Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Nov 13, 2022 9:13:58 GMT
I don’t think James Gray has ever made a truly great film, though he has several that have elements of greatness in them. He always seems like he’s on the cusp of making a masterpiece, but never quite gets there for whatever reason. My two favorite films of his are Two Lovers and Lost City of Z, and the latter (his best) is the only one of his films that he’s made in the last decade that felt fully realized to me. The Immigrant and Ad Astra are flawed in frustrating ways because they felt like movies I should have loved, but only ended up just kind of liking. I didn’t necessarily go into Armageddon Time wanting to love it, so perhaps that’s why I found it to be more satisfying of an experience than those other two. It’s not a perfect film, but it at least feels like the movie that Gray set out to make - it doesn’t feel compromised and isn’t weighed down by glaring flaws I can’t ignore or forgive.
Not nearly as ambitious as some of his other films from this past decade, but it’s obviously the most personal film he’s ever made. Covering issues of race, class, and the American Dream, this could have easily come across like an afterschool special, or a heavy-handed “message movie”... but what sets it apart from other films that cover similar territory is its specificity and Gray’s honesty in how he presents his own family. He doesn’t look back on his family history through rose-tinted glasses, and he isn’t afraid of showing how his loved ones were complicit in perpetuating a system of inequity. No one is absolved... not even himself. Aptly using the dawn of the Reagan era as the film’s backdrop, Gray is refreshingly self-critical, confronting his own sense of privilege and white guilt. Some have criticized the film for being self-congratulatory in this respect, but I think what keeps it from seeming like Gray is just patting himself on the back by showing how “woke” he’s become is the fact the film avoids an artificially reassuring tone, and instead comes across as sober self-reflection doubling as a call to action. It’s a delicate balancing act, and I think Gray pulls it off with great care and sensitivity.
Another big criticism the movie has been getting is the treatment of the Johnny character, played by Jaylin Webb. Because the vast majority of the movie unfolds through Paul’s POV, some have described Johnny as nothing more than a narrative “pawn,” and just another
Hathaway and Strong are quite good (though Strong gets better in the film’s second half), and Hopkins is lovely. The kids are the weak link and are a little shakey at times, but they’re fine overall, and Jessica Chastain’s cameo is random... but I kind of loved it (the way she says “handout” with such derision). And as is always the case with Gray, the film looks great - I’ve said before that even when his films are just good, they still feel great.
I’d say this is probably Gray’s third best film after Lost City of Z and Two Lovers.
Not nearly as ambitious as some of his other films from this past decade, but it’s obviously the most personal film he’s ever made. Covering issues of race, class, and the American Dream, this could have easily come across like an afterschool special, or a heavy-handed “message movie”... but what sets it apart from other films that cover similar territory is its specificity and Gray’s honesty in how he presents his own family. He doesn’t look back on his family history through rose-tinted glasses, and he isn’t afraid of showing how his loved ones were complicit in perpetuating a system of inequity. No one is absolved... not even himself. Aptly using the dawn of the Reagan era as the film’s backdrop, Gray is refreshingly self-critical, confronting his own sense of privilege and white guilt. Some have criticized the film for being self-congratulatory in this respect, but I think what keeps it from seeming like Gray is just patting himself on the back by showing how “woke” he’s become is the fact the film avoids an artificially reassuring tone, and instead comes across as sober self-reflection doubling as a call to action. It’s a delicate balancing act, and I think Gray pulls it off with great care and sensitivity.
Another big criticism the movie has been getting is the treatment of the Johnny character, played by Jaylin Webb. Because the vast majority of the movie unfolds through Paul’s POV, some have described Johnny as nothing more than a narrative “pawn,” and just another
Black sacrificial lamb
who is only there to provide a lesson for Paul and to make the white protagonist a better person. But considering that this is Gray’s account of his own life, you could argue that Johnny’s story is not Gray’s to tell, and that the entire point of the movie is the limited perspective of Paul. While there is one scene that plays through Johnny’s eyes (with his grandmother), and some have acknowledged it as evidence of Gray making him more human than simply a narrative prop, I’d argue that it’s misplaced and betrays the point of the movie. While well-intentioned, it breaks from the necessarily limited perspective of Paul and almost feels like tokenism in its brevity. As much as I applaud Gray for the honesty with which he presents his childhood overall, the film would have been even more honest without that scene imo.Hathaway and Strong are quite good (though Strong gets better in the film’s second half), and Hopkins is lovely. The kids are the weak link and are a little shakey at times, but they’re fine overall, and Jessica Chastain’s cameo is random... but I kind of loved it (the way she says “handout” with such derision). And as is always the case with Gray, the film looks great - I’ve said before that even when his films are just good, they still feel great.
I’d say this is probably Gray’s third best film after Lost City of Z and Two Lovers.