THE FABELMANS
Let's get this out of the way, straight up; I am a big Steven Spielberg fan, and I actually do like “The Fabelmans”, but I believe that the film has been overrated, probably due to the fact that this is Spielberg making a film about Spielberg, and thus fans and critics find it hard to critique one of the masters after making something so personal to him. And let's face it, he is a master. He is a giant of cinema and deserves all the accolades he gets, because he is brilliant at what he does, and has been great at it for such a long time. Spielberg is a genius with the camera and he has created more classics than any modern filmmaker going around. Hell, he even changed the movie business forever with his little known 1975 film, “Jaws”, which sent shock waves throughout Tinseltown and is often credited as the first big “summer blockbuster” movie. Considering all that, when Spielberg finally got around to making a film about his own childhood, it was always going to be reviewed well, but sometimes I feel that one of his greatest strengths can also be, at times, his greatest weakness, and that is when he leans too heavily into sentimentalism. You can tell through his films that Spielberg is a positive person and always sees the good in people rather than focus on their negatives, but personally I have found that the films where he goes too far in that direction, are the ones that do not work for me as well.
Steven Spielberg will never make a “bad” film; he is far too polished a filmmaker that his films are always expertly made, with his use of camera second to none. That said, he has made a few duds in his time, and like I just said, these are usually the ones that stray too far into sentimentality to the point of becoming twee. They become too saccharine sweet, which makes them harder to stomach. I will not go so far as to say that “The Fabelmans” falls into that category entirely, but I will admit that knowing this was going to be a nostalgia piece for this great director, there was a chance that he would go down this route. When the trailer for the film finally came out, my fears appeared realised, as it was all big wide-eyed visions of how great cinema was and the impact that it would have on this little boy, that it was a little sickening. The movie itself isn't as sweet as the trailer suggests, as Spielberg does tackle a number of heavy subjects like a parent's infidelity which leads to a subsequent divorce, growing up the only Jew in the neighbourhood and the abuse he suffers because of it, not to mention the idea of missing out on so much of his family's life in his pursuit to make movies. I love that all of this is included, but it has been imbued with the golden light of nostalgia, without the hint of melancholy. Another thing that irked me about “The Fabelmans”, (and I cannot believe I am about to say this), was Michelle Williams performance as the mother of the family, Mitzi. Williams is one of my favourite actresses, and I often think she is luminous onscreen, and she has the fantastic ability of bringing a humanity and realism to any role she plays, no matter how minor or unimportant it may seem. However in “The Fabelmans” her performance is so broad and big, that it felt like she was also mugging for the camera's attention. Too often, her reactions to things happening in the film was the whole wide-eyed look of awe and surprise. I also hated her hairstyle, but understand this is based on the haircut Spielberg's own mother used to have. Paul Dano, who plays the father Burt is fine, but he has never been an actor that I have liked much. Gabriel LaBelle, on the other hand, I thought was excellent playing Spielberg's surrogate, Sammy Fabelman.
As I mentioned above, despite my criticisms, I actually liked “The Fabelmans” (I gave the film 3.5 stars) and the film has a number of excellent sequences in it. Probably my favourite moment in the film is when Sammy discovers his mother is having an affair, which is done in a dialogue-free scene with him going back and forth through family footage he has shot at a picnic, editing it down until he finds out the devastating truth. It is a bravura moment that I am sure is Spielberg's homage to his good friend Brian DePalma. “The Fabelmans” is at its best when Sammy is making his movies or recreating scenes he has seen in movies with his schoolmates. You can feel that Spielberg loves recreating these moments of his youth and the excitement he felt while making these original films. To be honest, I think Spielberg still has that love of creating the perfect shot and telling stories, but its the purity of these moments (before the “business” of movie-making enters his life) that makes them stand out. “The Fabelmans” also ends on a fantastic scene involving David Lynch (!) playing director John Ford, who is absolutely hilarious (and foul-mouthed) in the advice he gives to young Sammy. This brief scene is almost worth the price of admission itself.
While I do like “The Fabelmans” a lot, I think that the universal praise that it seems to have received since its release is somewhat unwarranted. It is a good film, but not the out-and-out classic everyone is making it out to be. It certainly isn't top tier Spielberg, (the likes that include “Jaws”, “E.T”, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”, “Jurassic Park”, “Saving Private Ryan”, “Schindler's List”, “Munich”, and “Minority Report”), but probably the next level down. Again, I am not arguing that the film is bad, “The Fabelmans” is a good movie, but I still think it is probably the most overrated film of 2022. Personally I would have loved to have seen the almost universal praise of this film been applied on Spielberg's previous film, “West Side Story”, which was just outstanding!
No comments:
Post a Comment