Koehler's "Elah" review

• email this story
• read comments (61)
• post a comment
• 
  
  

The differences betwen Robert Koehler's Variety review of Paul Haggis's In The Valley of Elah (Warner Independent, 9.14 and 9.21) and my own opinion thing-dingie, which I ran last month, aren't as profound as they may seem.

The only serious divide is Koehler feeling it's "too self-serious to work as a straight-ahead whodunit and too lacking in imagination to realize its art-film aspirations" while I believe it exemplifies the kind of films that never seem to be doing all that much, but then gradually sneak up on you, laying groundwork and planting seeds and lighting all kinds of fires and feelings. Koehler is wrong, but I respect his intellect and perceptions. It's just an honest different of opinion.

Otherwise, we both admire Tommy Lee Jones' performance and Roger Deakins' cinematography, and we both have problems with Mark Isham's score and particularly an Annie Lennox song that Haggis stuck on to the very end of the film -- an element that wasn't in the version I saw several weeks ago.

What Keohler seems to miss is that Elah isn't some concoction, some tricks-of-the-trade movie that's mainly about pushing buttons and playing audiences like an organ. It's primarily about respecting real-life experience and refining this into art. Haggis's screenplay is based on a true story that happened in the summer of '03, and was first reported a year later in a Playboy magazine article by Mark Boal, called "Death and Dishonor."

It came from Boal interviewing Lanny Davis, a former U.S. Army M.P., about the death of his son, who had been reported AWOL following a tour of duty in Baghdad. Haggis bought the rights and created a somewhat fictionalized version, although he stuck to the basic bones.

The result, as I said several weeks back, is "more than just a respectable true-life drama, and a helluva lot more than the sum of its parts. I think it's close to an epic-level achievement because it's four well-integrated things at once -- a first-rate murder-mystery, a broken-heart movie about parents and children and mistakes, a delivery device for an Oscar-level performance by Tommy Lee Jones, and a tough political statement about how the Iraq War furies are swirling high and blowing west and seeping into our souls."

comment #1

EOTW says ...

I'm actually going to see this only for TLJ. I can't stand The Haggis.

comment #2

Geoff says ...

I happen to love Annie Lennox.

comment #3

MiraJeffAICN says ...

Jeff, once again we see eye to eye on Haggis. I thought Elah was great I have a lot to say about it. It's not without its problems, but TLJ, Sarandon and Tucker are all amazing, the latter in only a few minutes of screentime. But you and I have to appeal to Haggis about that Annie Lennox song. IT IS HORRIBLE. I REPEAT. HORRIBLE. It simply has to go. Paul, if you are reading this, please consider this suggestion. The film is beautiful and you can't send the audience out of the theater on that maudlin song with lyrics that sound like they were written by a 5 year-old. Stick to the beautiful, minimalist score, which deserves its own Oscar nom. You are so much classier than Annie Lennox. Come on!

comment #4

Larry says ...

While I certainly am looking forward to this, the supposed deep politcal messages of such movies are almost always shallow and pointless, better fit for bumper stickers. If you have real characters and a real story you can say something, but too often filmmakers merely trot out cliches and recieved opinions about the effects of war on a country's soul, etc., that make these movies almost unwatchable.

I also hope this isn't another movie about a soldier driven nuts by a war. Haven't they done enough damage with this stereotype attached to Vietnam? If you got your facts from the movies, you'd figure that Vietnam vets are morely likely to have serious mental problems than the nation at large. (Of course, this might be understandable since the only Vietnam vet they know in Hollywood is Oliver Stone.)

comment #5

malibugigolo says ...

I said this on another thread, I don't mean to be redundant it just that older ones don't get read:

Have any of you been to the Seattle Film Fest?
It seems any movie I like gets its only showing there.

comment #6

malibugigolo says ...

As for Haggis: when you scribe political movies, don't be surprised when politics kill them.

And to the person that pointed out ROLLING THUNDER with TLJ: thanks!

His next movie with Bertrand Tavernier is ironic (not to mention something I'm stoked to see) because Haggis should have look at Tavernier's The Clockmaker for how to frame a father (played by the great Philippe Noiret) looking into a son's sins as judged by the politics of the day.

If Ian Sinclair finds my grasp of history elitist, I say fuck you, you troll.

comment #7

btwnproductions says ...

