Deleted Scenes 05.01.08: The Slow Starters (Part Two)
Posted by Robert Sullivan on 05.01.2008
The delayed masterpiece finally comes full circle...or comes to a hasty conclusion allowing me to get back to Grand Theft Auto IV.
Hey people. I'm Rob, and welcome back to Deleted Scenes. As promised, this is the second half of the Slow Starters. But first, a quick story.
When I was hashing out which movies would appear on the list, it suddenly struck me that they're all pretty recent films. A couple E-Mails screaming about my allegedly never having seen a movie made prior to 1990, written in response to other columns, also helped this idea along. Well, looking over my array of DVDs, that concept is incredibly incorrect. The year of release has nothing to do with my enjoyment of a movie, and as far as this column's central idea goes...yeah, it really doesn't matter. What matters is the high level of disparity between my initial reaction and my feelings concerning the movie today.
The end.
Anyway, let's get started.
#3
Is it exceptionally odd for a 23-year-old to be able to immensely relate to the themes of a movie that's essentially a senior's agonizing slide into obsolesence?
Well, yes. Yes, it is. But it doesn't stop me from tipsily slipping the DVD into my PS3 after unsuccessful weekends out with the guys, which is admittedly quite sad.
At first glance, I really didn't see the point of this. An old guy who's failed his entire life to make a difference in any quantifiable way drives a very long way across America to fail in spectacular fashion once again, stupid drawing ending, roll credits. But I think seeing the movie in that way misses a greater purpose to About Schmidt, and one that (at least for me) only becomes clear after a few viewings.
That idea is that About Schmidt isn't merely the chronicle of a loser being a loser. It's a warning to the audience not to end up like Warren R. Schmidt, someone who put his wants and desires on the backburner for the happiness of others...who themselves aren't actually happy, thus the waste that is Schmidt's lifetime on earth. Alexander Payne's next film, Sideways, serves as the story of another Warren R. Schmidt who luckily woke up before it was too late...really, seeing the two movies as bookends helps both come into sharper relief, I've found.
I still think the stupid drawing ending is quite stupid, and awkward in its obvious "let's have the old man smile in a dumb attempt to make the audience happy" touch. What hurts it even more is the masterful closing dialogue of Schmidt's, along with the way Jack Nicholson delivers the words.
Really, I'm not asking for Schmidt to go back to Nebraska and blow his head off, but couldn't we just end with -
"Relatively soon, I will die. Maybe in 20 years, maybe tomorrow, it doesn't matter. Once I am dead and everyone who knew me dies too, it will be as though I never existed. What difference has my life made to anyone? None that I can think of. None at all."
Instead of the "he DID make a difference to little Ndugu!" crapola? Please?
#2
Another film that left me with a total feeling of "That's it? BOO THIS MOVIE!" after my first viewing, the brilliance of In the Company of Men lies directly in that feeling - yes, Virginia, that is it, men in their most exposed form. Are Chad and Howard abnormal? Anyone thinking they are is merely deluding themselves. They are utterly normal, and to think they're not suggests a basis in thinking of holding only decency as "the norm."
Of course, that will bring about the inevitable "it's not normal to be completely misogynistic/a spineless follower" questions. Come now. The genders have always had levels of distrust and anger towards the opposite, and Chad is merely the representative of one side extrapolated to its natural end. This fact is made all the more interesting by the actuality that Chad exists. Chad is everywhere. We know Chad. We may be Chad. And that's why, when late-night bullshit sessions turn to "scariest movie villains," my vote is always for Chad. Michael Myers isn't real. Freddy Krueger isn't real. Chad is. And Aaron Eckhart is able to show that very inconvenient truth in absolutely indelible fashion.
It's really a shame then that Aaron Eckhart's never been able to get another crack at giving the equivalent of what should've been an Oscar-winning performance in a different film, as much as I liked Good Chad in Thank You for Smoking. Of course, if he wouldn't take roles in garbage like The Core or No Reservations, another powerhouse rendition like Chad might be possible.
And it's really a shame that Neil LaBute has turned out to only have this one thing to say, even though In the Company of Men is a Hell of a "one thing."
Of course, LaBute did give us the immortal Nicolas Cage-starring epic known as The Wicker Man. I would call that movie a remake, but to call a movie a remake is to say that there's some note of comparison between the two works. Anyone who's been privy to the wondrous magic of Nicolas Cage's one-of-a-kind performance knows that The Wicker Man is its own galaxy.
#1
Oh, I know...I'm horribly, horribly ashamed.
Luckily, there are always a few fellow Achievers with a similar story to tell at the Fests. Thank you, brothers shamus (and sisters). Thank you.
