"Detachment" (2011)

“Detachment” (2011) Review:

“Listen and Learn”

            Oftentimes the messages imbued, sometimes even in the most subtle of scenes, have a profound effect of the audience forcing them to think about the world in which they live, yet these moments are hard to come by. Oftentimes movies think for you rather than provoke you to think.  A film that thinks for you, beginning with a problem and ending with a logical solution can be a good film, yet is never
truly provocative. Oftentimes the audience can see the message coming from a mile away and that’s that. Yet film has an amazing capacity to provoke, inspire, and drive which, in certain respects, literature does not have. With different shots, sounds, and colors a film can say much more without words than most novels can with them. “Detachment” (2012) strives to be this type of film; a provocative and insightful film, which will leave the audience changed forever. Yet striving and achieving are not the same.

            The film follows a month in the life of Henry Barthes (Adrian Brody), a substitute teacher who takes a month long position at a failing high school in an in descript city in an undefined part of the country. Barthes’ experiences compose the film and range from his experiences in the classroom, to caring for an underage prostitute, to dealing with the death of his senile grandfather who continually confuses him for his mother (and not in an at all comic way). The film dabbles in a lot with many cameo performances by well known actors masquerading as much more insightful players in the melodrama that is Henry’s life. These range from the underutilized Ms. Madison (Christina Hendricks (Madmen)) to Mr. Seaboldt (James Caan) who add in extra tidbits on education in America to truly hit the viewer over the head with the idea that educators and by extension society are failing when it comes to public education. The film points a finger directly at parents who are seen briefly or only heard (making the film feel even more low budget than it was) yet are always complaining about their children. When the credits begin to role the audience is left to puzzle out whether or not the writer Carl Lund, has ever talked to parents. The film also criticizes government bureaucracy and specifically no child left behind making it feel like a soap drama based on “Waiting for Superman” (2010).

            With a seemingly pointless and nonexistent plot structure, the film meanders slowly; taking time to add another overt message, then picking up and moving on. The lack of structure, worked in “Killing them Softly” (2012), a film in the hands of the much more talented scriptwriter Andrew Dominik,  yet failed miserably in this film. Once the film was over I felt empty and depressed rather than inspired and righteously incensed. During it’s hour and a half running time the film dealt with seemingly every subject under the sun; from teen prostitution, to teen suicide (a scene and character I felt were completely unnecessary), to society’s influence on youth.

            The scriptwriting did not aid this film’s noble pursuit yet rather seemed to impede it. The dialogue was, for the most part, enjoyable and interesting, yet seemed to fall apart in certain areas (well, the majority of the scenes) when either Henry or other characters would add their own insights into the fray which felt a bit too stagy for my tastes. Whereas “Killing Them Softly” (2012), used strong dialogue throughout only stopping at a few places to explain it’s significance (and even then they handled it through compelling and non direct stories), this film decided it’s message was so important that it mind as well forgo dialogue and skip to the good stuff. In addition to all this, the film cuts back and for the between interviews Brody’s character gives describing characters he encounters in the film which, while saving the writer work writing dialogue, seemed to stop the already ponderous film in it’s tracks. If there were one word I would ascribe to this film’s script it would be lazy. Period.

            Yet the film is, if nothing else, incredibly artistic. Composed of wonderful shots and interesting use of chalk on a blackboard, the film is visually interesting and engaging helping the audience to get through the somewhat tawdry plot, or lack thereof. However, despite the nuanced color schemes and angles, the stylized perspective soon became distracting and irritating, as they seemed to draw attention to the film’s importance. This would have been fine if the film were truly important, yet rather this seemed arrogant and flashy.

            The film’s strongest suit was it’s acting. Adrian Brody gave an amazing performance that, while not truly inspired, seemed to hold the film together when it seemed to be it’s most preposterous. His cool attitude helped to ground the film in some semblance of reality as it’s examples of common American students drifted further and further away from that same reality. And while the many cameos in the film seemed to help fill it’s hollow frame, newcomer Sami Gale shined. Playing the role of Erica, a teenage prostitute living on the streets who is taken in by Barthes, Gale brings a sense of true human struggle to the film as her character transcends stereotype and becomes a human being. Her presence helped the film maintain it’s credibility and, ultimately, aside from Henry, was the only character worth caring about.

            “Detachment”, is not a horrible film, but merely a misguided one. The film’s style is, while very artsy, also sloppy and incomplete. While I loved the message in this film, that education needed to be reformed in America, the filmmakers communicated that in the first scene and then proceeded to indulge themselves in ridiculous examples of failed American education. This film should probably be viewed as a stepping stone for those involved and nothing more. Any questions? 

Stars: 7/10