Elah is nothing if not well-intentioned, but Koehler wins this abortive smackdown. I expect most reviews will follow suit (and, yes, torn from the headlines as it may be, and for all its empathy, the film does imply that Iraq is breeding killers and psychos.)

Variety also laid into the lamentable Sleuth remake, a goner from the get-go,and, as mentioned, Lust, Caution. But the review of Death Sentence is surprisingly good, which may make it worth a visit. Manny Farber's "termite art" triumphs again.

comment #8

BurmaShave says ...

What Lennox song? Or is it another original? By the way MiraJeff, the song might not fit in the movie, but there's no world in which Paul Haggis is classier than Annie Lennox.

comment #9

Ian Sinclair says ...

Someone grab MiraJeff's feet before he completely vanishes up Jeff's rear end.

comment #10

malibugigolo says ...

And again Ian adds so much to the discussion...

What are you doing up?

People that read Henry Green are in bed before 10.

comment #11

Aguirre says ...

um, has anyone seen a little movie called "crash?" for the zero of you fortunate enough to have sidestepped that aberration, it was a cataclysmic jenga tower of directorial blunders, the most laughable of which may have been the song that plays over the film's tidy closing montage. perhaps haggis closes his films with absurdly maudlin songs because they're the only means post-production affords him of overwhelming his absurdly maudlin writing. if jeff is going to pick a film to be as stubbornly wrong about this year as he was regarding marie antoinette last year, elah is my candidate. that said, i'll be there the day it opens hoping to be pleasantly surprised.

comment #12

bmcintire says ...

The song is called "The Dark Road" from her upcoming album Songs Of Mass Desruction. The video was featured on amazon.com (I believe it still is - link below). I've been a longtime fan of hers, but the song, though not the horror show indicated above, is no great shakes. Certainly better than the thing she did for LORD OF THE RINGS.
http://www.amazon.com/Songs-Mass-Destruction-Annie-Lennox/dp/B000UCEJEQ/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-9431969-4109458?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1188552198&sr=8-1

comment #13

Josh Massey says ...

Thank you Burma, for saying exactly what I was going to re: classiness.

comment #14

MiraJeffAICN says ...

My bad. I didn't realize I was posting on Annie Lennox's fan page. Jeez. I guess two Oscars just aren't classy enough, Paul. Maybe a 3rd one wil be enough to silence the haters. And for everyone who thinks I'm kissing Wells' ass, I thought Marie Antoinette sucked and Sofia Coppola is likely incapable of making a great movie. You heard me you Lost in Translation lovers. She's got a good eye but she can't write for shit.

comment #15

BurmaShave says ...

MiraJeff, that's exactly what Wells thinks of Sofia. Were you just confirming, or do you suck at making examples? I don't hate Paul Haggis, but again, not as classy as Annie Lennox. My bad. I didn't realize I was posting on MiraJeff's fan page to himself.

comment #16

p.Vice says ...

MiraJeff -- Agreeing with someone doesn't mean you're kissing their ass. However, when you keep pointing out how frequently you agree with them over and over and over and over...

comment #17

Josh Massey says ...

Next time MiraJeff, point out how different you are from Wells by telling us how much you hate Norbit and low thread counts.

comment #18

Mark says ...

HE needs a new still of this movie. I'm already sick of it.

comment #19

T. Holly says ...

You're popular Mira. If you become a reviewing columnist HEre you could get exposed to industry development and get a production gig. Do Variety and Harry pay you? You're a good writer, but I don't see you becoming a critic.

comment #20

Ian Sinclair says ...

Just a FYI: aside from the largely negative (and frankly homophobic) twin Hollywood trade reviews, SLEUTH is picking up some very nice ink indeed from the Italian and British press and last night had a five-minute standing ovation.

comment #21

T. Holly says ...

Just BTW Ian, I loved your breakdown of the British accent. And TLJ is u-g-l-y.

comment #22

malibugigolo says ...

re: Henry Green's comment:
"Italian and British press and last night had a five-minute standing ovation"

That's because they had an erection they couldn't get rid of; nothing to do with the artistic merit of the movie.

comment #23

malibugigolo says ...

T. Holly your better than that.

comment #24

Ian Sinclair says ...

Here's the International Herald Tribune on SLEUTH:

The distinguished team responsible for the new "Sleuth" is justified in emphasizing that this is no ordinary remake. Harold Pinter has completely rewritten Anthony Shaffer's original play (rather than his 1972 screenplay), keeping the outlines of this ingenious drama, but gutting it as comprehensively as the new location - still an English country house on the outside, but its interior transformed into a hypermodern space of glass, stone and steel, equipped with all the latest electronic gadgets and surveillance devices (this setting is the result of one of the few minimalist directions in Pinter's screenplay).

Michael Caine plays Andrew Wyke, the wealthy writer who inhabits this high-tech rustic retreat but, whereas in the original he was the author of old-fashioned country-house murder mysteries, he is now a self-made millionaire producer of blockbuster crime thrillers. Jude Law is in the role of Milo Tindle, the struggling young actor (a more timeless figure, perhaps), who has shacked up with Wyke's wife and comes to ask him to do the decent thing - and give her a divorce. Jude Law is not only the other main protagonist (played by Caine in the first version of the film, opposite Lawrence Olivier), but the co-producer, who over several years put this project together and recruited Kenneth Branagh as the ideal man to direct it.

The reworking of the play is not just an adept transformation of theater to film (to which cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos has made a major contribution), but also casts a revealing light on social history, reflecting the enormous changes in English society, language and morals in the nearly 40 years since the play first appeared on the London stage.

The first celluloid "Sleuth" was filmed over 16 weeks, but this version took 4, and the increase in pace is palpable. At the same time, Pinter has punctuated the action with his famous pregnant pauses, often to great comic effect.

Shaffer's Wyke was an eccentric upper-class player of elaborate games. Pinter's and Caine's Wyke is a much more volatile, dangerous customer, his Cockney charm, laced with a kind of habitual sarcasm exploding into violence at a moment's notice. Jude Law's Tindle, too, reveals under pressure hidden reserves of rage and murderous intent. Having locked antlers, Wyke and Tindle become so absorbed in their struggle they seem entirely to forget the object of their contention, Wyke's wife. The original, more restrained, battle of wills and wits between Wyke and his rival has now become a much more edgy, psychological and physical contest. Even those who can remember the original play and film will find this new interpretation a gripping experience.

comment #25

T. Holly says ...

Oh, you mean here --
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/31/arts/flik1.php

What accents do you suppose they were using?
MaleGig, I'm not better than appreciating Ian's understanding of the British accent. I thought this was good:

Jude Law's dialect, like Ricky Gervais', is actually North London: Hugh Grant used it for ABOUT A BOY. Americans usually have no difficulty understanding this dialect, as long as it is slowed down from its normal tempo. However, this is not true for other London accents: Mick Jagger and Michael Caine, both South Londoners, have to use a transatlantic drawl for Americans. Please Note the word "dialect" - Englishmen speaking English do not have accents, though Americans have.

In the US, generally speaking, the only two British dialects that are comprehensively understood are "upper class" and "mockney", a kind of vaudevillian cockney accent with a period after every syllable used by British actors from Cary Grant to Michael Caine. Every other British actor is more or less forced to adapt their vowels to the dialect-free Recieved Pronounciation (or "RP"), the voice of the classic Shakespearean actor, which is pretty much universally held to be the most pleasant dialect in the world.

comment #26

jeffmcm says ...

Of course Englishmen speaking English have accents, if for no other reason than because there are a variety of types of speech within England itself. Which one of them is 'correct'?
And I'd like to see some figures to support the notion of "universally held to be the most pleasant dialect in the world."
It's his usual intellectual masturbation.

comment #27

T. Holly says ...

If he's playing me, I want to know, because nobody plays t.holly.

comment #28

Ian Sinclair says ...

Jeffmcm, talking of masturbation, if you can tear youself away from your self-professed delight in masturbating to images of women being tortured to death, look up the words accent and dialect in a competent dictionary. Not only would it be a better use of your time, you loathsome human being, but it would take you away from these boards for a while, where you have nothing to say on any matter which is of the slighted use, consequence or interest to anyone. There is as much point to you as there is to a wasp.

comment #29

T. Holly says ...

I think Englishmen speaking English is akin to Chinese speaking Cantonese.

One "should note that Cantonese is a dialect for speaking but not for writing. People speaking in Cantonese usually write in Chinese."

But what about that movie Sleuth, eh?

comment #30

jeffmcm says ...

Ian Sinclair: Ditto, except the parts of your statement that are nonsense or lies.

comment #31

bents75 says ...

