Reflections from a Young Movie-goer
More often than not,
films with "American" in their title seem to be aiming for
some sort of grandiose parable status. American Beauty,
American Psycho, American Sniper, American Pop,
all of these films are to some extent concerned with evoking
something about the American condition, something which transcends
the film itself. Part of it is inherent within the very use of
"American" in the title, it makes this particular aspect of
the film central. This is more than apparent in Tony Kaye's American
History X (1998), which
aims directly at the weighty issue of race relations and racism in
the USA.
Told in a non-linear,
fragmentary style, aided by the use of black and white photography to
indicate past events, the story follows two brothers involved in the
neo-nazi movement in Los Angeles. Edward Norton gives an immense
performance as the older brother, Derek, who after being released
from prison renounces his membership of the movement, only to
discover his younger brother is becoming increasingly involved in it.
The younger brother, Danny, played by Edward Furlong, is in trouble
at school after submitting a paper about Mein Kampf, and has been
tasked by his principle with writing a paper about his brother titled
"American History X". The film then dots around, switching
between black and white; charting in a non-chronological sequence
Derek's path to racial hatred, activities as a gang leader and
rehabilitation in prison, and colour; the events of the evening which
involve Danny attending a neo-nazi party against Derek's wishes. The
film's heart is in the right place, but there are some very obvious
missteps in its approach which hold it back from being something far
greater.
The fragmentary mode of
story telling can result in some ingenious narrative structures, not
to mention some sublime, filmic moments. Take for example Mike
Leigh's Mr Turner (2015), by portraying only several carefully
selected episodes from J. M. W. Turner's later years and using a kind
of impressionistic realism that Leigh does best, he evokes almost
perfectly not just the mind of the artist, but the era in which he
lived. Furthermore, what we are not shown is just as important as
what we are; the aftermath of something momentous can hold just as
much power than the something momentous itself. Though this is not
always the case, every film which employs a fragmentary method needs
to be aware just how much it gives its audience. Ironically, much
like its subject matter, American History X manages to be
completely fascistic with its material, leaving very little room for
contemplation or emotional depth. Too often, it feels as if the film
is demanding its audience's emotions without properly earning them.
As a result, there's one or two moments which fall completely flat in
their intentions. Ideally, rather than taking any of these bits out,
the whole film needs a least another hour of material to space out
the scenes it intends to be more arresting. Either this, or it
re-structures the narrative to create situations which allude to what
is instead show.
The few effective
moments of the film, though, reach much greater heights than the
rest. Central to these are Edward Norton's performance which attempts
to dissect the mentality of disaffected suburban youth, and almost
succeeds if it were not for the heavy handedness of the narrative.
The characters he's surrounded by resemble the scenes themselves,
lacking the essential nuance and complication for real drama to
occur. This is especially damaging to the film given the effort it
puts into examining race relations. Unlike other films which tackle
the same subject matter, for instance Boyz n the Hood (1991),
to which it pales in comparison, it feels itself too worthy to spend
time establishing characters or atmosphere. It hurries to get to the
point without bringing its world to life first.
No comments:
Post a Comment