Written and Directed by Brad Silberling
Moonlight Mile is advertised as a movie about human relationships, and while that's an aspect of the film, I think it's a poorly represented one. Yes, human relationships are the focus of the film, but thematically, it's about a very specific aspect that is explored throughout the film between it's many characters.
The opening of the film leaves you without an explanation, and quickly the viewer can tell that something far bigger than a regular story is being told. Joe Nast (Jake Gyllenhaal) is living with JoJo (Susan Sarandon) and Ben Floss (Dustin Hoffman) but they obviously aren't his parents. We can also tell they've gone through a difficult experience. As the story slowly reveals, not through words, but through actions and emotions, Joe was their soon to be son-in-law, but he never got the chance to make it official because his fiancee Diana was murdered before they could wed.
Don't be mistaken, this is not a mystery, it's a film about people dealing with grief, the avenues they take, and the blame, hurt, and confusion they share. It is also a really funny film, because often times when people are feeling their worst, they see the truth in humanity and each other. After the funeral, Joe and JoJo mock the funeral-goers that weakly try to console them. Ben, however, sees the good in people and tries to explain it's hard for everyone, they just wanted to be nice and offer their condolences, however hollow they may be.
JoJo, the darkly sarcastic writer, can see right through their ruse, and laughs them off to hide her pain. Joe and the Floss' have made a special bond, one forged in shared pain, as they all contemplate their pasts and futures, the could'ves, the would'ves, and every possibility scenario that surrounded Diana's death. Each character bears his or her own guilt over the situation. Ben believes he should have been at the restaurant to meet Diana earlier, then she might not have been in the crossfire fo the shooting that happened. Joe bears his own secret guilt, as the only reason Diana was in the diner to meet her father was to tell him about her and Joe's dissolving relationship. But Joe decides to hide this fact, and let the guilt eat at him, because he can't bear to tell JoJo and Ben he feels responsible in the first place.
Ben, ever the optomist, takes Joe on as a partner in his commercial real estate business, to fill the void that his dead daughter has left. Joe isn't particular to the business, but he feels he has to do it, because of his guilt, and because it is what's best for Ben and the family. They share quiet, funny moments together, bonded through their moments with Diana that connect them.
However, this movie is all about what's below the surface, the guilt and the blame that is shared. Sometimes they put it out in the open, blame each other, while really only blaming themselves. Almost inexplicably, the movie is set in 1973, you'd barely notice except for the very subtle clues that are left in the movie. I still don't feel it was all that important to the story, I feel it was only set then because the writer/director was reflecting on events from his own life, which probably took place in this time frame.
However, Joe meets a local girl, Bertie (Ellen Pompeo) who works at the small town post office where they live, and they meet by chance when Joe comes to collect his now-defunct wedding invitations. They hit it off from minute 1, and then slowly build a friendship based on mutual loss. Joe learns that Bertie's lover Cal, the owner of the bar she spends time helping out at, went missing in Vietnam 3 years ago, so she understands and connects with him on his loss. The two begin a confusing relationship that may end up hurting more than it helps.
The rest of the film focuses on how Joe must come to terms with his feelings of guilt, how to figure out to express them, and at the same time, make Ben and JoJo understand his side of the story, his own pain and guilt over the situation. Everything eventually comes to a head when Joe takes the stand in the murder trial of Diana's killer, where Joe has to face the man that took his best friend.
Once it is all out in the open, Ben and JoJo learn how to cope along with Joe, how he feels, and how they all connect through their indivual pain and feelings of inadequecy. They also have the same feelings, but their pain makes them feel just as Joe did, that they can't admit any of this to themselves or Joe, because it would be to put a burden on someone else.
This story is effective in many ways, mostly because of the fantastic performances. The only person I didn't particularly love was Jake Gyllenhaal as Joe, not because he was unrealistic, but I feel that he's played this character before, that it wasnt' much of a stretch for him. He was quiet and subdued, not bad, but again, not much of a challenge either. The characters played by Dustin Hoffman and Susan Sarandon, as the parents, are both great characters. Dustin Hoffman is scared, unsure, but at the same time reassuring. He is quiet and turns his emotions inward, while at the same time, he is the happy face that the family puts on to ward off concerned friends and family. He is possibly the most complex character, carrying his own weights of guilt and regret in his relationship with his daughter, and he has trouble accepting these regrets, so he carries on as if nothing is wrong. Sarandon’s character, the wife, does the exact opposite. Her demeanor doesn’t change and she keeps her sarcastic tone. She’s brutally honest in everything she does in her life, even when she’s grieving. She keeps the family together, by pulling Joe in as if he were their own son, she openly mocks the people that offer her fake consolation, and she often confronts Ben and his non-confrontational acceptance of the truth at hand.
In this particular movie, the acting is the glue that holds all the pieces together. The pieces themselves are comprised of the story being told, and in this case, the story and its construction are intertwined. This is because the writer is also the director, and this script in the hands of another person would not work as well as it does in his hands. He knows exactly how to bring each scene to fruition and how to get the actors to that point. His even hand also guides the magnificent photography that perfectly sets the mood of loss and confrontation that the story is thick with. Every element is perfectly in place for the telling of the story, and this is all because Silberling knows this story all too well.
I would say the only question I was faced with during this movie, not a problem really, was why this movie is set when it was. I understand (through special features) that the subject is close to Silberling’s heart, and it is in very many ways autobiographical. That may account for part of the reason the story is set in 1973, in addition to the fact that if it were set any other time, Cal’s disappearance overseas would be a lot harder to swallow, it would feel like a missing piece. Other than these reasons, I don’t see the point of setting the story in the 70’s, but that’s not a bad qualm to have about the film overall. It is a highly effective piece about grief, how people deal with it, and the connections in our lives that both bring people together and drive them apart. I still can’t understand how this movie slipped under the radar so far, but I suppose it’s happened to better films.
8.8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment