Argylle

 

I will confess from the beginning that I am a Matthew Vaughn fan. Out of the films that he's made there hasn't been one that I haven't loved to some degree or other. I anticipated “Argylle” like I would have one of the Kingsmen films, it's a spy thriller with that Vaughn touch that makes them so entertaining and unique. I must also confess however, that this is probably the weakest of the films that I've seen from this director.

Let me point out the things that are problematic before I get to the things that I love so much. Everybody expects that there will be twists in a spy Thriller. After all, betrayal, double agents, and hidden agendas are all part of the field. So of course there will be some surprises along the way. The issue this film has is that it has a change, twist, or revelation every 10 to 15 minutes that makes the movie suddenly change direction and make us question not just our loyalties but the plot structure itself. Sometimes you can just be too clever for your own good. That's what happens here, screenwriter Jason Fuchs seems to be operating under the assumption that if we're going to give up any sense of reality in the visuals, then we don't have to be realistic to the plot points.

It's a Fantastical story, that asked us to suspend our disbelief from the very beginning,and then it asked us to do so again, and then one more time, and then several more times, leading to a little bit of exhaustion in trying to keep track of what the hell is going on in this movie. They have compensated for those faults by creating inventive action sequences and interesting characters, but action sequences are not plot, and when characters change repeatedly, we begin to distrust our own sense of what it all means. Those are not the kinds of things that are going to make most audiences happy.

The main things that keep this film from collapsing altogether are those action moments and the main characters that we get to know from the very beginning. Let's just face it, Sam Rockwell makes everything better, and when he dances, the movie is probably going to be a lot more worthwhile as a result. Rockwell does dance in this movie. Bryce Dallas Howard, plays a somewhat introverted character for the first half of the film, and without giving away a big spoiler or two, there are some dramatic changes that take place in the second half of the film that even the greatest of actresses would have trouble pulling off. She does the best that anybody probably could with what the script gives her.

Two other actors in the film also have their plot lines substantially seem to change the characters they are playing, at least for a short period of time. When it happens it's a little disconcerting, until we get another twist that reveals why even these characters have changed their personalities. The story also gets complicated by the fact that we are jumping back and forth between three different World Views. In one, Bryce Dallas Howard's character Elly Conroy, is visualizing the fictional story that she has written in her spy novel. The second viewpoint comes from Sam Rockwell's character, Aidan Wilde, as he appears to be a real life spy who is intervening in the story in a way that makes Elly extremely nervous. When we finally get to two more big twists, another perspective is added that we bounce back and forth between, without being sure where we are going to land. I'm sure the director and writer thought that this would be a fun ride for the audience, but I think you have to win the audience over before you can pull off something like this, and they don't quite accomplish that in time.

As is usual with a Matthew Vaughn film, there are cleverly directed and visualized gun battles throughout the story. The most effective one, includes a lot of scenes of hand to hand combat, as well as the use of firearms, on a speeding train in the first half of the film. There are inventive moments where Aidan acts quickly and definitively when dealing with the threats to Elly. One thing that might slightly undermine all of this is the presence of a CGI cat and an exit by Parachute that is also clearly a CGI moment. It's my belief that the CGI in a more primitive form is being used this way to remind the audience that this is all a fantasy, and not to take all of the murder and death too seriously.

As the plot gets more ridiculous, which distances us a bit from the movie, we get rescued by over the top visual sequences which are also ridiculous but are completely entertaining. On the podcast this last weekend one of the guests cited two sequences near the end of the film that she was bored by, these were the two sequences that I was most amused at. The fight in the hallway with the different colored smoke and the gas masks made me laugh hard. When we get to the next sequence which involves an oil slick, a couple dozen thugs, and some improvised ice skates, I not only laughed at how preposterous it was, but also how confident Vaughn and Fuchs were in designing this silly but nicely rendered moment. I didn't just have to suspend my disbelief, I had to suppress all reasoning and just enjoy the stupidity.

