy of an award.

Take this year's Best Actress nominations, for example. This is a very tricky year. First, you have a very likable actress in Meryl Streep, who has many fans within the industry. She is easy to work with on the set and is well liked, hence her long list of nominations. Plus she is a very talented actress. Then you have someone tempermental like Glenn Close, also very talented but very stuck on herself. She is very respected in the industry but not as popular. In LA, she has the reputation of being a "stage" actress. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't go over well in the film community. Then you have a new comer like Michelle Williams, whose tragic story with Heath Ledger and her down-to-earth homespun ways make her very appealing, expecially her devotion to her daughter. She gave an all-out, once in a lifetime performance in "My Week with Marilyn." Just about everyone in Hollywood is gushing over her right now. We'll see how that translates when it comes time to vote. I wish her luck. Now add to that, the brilliant performance from Viola Davis in "The Help" and the obligatory addition of Rooney Mara from the flopped Hollywood version of "The Girl with Dragon Tatoo." (The Swedish version was better and more people saw it on DVD than went to the film). Done!

Hollywood can be very funny about its nominating process. Look at Paul Newman and Peter O'toole. Both men nominated numerous times, based on their talent. But both men were trouble on the set. O'toole has never won, even with seven or eight nominations. John Wayne only won when rumors spread that he was dying of lung cancer (although he did develop lung cancer, he lived another six years after his award). Alfred Hitchcock never won an award for his work (he got an honorary) and many critics feel he was one of the greatest directors of all time.

As to "The Descendants," I believe that like "American Beauty," it is a movie of its time and speaks on an emotional level that appeals to many people stuck in similar situations. Perhaps yours is a perfect family, where your communication with your children is very good. But in so many instances, parents have lost touch with their children, whose noses are buried in their electronic gizmos. "The Descendants" is a powerful story of one parent who realizes how far removed he has become from his family and decides he must act to regain their acceptance. He pays a price for his honesty and all is not happily ever after. However, along the way, we see some terrific performances... but especially from Clooney, better than any film he has ever done... ever... period. The academy recognizes that level of excellence (on and off the set) and will give him the Oscar because he earned it. I hope the picture wins, too. Of all the films nominated, this story of greed, impatience, frustration, and acceptance struck an emotional chord inside me that still resonates. I can recall, on this site, just a few years ago that you, Chris and you, Oscar, argued with me about "Brokeback Mountain." I felt that movie, emotionally speaking, betrayed me. This year, Oscar, I believe the roles have reversed.

[Chris Knipp]

A fascinating and informed comment -- though I think while Academy voters are not movie critics they are not all "artists" but sometimes connected with industry in indirect ways. You know more about this than I do, but the word "artists" might mislead readers here. I can't argue with your hadicappping the votes by inside knowledge of personalities, yours and Academy voters'.

It's in my view unfortunate that Oscars are withheld due to somebody's being less easy to work with, rather than rewarding the best work on the screen. That means it is not so much about "art" or "artists" as about personalities and social relations and work conditions. Most liked. If the stiff, snooty, stage person Glenn Close turned in a better performance than the charming, easygoing Meryl, Glenn shouild get the Oscar, but she won't, because Meryl is a dream on the set, modest charming and chummy. (I am not asserting that Glenn's performance is better.) But another factor you implied but didn't so much specify is that Oscars are cumulative, and Meryl's cumulative work outstrips Glenn Close's in quantity if not in quality, and perhaps in quality.

I am with you and I guess we're against Oscar on The Descendants, which again you say astute things about. But in the case of Brokeback that was a year for me when that seemed the one essential choice and so we was robbed, but there are several titles besides The Descendants whose being given the Best Picture Oscar might not distress me, as well as several others whose choice, not for the first time with these awards, would disappoint me given the presence of more original and essential films.

[Chris Knipp]

The Descendants is still in the US box office top ten -- hooray!

But if numbers proved quality then the Best Actor Oscar would be to Leo DiCaprio and Best Picture would go to Harry Potter.

