by
Julien Faddoul
* (1 star)
wd
– Ryan Coogler
ph
– Rachel Morrison
pd
– Hannah Beachler
m
– Ludwig Goransson
ed
– Claudia Castello, Michael P. Shawver
cos
– Aggie Guerard Rodgers
p
– Nina Yang Bongiovi, Forest Whitaker
Cast:
Michael B. Jordan, Melonie Diaz, Octavia Spencer, Ahna O’Reilly, Chad Michael
Murray, Kevin Durand, Marjorie Shears
On
January 1st, 2009, at 2:11am, Oscar Grant III was fatally shot and
killed by BART police officer Johannes Mehserle in Oakland, California. Replying
to reports of a conflict on a packed Bay Area Rapid Transit train returning
from San Francisco, BART Police officers detained Grant and several other
passengers on the platform at the Fruitvale BART Station. Grant was unarmed.
Officer Mehserle claimed he mistook his gun for his Taser. Several eyewitnesses
filmed the event on their phones and the videos went viral, causing an uproar
of protest and dispute that still continues to this day.
Ryan
Coogler’s Fruitvale Station is a film
that attempts to apply context and cogitation to this disgusting, hideous event
and, regrettably, fails. It fails simply because of that reason; it is a film
that gives no insight whatsoever into Grant’s murder and the film we are left
with exists in the cloudy stratosphere of ecstasized affectation.
The
film is told to us in fictional-construct: It opens with video footage of the
real shooting and then rewinds 24 hours. We follow Oscar himself, played by
Michael B. Jordan, go about his day, interacting with his girlfriend, mother,
daughter and other family members and friends (and some enemies). All of this –
with the exception of one flashback to two years earlier – is leading up to the
impending tragedy to come.
This
story is a burning one. It is patent that people are discriminated because of
the colour of their skin and the circumstances of their life and that is a
story worth telling. But every choice that Mr Coogler makes actually denies
this event from having an ampler power. One wonders whether a documentary on
the subject wouldn’t have been a greater asset to be served with.
Mr
Coogler brings to the film almost all the risible tropes we’ve come to expect
from an independent film like this. His camera follows Mr Jordan around as he
encounters the most obvious postulations imaginable. Like the Dardenne
Brothers, but with an agenda. These include a dog being run-over by a car, a
slow-motion racing game with his daughter, a chance meeting with a pregnant couple
and a horrifically trite conversation with his mother, played by Octavia
Spencer, where she convinces him to take the train from Fruitvale that night.
Once we reach the train, Mr Coogler begins to borrow from Spike Lee and has all
his characters reappear in a gallery of clumsiness. There’s nothing clumsy
about that symbol per se, but the film doesn’t seem to realise it’s own
ridiculousness, not because it’s too self-serious – in fact there are many warm
and humorous moments – but because Mr Coogler doesn’t devote any time toward
it’s context.
It
is after this when we see the shooting recreated and it could not be more
slipshod. We are given no real rationalisation from the police officer’s
perspective (who is, for some reason, played by Chad Michael Murray) and Mr
Coogler constantly cuts back to Oscar’s girlfriend Sophina, played by Melonie
Diaz, who is waiting outside the station, wondering what’s going on. We are
shown, in succession, the phone calls between Oscar and Sophina, the phone
calls she made to Oscar’s mother in a panicky temper and the various onlookers
on the train filming with their phones. This was all, according to reports,
very close to what exactly happened, but it doesn’t justify its existence in
this film. It is hysteria for hysteria’s sake.
Again,
this would have been expulsive had the film been consistent with itself, but
this sequence seems to betray the 70 or so minutes we have spent getting under
Oscar’s skin, understanding his predicaments and contemplating how so many are
often in the same situations. But it is in the final 15 minutes where the film
loses all thematic value altogether. Oscar is taken to hospital and his
condition is critical. Mrs Grant and the rest of the family await the news in
the waiting room, as they pray for Oscar’s recovery.
There
is no reason for this sequence. Since we already know the outcome, it is an
exercise in perversion. It is quite astonishing how Mr Coogler, clearly working
with the best of intentions, could take his film toward such arty rot and all
it does is distance the audience even further from what the film is trying to
be about. If the film is a fictional-construct of the last day in a life, then
what is the purpose of the last 15 minutes? Furthermore, if we as an audience
are assumed to reach emotional purification during this time, then why show the
video footage at the beginning, which only negates any kind of catharsis
because we’ve already had it?
This
is Mr Coogler’s first film and these are all basically “first-film” problems.
What Mr Coogler does accomplish is coaxing some fine work from his cast: Mr
Jordan, Ms Diaz and Ms Spencer are all quite wonderful and are not once caught
over-doing the despondency they are asked to convey. It is a shame though that
they are playing concepts as opposed to characters. In the end, Fruitvale Station ends up being a con
for the audience to devour and for awards to be showered, much like Beasts of the Southern Wild last year (a
con if ever there was one). Many have praised the film since its premiere at the
Sundance Film Festival earlier this year, where it won both the Grand Jury
Prize and the Audience Award. But all I can see is a movie trying to have its
cake and eat it too.
No comments:
Post a Comment