There are some very clever moments in the film where the main character Elly, mixes the events that are happening to her with the visualization that she has of her fictional spy. She sees the very same events that she is going through through the lens of her hero. Henry Cavill seems to be auditioning for at least the third time to be the next James Bond. These spy films have very different tones, and this one would suggest that Cavill would be playing Bond closer to the Roger Moore version, then to the Sean Connery or Daniel Craig versions of 007. I'm not sure that this is the best direction to take. John Cena is in the movie briefly, but was completely delightful in the moments that he had. Samuel L Jackson plays Samuel L Jackson as usual in this case, as an ally rather than an antagonist.

The most valuable player in the film, aside from Rockwell, is Catherine O'Hara who is playing Elly's mother, and her plot line is dramatically different from what I had anticipated. Of course that's one of the twists that you will probably wonder about when it shows up. On the other hand, Bryan Cranston is chewing the scenery exactly how a villain is supposed to in this kind of movie. There are a couple of other characters that pop into the story a little bit, and they provide exit strategies and some ridiculous answers to difficult plot choices. I just had to keep reminding myself that it's all in good fun. Otherwise, you're going to have a better time mocking some of the things that happened in this film, rather than laughing at the silly things that the filmmakers want you to laugh at.

Galaxy Quest Revisited

 

Last week I got to talk about The Princess Bride and add it to my list of perfect films. The original post that I wrote several years ago included three films that at the time I would classify as perfect. I haven't changed my assessment of those films, but I continue to evolve in my appreciation of them every time I see them, and I got to see one of them again this week.

It's been said that Galaxy Quest is the best Star Trek film ever made. I think that's probably a correct assessment. Those things that we loved about Star Trek, the characters, the camaraderie, and all of the tropes that make up science fiction television of the 1960s are present in this send-up of a Star Trek type television show. The lead actor played by Tim Allen, is a thinly disguised version of William Shatner's Captain Kirk. The outsized ego of the star, gets put in contrast to the attitudes of the secondary players and co-stars of the series. Sigourney Weaver gets a chance to play comedy, and boy does she nail it. She does let her wig do half the work however. Oh and her push-up bra. I'll get to the work of the other actors in just a minute.

The thing that makes this film resonate so much with its loyal audience, is that it represents them not in a satirical way but in an affectionate one. We all know those fans who take the minor portions of the thing they love and obsess about them. In this film The “Questers” attend a fan convention and do the usual cosplay, and line up for autographs at $15 a pop. That episode of Saturday Night Live where William Shatner went off on the fans of Star Trek and told them to get a life, feels like it is the basis for several of the moments in the early part of the film. The  actors in the cast of the canceled TV series Galaxy Quest, struggle for relevance, while having to make do with personal appearances that cash in on their celebrity from their time on the show. When they are at the fan convention, they recognize for the most part that it is the fans who have sustained any career that they might have. When Tim Allen's character Jason Nesmith goes off on a fan in the autograph line it, frustrates everybody else and surprises them. Even though they are all irritated that this is what their careers have been reduced to, they still recognize that the fans are sincere and care about them. None of them would want a fan to be disappointed. This film takes geek culture seriously while still mildly lampooning it. The fan boys and girls have their fantasies about the characters, read online sources for information about the show, and have a depth of knowledge that befuddles the cast of the show. It's those very things that allow the Thermians to be perceived as fans instead of the aliens that they are. Jason has a private gig booked, and it was with some of the fans that he dissed at the convention, and he mistakes the Thermians for the group that he is supposed to visit.

Harold Ramis was supposed to be the director for the film, but he dropped out when Tim Allen was cast as the lead. He thought that this was the wrong move. In fact it was the perfect move because Allen was at the height of his TV Fame and was just crossing over into movies, and the confluence of those situations with the character that is written in the script is just perfection. Sometimes you just get lucky. Speaking of lucky, the supporting cast is so deep with talented actors that it's a little ridiculous. Tony Shalhoub gets laughs with the mildest kind of expression on his face, looking a wee bit high and befuddled, but also extremely confident in some situations and frantically overmatched in others. I think the implication was that he was chemically treating his emotional issues, and that is reflected in the performance of his character. He is frankly hysterical. Of course hysterical is a relative term and if there is a level that is one step up from that, that is where you'll find Sam Rockwell in this movie. Almost everything he says is a comic gem, and his desperation, fear and ultimate redemption add some real spark to the story as well as making the emotional heart of the movie even more solid. This may have been the first time I recognized Rockwell's genius, and I have been enjoying it ever since. I can't wait until next week when he stars in “Argyle”, the new movie from my favorite contemporary action director Matthew Vaughn.

Fandom is well represented by Justin Long as the leader of the fan group that has big questions for Jason, and is a little too obsessive about the technical readouts of their spaceship The Protector. If you have not seen the film and don't know what I am referring to, I'm not going to try and explain it to you, this site has never been about simply restating the story for the readers. This is a movie that's been out for 25 years now, and if you don't know the premise, you're just going to have to see it and then come back and read these comments to make sense of it all. Long has the earnestness of a young fan, and the whining voice of a frustrated teen when dealing with his mom. Enrico Colantoni, Patrick Breen, and Missy Pyle all score laughs at some point as the Thermians. At one point Raiin Wilson is in the film, but he disappears completely once we are on The Protector. 

The CGI may be a little wonky, after all it is 25 years ago, but none of that matters because the special effects in the original Star Trek were never great, and that never mattered. The value of these shows was in the characters and situations, not in the flash and visual extravaganzas that we get in so many science fiction films these days. I really enjoy the fact that the Thermians built their version of The Protector based on the television show, because some of the technology looks like an adoption of a game console, and some early computer technology. Exactly the kind of thing that might have been done on Star Trek. Even if it is sometimes just Christmas lights, the fans don't really care because they came for the characters. Which is what I've been doing for the last 25 years with this terrific film. Alan Rickman, a comedic performance that is equal to all the dramatic work that he did in the later part of his career. “Galaxy Quest” along with “Robin Hood Prince of Thieves”, contain two of the most iconically hysterical comedic performances of the 1990s. Rickman is sorely missed, but we at least have this iteration of him to cherish in our memories.

See How They Run

 

It's not everyday you get a real farce on the big screen. Lots of films have elements of farce and are quite enjoyable as a consequence. In the last year I would say "The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent" and "Free Guy" are two examples of action films that have farcical moments in them. Most Wes Anderson films also feature the concept of a light, humorous play in which the plot depends upon a skillfully exploited situation rather than upon the development of character. "See How They Run" has the advantage of actually being a film about a play, which is eventually revealed to be a sort of play in itself. That is what makes it a true farce as far as I am concerned. 

The story concerns a murder that takes place during a negotiation to turn "The Mousetrap" into a movie. Those of you not familiar with the play simply need to know that it is an Agatha Christie murder mystery. It is also the longest running play in the history of theater, starting in 1952 and still playing on the West End in London to this day. This movie is not a filmed version of the play, but rather a take off on the plat, using "The Mousetrap" as a sort of touchstone or spine for the mayhem. It mocks the machinations of old Hollywood and they manner in which film makers try to take material and rework it to their own vision. The real clause in the contract granting rights to a cinematic version, states that such a film cannot be made until six months after the play closes in London. See how this is going to work?

Making use of techniques used by movies over the years, this film starts off being narrated by the stereotypical victim of these kinds of drawing room mysteries. The performance of Adrien Brody is fitfully droll and sarcastic, with just a little bit of surprise thrown in. The fact that he is in the film explains why his character is resurrected for several flashback scenes. Those kinds of scenes are also mocked in the film in a self reference that will be seen time and again in the movie. No spoiler here, but when you see the climax of the film, you will laugh out loud, hard.

The historical context of the story adds some fun twists to a murder mystery that is as convoluted as any written by Christie herself. I enjoyed having Richard Attenborough played on screen as a young actor treading the boards in the play. The Hollywood Cliché of the producer is only partially exploited, but the film director tries to compensate by being a cad and attempting seduction by casting whenever he can. Once the murder has occurred, the real stars of the film and the source of the greatest comic moments show up. Sam Rockwell is doing a Gary Oldman impression of a fifties era detective inspector. He is great playing the detached slightly alcoholic run of the mill, hardworking detective. He is partnered with eager beaver Constable Saoirse Ronan, who comically takes notes, jumps to conclusions and also plays the hero. There are bad puns, slamming doors, slightly missed moments when trailing a suspect, all of which will provoke a chuckle here and there. 

This sort of thing is hard to pull off in a film. So many times what works on stage simply seems frenetic on screen, but here the pacing is cool enough to let us enjoy the oddball characters and the silly assumptions. The final result is a charming little mystery that lampoons it's own roots in a gently comic way, and evokes enough laughter to justify going out to a theater to see it. I was pleased that the Tuesday Discount brought out a good sized crowd for this movie. It's great to hear laughter from a collective of souls in the dark.  

Richard Jewell

Let's get the film's big criticism right up front. The screenwriter and director are accused of slandering the name of the dead journalist who first publicly pointed a finger at Richard Jewell as the Olympic Bomber. Kathy Scruggs as portrayed by Olivia Wilde in the film, was a hard charging, not very bashful crime reporter who was looking for a "scoop" so to speak in the case that took place in the town she worked in. The irony of a journalist being besmirched by innuendo in a piece of  dramatic entertainment, when in a newspaper she did the same thing to an innocent man is not lost on most of us. The inference that she offered sex for a tip to an FBI agent is a fictional speculation of how she obtained this inside information. She never revealed her source, and in fact was nearly jailed for refusing to do so by a judge.  It is reported that she was a somewhat wild figure in the confluence of police and journalists on her beat. The screenwriter put two and two together and came up with a dramatic tool to show us how she might have done it. Miss Scruggs has been dead for 18 years so it is legally not possible to slander her. Richard Jewell was publicly accused by her stories, without anything more than a piece of gossip, and he was alive to be roasted by the ensuing firestorm. Let's suppose for a moment that the come on from Miss Scruggs was left out of the film, would what happened to Richard Jewell be any less tragic? No, but the character of the reporter would have no way of claiming to have an informant. That is a plot hole that should not exist in a well told story. It is a two minute scene in a film that more than two hours in length. People judging the movie based on this is disproportionate.

Having set that aside for the moment, the film itself is very effective at recalling the time and place of the events depicted. There is a substantial opening act that shows us who Richard Jewell was. He seems to have been overly enthusiastic in his pursuit of doing right. The campus security job he has is lost because he does what is asked of him but it conflicts with what is within his scope. You don't get the impression that he is motivated by power or the notion that he is in control, in other words he is not the "asshole" that he is warned not to become. He just wants to follow procedure and have people be protected. He continues to believe in what he sees as being right.

Anyone in a position of authority is likely to ruffle some feathers. It is easy to make an inference that a police officer is getting off on their power, especially when you are the one on the other end. I know I have felt that way a couple of times in casual contact with police. It goes the other way as well, people instinctively react to the perceived power of the police. The idea that there is a profile and you are being judged by that is a reality. The accuracy of such a profile still needs to be verified, and this film shows the FBI struggling to fulfill their own prophesy. The trailer lays out the problem here immediately, the two most powerful forces in the world are basically trying to nail Jewell for something he did not do.

Anyone watching the political scene these days will get flashes of deja vu because this stuff goes on constantly today. The FBI seems to have a number of troublesome issues that have been disclosed over the last fifty years, and the political element has been one that continues to be prevalent. The media is a little sensitive about being called out when they are indulging in speculation about the facts. The righteousness of journalists can't change the truth, sometimes they get it wrong. This was certainly one of those places.

Clint Eastwood continues to be one of the best directors working in Hollywood today. This story builds very effectively and we don't even get to the bombing until the second act. The section where all of the attack plays out is effectively staged and there is real tension as the bomb is discovered and the authorities, including Jewell try to deal with it. This sequence shows how Richard Jewell's strong desire to be a law enforcement officer is a good thing. His insistence on following the protocols probably saved dozens of lives, which makes his subsequent vilification all the more unjust. Sure the FBI needs to follow every lead, but to ignore exculpatory information, in pursuit of a profile that is thin to begin with is preposterous.  The fact that the journalist is shown to believe this well before the bureau is an attempt to rehabilitate her character as well.

Sam Rockwell continues to show that he is a leading actor in a character actors clothes. He plays the attorney defending Jewell as the professional skeptic he needed to be. He brings the rage that the deferential suspect seems incapable of displaying. At times that disgust has to be directed at his client who seems programmed to sabotage himself at every turn. Paul Walter Hauser deserves accolades for not only resembling Jewell but for showing us the hopes, and frustrations of the title character. We can see that he is flawed, but Hauser makes him sympathetic at every turn, even when he does the stupid things his attorney advises against. Kathy Bates has one scene that presents some histrionics but she still undersells the moment so her character remains real and completely sympathetic. Jewell's Mother is collateral damage in this process, another example of how the great forces of the law and press can grind someone down indirectly.

Much is being made about the lack of success for this film at the moment. If you are skipping it because it seems too political, you are making a mistake. It simply points out the real danger that anyone, regardless of their politics could fall into. If the controversy about the presentation of the journalist discourages you, remember that it is a film, and with dramatization some narrative tools work, whether we believe they are fair or not. There are some great performances and a compelling story here, don't skip it because of misdirected desire for purity. Story telling is what movies are about, and this one tells a hell of a story, and does so well.

Never Surrender: A Galaxy Quest Documentary

The producers of this film included a quote from Pulitzer Prize winning Playwright and Screenwriter David Mamet. The comment basically says there are only 4 perfect movies: The Godfather, A Place in the Sun, Dodsworth and Galaxy Quest. On that last one, I am certainly inclined to agree. This throw away movie that was sold as a kids film for the Christmas holidays is so much better than it has any right to be. For the twenty years since it was initially released, "Galaxy Quest" has grown in stature and seems to be beloved by millions who may have missed it on it's first release.

This documentary traces the development of the movie and the twists and turns it took to become a cultural touchstone. This comes from a fan driven group and that makes perfect sense because "Galaxy Quest" is a love letter to fandom and it may well have cleared the path to widespread acceptance of geek culture in the broader population. "The Big Bang Theory" and the "MCU" would not have nearly the resonance they do if Galaxy Quest had not blazed the trail for them.

Like many documentaries, the movie is loaded with talking heads who recall the events and personalities that are part of the story. Every major surviving cast member is included in the conversations. Sigourney Weaver is effusive in he love for the project and how it allowed her to play a comedic role that she sees as a lot closer to her true persona than the iconic character of Ripley really is. Sam Rockwell was almost unknown when he took the part, after having turned it down several times. He reasoned that it might be a good piece of counter-programming to show his range as "The Green Mile" was coming out around the same time. Tim Allen  probably had his finest role as an actor playing the William Shatner inspired lead character.

The Producer, screenwriter, director, casting director, production designer, editor and composer all have stories to share about the film and many of them are hysterical. The movie is generously supplied with clips from Galaxy Quest itself, along with Star Trek moments and a variety of other material. There is also an elaborate thread about the fans of Galaxy Quest, and the documentary trails a couple of fans who cosplay their way across the universe in salute to this pitch perfect film. We get a chance to see how fans become part of the story and how they were the original inspiration for the film in the first place.