Ian Sinclair - Since there seems to be no limit to the irrelevent issues that people will argue about,and insult, on here, allow me to introduce another one based on one of your false and relatively non-sensical comments :

"There is as much point to you as there is a wasp."

In fact, just like most insects, wasps serve an intricate point in the food chain and are particularly useful for human purposes, being parasitic creatures, because they act as a natural pest control.

comment #32

actionman says ...

sounds like Brian De Palma's REDACTED will be the Iraq movie to see.

comment #33

Rich S. says ...

Geez, Ian, is that the kind of tough love British psychotherapists are practicing these days?

comment #34

Ian Sinclair says ...

Rich S, sometimes you have to take care of annoying insects with a rolled-up newspaper.

Actionman: just read the HR review. Yes, REDACTED looks terrific.

comment #35

jeffmcm says ...

"sometimes you have to take care of annoying insects with a rolled-up newspaper."

And for that he charges his clients hundreds of pounds sterling. But we get it for free!

I do wonder, though, if it's all a put-on. If I was an upper-class British twit, looking at Sinclair's posts, I'd start to wonder if he was caricaturing me.

comment #36

Ian Sinclair says ...

Who is the "we" tiu are referring to, you masochistic onanist? The only person I am being rude to is you, and that is only because, as usual, you asked for it. Now take a hike, that is if you can get your hand out of your pants long enough to hitch a ride.

comment #37

jeffmcm says ...

In case you haven't noticed, you are far from Mr. Popularity here, you simpering, faux-educated bully.

And stop spying on me!

comment #38

Rich S. says ...

I'm waiting for Ian to advocate a sharp rap across the knuckles.

Either Jeffrey needs to post something new, or we need to all get lives.

comment #39

christian says ...

all the above please.

comment #40

jeffmcm says ...

This is one of the reasons that I hate festivals: because all the cool kids are there complaining about how nothing they want to see is playing, and we're left here to fend for ourselves. It's a madhouse a madhouse.

comment #41

foxnewsisfake says ...

This is all so awfully entertaining, terribly exciting, and horribly interesting.

comment #42

T. Holly says ...

It's Liza Richardson, yes the DJ from NPR, you have to appeal to about the Lennox song.

HEre, test your intelligence on accent vs. dialect, it's a fill in the blanks quiz, hit "hint" for the answers.

http://www.yorku.ca/earmstro/speech/speech_intro/accvsdia.htm

comment #43

Ian Sinclair says ...

That was fairly comprehensive, T. Holly.

And now I am off to Venice. TTFN.

comment #44

Griff says ...

I haven't seen "Elah," and I don't know if I will. But I have to ask: how can the partly true story of one soldier's experience be "a tough political statement about how the Iraq War furies are swirling high and blowing west and seeping into our souls"?

Just for comparison, anyone remember the story about the Black Muslim baker who assassinated a reporter in Oakland? If one were to fictionalize that story to focus on the dysfunction of the Black Muslim community, and attempt to make it "a tough political statement about how racism and ideological intolerance within the black community continues to encourage them to slaughter their own, and those furies are seeping into our souls..."

Would anyone really think that taking ONE story would justify sweeping generalizations about an entire group/culture?

Apparently, it's okay if we're making sweeping generalizations about the correct group/culture.

comment #45

jeffmcm says ...

The Black Muslim community is a tiny minority within a larger whole. A white Army family is part of the American mainstream. The two aren't really comparable.

And good riddance to Ian Sinclair for as long as he's in Venice. Here's hoping he eats some undercooked chicken cacciatore.

comment #46

Mgmax says ...

Every other British actor is more or less forced to adapt their vowels to the dialect-free Recieved Pronounciation (or "RP"), the voice of the classic Shakespearean actor, which is pretty much universally held to be the most pleasant dialect in the world.

This seems a good time to link to one of my favorite examples of this-- Peter Sellers doing Olivier doing Richard III doing The Beatles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ2s9A0-rC0

Try to imagine doing this with a modern pop hit and finding an audience who would get all the levels of the joke...

comment #47

jeffmcm says ...

Oh, here's my other point: it's one thing to make a movie that asks "what's wrong with us?" and it's a very different thing to make a movie that asks "what's wrong with them?" Haggis' movie is obviously trying to be the former (we'll see if he succeeded or not), that hypothetical Black Muslim movie sounds very much like the latter.

comment #48

Mgmax says ...

