A lot of times, going into a movie I'm unable to distance myself from my own preconceived notions of what I think the film is going to be like and how I'm going to react to it. Occasionally, I'll see a film that I'm expecting to hate and I'll force the movie to change my opinion. Even more often I'll see a film that I'm expecting to be great and it won't live up to those expectations. I honestly didn't know if I was going to love or hate Unbroken. The first preview I saw of it I immediately thought that it was a film that was made solely to win all Oscar gold available for every category, especially with Angelina Jolie attached as director and the biggest selling point of the movie due to a bunch of relatively unknown actors starring in it. But, then I read that the Coen Brothers wrote the script and my thoughts on the film changed. It can't be bad at all if the Coens wrote it. However, the reviews came out and a lot of them were unfavorable. My guess is that a lot of critics had my first inclination that it was Oscar bait and it let a few of them down... so, my expectations were lowered quite a bit and my interest in the film ceased. So, by the time my ass hit the theater seat I was expecting to be able to point out all of the points of failure and nitpick the movie down to a C grade... and I was doing that for a little while, but after most of the movie had gone by, it really did win my affection.
Louis Zamperini was an Olympic athlete, a bombardier in World War II, and a prisoner of war in a Japanese internment camp. All three of these stories are told in Unbroken and really all three of these stories really could've been their own film. The movie could've been a trilogy and, for once, it wouldn't have been out of greed but out of great storytelling. However, the decision was to make one movie and tell how this one man overcame a great deal of adversity. After Zamperini competed in the Olympics and did a very respectable job, he joined the military as a bombardier. His plane is shot down during a rescue mission and him and two others are stranded on a raft at sea for well over two months. Inches from death, with no hope in sight, they're finally rescued... by a Japanese freighter. Instead of being thankful for finally winding up on solid ground, they're immediately thrown into an internment camp led by a malicious Sargent who tortures prisoners at will due to his own emotional predilections. Suffice it so say, Zamperini probably had a better experience dying on a raft in the middle of the ocean. But, his will to survive is what makes him... yes... unbroken.
It's strange what we as a culture enjoy watching and consider "inspiring". In this film, you take a man who is genuinely portrayed as a decent human being just get the ever-loving shit kicked out of him. He's pushed past the brink of sanity and strength. He's thrown every obstacle one could think of and he overcomes all of it. Yes, it's inspiring to see what a single human being can deal with if they're strong enough, but the pain never lets up for a second. We're watching a tortured soul, knowing full well he survives it all, but that's all we get. Something bad happens, then something worse, then something worse, then something unbelievable (yet true), then something WORSE, and so on until the end when you realized he was able to survive. It's a torture movie. It's like watching Passion of the Christ. Jesus is beaten and hung to death for two hours and then at the end comes back saving the souls of every living being on Earth. The film is watching him get f#@&ed up, yet when everything is okay at the very end, we're able to say that it was inspiring. I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not, but we as a society enjoy watching this type of film. I was getting sick to my stomach watching Zamparini get handled the way he was, but I was even more impressed with the amount of physical abuse he could withstand without killing himself. It's a strange dichotomy.
I do believe that a lot of the criticism of the film to be a bit accurate. It's very evident that Jolie is a little bit too emotionally attached to her lead character to distance herself from him and give him a dramatic arc. He begins the movie as a strong person, almost too perfect and great and ends him on the same pedestal he began on. It's almost hard to paint the man in a bad light because of everything that happens to him, but he has no flaws during the entire film. Not that he needs any, but the need to overcome inward adversity as well as outward adversity is what makes great films. In any instance, I thought the film was very well done, especially for Jolie's second outing as a director. It's not an easy film to watch, but it is a good film. And while I don't expect it to win any of the awards I had assumed it was going to, there is a decent little film here about an amazing human being with an incredible story.
B+
No comments:
Post a Comment