The climax of the film brings the fans and the makers of the movie together at a celebratory screening of the film. It just so happens that I was at that screening along with my wife, daughter and my Southern California blogging colleague Michael, who brought his daughter the the screening as well. I covered the showing two years ago with some more details. Last night when we saw the documentary, we were delighted to note that we make a guest star appearance in the film. Amanda's Jaws shirt and my Hawaiian style blue shirt are clearly visible in the crowd scenes as the Thermains arrived for the screening of the film. I have been a long time fan of Galaxy Quest, I took the whole family as our Christmas day movie in 1999. One of the things I remember speaking to them all about was that the aspect ration of the film changed three times in the movie. It was nice to hear that confirmed by the director, since the DVD presentation does not always allow you to notice that change.

I'm not one to disagree with David Mamet. I think he is certainly right when he includes this movie on a list of perfect films. In fact I did the same thing six years ago on a post I entitled "Three Perfect Movies". If you check it out you will see I was with Mamet on this one early on. The documentary was accompanied by a long introduction from the Fandom group that put it together. If it is ever available to people on line or in physical form, I hope they will include the interactions of the writers for the site and the "Honest Trailer" they put together for the film. They were quite entertaining as well. 

Jo Jo Rabbit

This may be on two distinct sets of lists at the end of the year. Some folks are going to find that it is a misfire that fails to manage the complex shift in tone that occurs on a regular basis in the story. Others will be beguiled by the delicate balancing act between the sweet and the bitter. It took me to the last couple of shots to decide which group I am going to fall into. Count me enchanted.

The lead character, Jo Jo is a ten year old boy who is a microcosm of Germany under Hitler. He seems to be hypnotized by the promise of the Fuhrer and the propaganda machine that engulfs the whole country. Little boys and nations can become obsessed with symbolism, and the swastika, uniforms and military pomp all sucker the crowds in. Taika Waititi has punctured these concepts with obvious asides about the stupidity of some of the things the boy and the country are buying into. That humor is often outlandish and it does provoke a big laugh on numerous occasions.  The dangerous high wire act he is performing exists because that humor is often juxtaposed with a horrifying reality. Even though those moments of tragedy are presented in non-graphic ways, it is a sudden jolt to the left that might upset the balance of the story at any time.

By making the lead a ten year old, the whole metaphor can be looked at as a loss of innocence on the one hand, but it is also a rude awakening at the same time. Since Jo Jo gets a Rabbit to interact with and he is designated as a rabbit by some of the other characters, I guess it is fair to classify this story as a fable. In many ways it has the same sort of fairy tale essence to it that "Life is Beautiful" had. The harsh realities of the world are being covered up by a childish view of the events surrounding our lead. That his imaginary friend is Hitler himself makes the story feel completely absurd. Sure we laugh at the amusing image of Hitler jumping out a window or sitting down to a meal of unicorn, but each moment is building toward the shakeup that will be so heartbreaking at the climax of the film. Sam Rockwell acquits himself with the usual high caliber comic performance he has been noted for, but he gets to pay off some actual sentiment in the end. Rebel Wilson is merely a cartoon in the movie, but it is a funny cartoon that we will never have to take seriously.

Straddling the gap between sweet fantasy and morbid reality is Scarlett Johansson as Jo Jo's mother.  She is an indulgent mother who vaguely disapproves of her son's embrace of Nazism, but she is also an enigma, one that presents us with a reality far from the domestic bliss she is trying to project. Waititi himself plays Hitler, and at times he is cloyingly obtuse and at other moments we hear the rhetorical weapons he used to seduce a whole nation being wielded against a child. If you hold your neck too straight in the curves, you may break it. The trick is to lean into the humor but try to ease back from it before the next breakneck switch in tone. I was able to do this more effectively as the film went on and I got used to the sort of whiplash inducing moments writer/director/star Waititi had in store for us. I can easily imagine though that some people will find it annoying.