"Oh, here's my other point: it's one thing to make a movie that asks "what's wrong with us?" and it's a very different thing to make a movie that asks "what's wrong with them?""

Yeah, one is liberal navel-gazing and Hollywood loves to do it, the other might actually tell us something interesting and Hollywood would never do it.

comment #49

jeffmcm says ...

"What's wrong with is" is the subject of many of the greatest films ever made: Citizen Kane, The Godfather, Dr. Strangelove, Taxi Driver, and so on. "What's wrong with them" is xenophobic (by definition, it assumes 'something is wrong' with 'them'), condescending, and counter-productive.

comment #50

jeffmcm says ...

substitute 'us' for that first 'is'.

comment #51

T. Holly says ...

Shakespeare asked nothing, it told and told and told.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=thz2EUizC9Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTZwWXFef1o&mode=related&search=

comment #52

christian says ...

is that the same ian sinclair who wrote the bfi monograph on CRASH? or a tart scoundrel impersonating him? watson?

comment #53

KeithNYC says ...

Jeff,
I am a huge fan of this site but what you did with this article is completely irresponsible. I actually read the Variety review and it is overwhelmingly NEGATIVE. You know that, yet in your attempt to create the perception of a postive reaction of this film from the critics your deceived us by framing the review as congruous with your own feelings on the film. Here are some excerpts from the Variety review:

"The Iraq war has proven as nettlesome to Hollywood moviemakers as it has to Washington policymakers, and "In the Valley of Elah" continues the trend."

"the film ends up delivering a poorly conceived message of alarm, bluntly signaling that the war is causing America's sons and daughters severe psychological damage.It also continues a line of recent movies addressing the first Gulf War ("Jarhead") and the current one ("Home of the Brave," "Grace Is Gone") that fail to capture the realities of war experience and familial angst beyond basic truisms and pictorial surfaces".

"Not one for subtlety, Haggis ensures that Emily is not only the only woman in her department, forever marginalized by her male colleagues, but that she's also a single mom to a cute boy (Devin Brochu)."

"The film awkwardly shifts between Hank's emotional realities -- as he watches some disturbing vid clips recovered from Mike's cell phone -- and a cycle of fairly obvious red herrings. One, involving Mike's unit buddy Robert (Victor Wolf), consumes an inordinate amount of running time, and is amounts to a one-dimensional portrayal of American-style bigotry."

"Much of this is woefully familiar in dramatic terms,"

You are better then this Jeff.

comment #54

Mgmax says ...

""What's wrong with them" is xenophobic (by definition, it assumes 'something is wrong' with 'them'), condescending, and counter-productive."

So you feel that way about The Lives of Others?

Schindler's List?

The Killing Fields?

comment #55

jeffmcm says ...

I don't think any of those are "what's wrong with them" movies (although I've never seen The Killing Fields). I already know what's bad about Nazis. A movie showing how each of Nazis are 'bad' would be pandering to the audience's predetermined notions of right and wrong. The point of Schindler's List is to show the moral choices made by Oskar Schindler.

Actually, Lives of Others is a good example of a movie that fails in certain regards because it makes the main character's transition from cold SS guy to Goethe-reading nice guy so easy and fast that there really is no moral issue at stake.

comment #56

jeffmcm says ...

Two movies which are "what's wrong with them" movies also: Jesus Camp and Fahrenheit 9/11. And while I enjoyed both of them, I think they are closed-minded, condescending, and counter-productive as well.

comment #57

Mgmax says ...

"because it makes the main character's transition from cold SS guy to Goethe-reading nice guy so easy and fast that there really is no moral issue at stake."

No, it makes it primarily visual rather than explicit in dialogue, and your TV-trained sensibility didn't watch it closely enough.

comment #58

jeffmcm says ...

No, it took one three-minute montage for the transition to happen and then it was never addressed again. It was underwhelming both dramatically and visually. Considering that I barely watch TV, you don't know what you're talking about.

comment #59

Mgmax says ...

Well, when Paul Haggis remakes it, it'll all be spelled out for you.

comment #60

jeffmcm says ...

I agree that Paul Haggis is a crummy filmmaker, but that doesn't change the fact that the character's transition was the dramatic equivalent of flipping a switch.

comment #61

jeffmcm says ...

You aren't making an argument here, Mgmax, you're just repeating yourself. I'm completely open to being persuaded by you if you actually made a case in favor of your interpretation, but you haven't done that.

Post a Comment