[cinemabon]

What a shocking admission! You're a Potter-head? I have all the films on Blu-ray and digital copies on my netbook, which I watch (particular scenes) when waiting for my son to finish rehearsal (he has rehearsal in three different orchestras three nights a week and he's only a junior in high school!). I would agree that this is probably the best Potter film of the series, certainly the most dramatic in terms of tension and performance. The opening shot with Snape standing on high watching over the scene below as Hogwart's students march in rows toward the school's front door is something Rowlings could never envision in her novels. Only in film is an image of that magnitude expressed properly.

Two other commercial films I felt were overlooked this year were: Limitless and X-Men: First Class (especially the scene in the bar... I've watched it over and over several times... "my parents have no name... it was taken from them... by pig farmers and tailors!" One of the best scenes in any movie this year... an instant classic! A mini-film within the film!)

[Chris Knipp]

I am not a Potter-head. I was replying by implication to tabuno who on the Extremely Loud t (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3201-EXTREMELY-LOUD-AND-INCREDIBLY-CLOSE-%28Stephen-Daldry-2011%29)hread was chortling that his current fave is making money for the sixth week and in the top ten grossers. I just said, "if numbers proved quality then the Best Actor Oscar would be to Leo DiCaprio and Best Picture would go to Harry Potter." I certainly liked Deathly Hollows II as I said in my review on the thread and I listed it among my Best Blockbusters. (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3222-Chris-Knipp-s-2011-MOVIE-BEST-LISTS) I certainly like it way better than Twililght, Transformers, Hangover, or Pirates of the Caribbean. It's not about the numbers.

The Descendants comes with less baggage than a franchise film, only with the memory for those who can remember of Alexander Payne's previous work.

[tabuno]

For me that Potter series began to loose it's charm a while back when the series turned darker and more aligned with the fantasy action thrillers. The last Potter movie became more of a special effects, lightshow and the usual parade of characters begin to die off like many of the horror-thrillers (though an attempt is made to make it more unpredicable, random and thus supposeedly more authentic and compelling). Harry Potter's performance towards the end was among the weakness and the ending scenario was telegraphed. Potter, the movies. growing up was like the difficult transition some child actors have in growing up in real life, and for me, the results was more boring and pedestrian than say the Naria series which retained its freshness even as the characters grew up. Fascinatingly, by the end of the series there was the admission in the plot that there was a time and place where charm of magic is lost to those who grow up.

[Chris Knipp]

Yes, growing up is difficult, and that's a theme of the books. But this doesn't seem to me a fault of the latter films in the Harry Potter series. It's a challenge that is taken on and won. Amd how can one share the idea that things deteriorate when in fact the last two films seem to me to have caught the right note, when Columbus' ones were too simplistic and Cuaron's were too dark, and the earlier ones spent too much time explaining things, though they did, of course, have a lighter, happier quality? In a sense they are all good; they are enormously popular for a reason, starting with the enormous popularity of the books. In my review I describe how many millions of copies sold within 24 hours for some of the novels.

Things turn dark toward the end. But that is in the nature of the stories. Things are on a vast scale, and the tone is mournful, but also epic and satisfying. To say that things are "telegraphed" is not a convincing generalization, to me. In your description, you don't make clear whether your dissatisfaction is with the films or with the stories by J.K. Rawling themselves; but this is an essential distinction to make. If your dissatisfaction is withe the stories, then the fault can not be with the film.


Fascinatingly, by the end of the series there was the admission in the plot that there was a time and place where charm of magic is lost to those who grow up. That I can agree with but how can it be seen as a fault? It's simply a grownup idea. Maturity means a loss of the magic of childhood -- though we seek to retain our freshness of vision, we cannot spend our lives as children.

What cinembon and I have been talking about is that The Descendants is about being grown up, learning to be. And that's a tough one.

[cinemabon]

I sat down for lunch to read your reply and didn't get past the first sentence when I burst out laughing. Now my lunch is in my lap... thanks a lot, Chris. But I understand...

I had to edit this because it appears out of context... it was the quip about being a Potter-head in a related post.

[Chris Knipp]

I'm glad if I complimented your lunch. Bon appetit!

[cinemabon]

Chris, see above amendment...

[Chris Knipp]

i figured that.