Roman Griffin Davis makes his debut as the title character and the performance is essential for the movie to work. He has to be a kid who is both incredibly sure of his grounds while simultaneously doubting the foundation he is standing on. He hits those notes especially well with his interactions with costar Thomasin McKenzie. She plays a belligerent and sarcastic version of an Anne Frank character, and she must be stern but frightened at the same time. That the director got these performances from his cast is what allows us to go along with the story. Ultimately, it is a hopeful interpretation of the minds of the German population under the Nazis. If would be easy to dismiss it as a tasteless concoction that never quite gels, but I think in the last few minutes, it firms up into one of the best films of the year. 

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

It might look like a comedy from the trailer, but "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri has a subject as unfunny as anything you can probably think of. The fact that Writer/Director Martin McDonagh manages to get us to smile so often is a testament to his writing skills. The death of a child through a brutal crime generally does not set off the chuckle meter for most of us. However, if you have seen his previous films, "In Bruges" or "Seven Psychopaths", you might not be too surprised. Each of them deals with dark themes with comic overtones and while not always successful in the case of "Seven Psychopaths", it all clicked in the feature debut "In Bruges".

Crime leaves a scar on everyone it touches. The feelings may not be the same from one victim to another, and they certainly do not get expressed the same way, but everyone has a piece of themselves changed by these kinds of events. Mildred Hayes is the mother of a dead teenage daughter. Her anger seethes for months and when she reaches a boiling point she is ready to let it out on anyone in the vicinity. Frances McDormand will probably win her second Oscar as the brutally self centered, guilt ridden and thoughtless Mildred. She is pushing for answers but there are none coming her way. Mildred is a character that you can at first feel for, but as we see what her mania is doing to others in the community that would otherwise sympathize with her, we can also hate her a little. She still has one child and he is battered by her pitbull like approach to the problem she sees. The Sheriff in the town is not guilty of negligence, just a lack of evidence to pursue. A man who shows a romantic interest in her and tries to be a friend, is belittled by her blindness to the feelings of others.

This movie never goes where you think it is going to. It feels like a vengeance film and a procedural, wrapped up in small town melodrama, but it never takes a conventional course. There are a number of moments that come out of left field, although they really are significant and related to the characters. The Sheriff's story turns out to be as sympathetic as Mildred's. Just when you think the deputy is getting his just desserts, there is a string of information and behavior that changes our attitude towards the character. People in this movie say and do hurtful things to each other, but rarely with the intention of having the kind of effect that occurs. It's as if each is throwing a temper tantrum and the whole town feels like the bewildered Mother in the grocery store with a ego-centric toddler to deal with.

Woody Harrelson can play both psycho and family man. Here, you will find his performance ultimately heartbreaking. At the same time, he manages, even when off screen to delight us with a sense of humor or a moment of empathy that everyone should appreciate. John Hawkes plays Mildred's ex-husband, the abusive Charlie. He too can be sympathetic one moment and loathsome the next. Lucas Hedges, who was so effective in "Manchester by the Sea" last year, again plays a teen, trapped by a family drama that he has difficulty coping with. There are a dozen performances by secondary characters that are just spot on: Zeljko Ivanek, Samara Weaving,  Abbie Cornish, Caleb Landry Jones and others make this feel like a real place with real people who have real faults and qualities. 

Special attention however must go to a second likely Academy nominee for this film. Sam Rockwell has been a favorite of mine since I first saw "Galaxy Quest". He was neglected for Awards attention a few years ago for one of my favorite films from 2013,  "The Way, Way Back".  That injustice is unlikely to be repeated. Rockwell is simultaneously repellent and sympathetic in the part of a Dim Deputy who has anger issues but also a strong need for justice. The less you know about the film and it's plot twists, the more compelling the performances turn out to be, Dixon is a character in search of a redemptive storyline, and it doesn't matter that he is sometimes an awful person, he is also a human being. Mildred's quest for justice for her daughter changes lives in many ways, none of them are predictable, and Rockwell's Dixon is the least predictable of all.