Plot Intro
In 1962, classical pianist Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali) employs Frank “Tony Lip” Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen) as his driver and bouncer during a concert tour of the Southern states. Vallelonga’s job is to ensure that the rampant racism and prejudice that exists in these states does not prevent Shirley from attending his performances.
This was a real shocker of a winner last year. Not because it’s particularly terrible or unpopular, but more because this was our “middle of the road” nominee. The “filler nominee” that ticks a few boxes because it tackles socio-political issues, tells a (allegedly) true story, and has a couple of well-renowned actors in it. Whilst the list of nominees was a bit lacklustre generally, Green Book unexpectedly defeated much more noteworthy entrants such as female-driven The Favourite, the overblown A Star is Born, the confrontational BlacKkKlansman, the innovative Roma, and the action-packed Black Panther. So Green Book’s win was a curve ball that I certainly didn’t see coming.
To its credit, it’s competently made from a technical point of view. The story has enough meat to it to keep you interested and never loses focus; it has lovely moments of charm and humour; it successfully celebrates Shirley’s work; and it provides some pretty complex, if not particularly subtle, character work. Mortensen and Ali provide excellent performances and Ali nabbed a deserved second Best Supporting Actor trophy. Both are playing spectacularly different characters to their most well-known past roles (see Moonlight for Ali and The Lord of the Rings for Mortensen) so the film solidifies both of them as two of the most versatile actors around.
The major problem with Green Book, however, lies in two tricky issues. Firstly, around the time of the film’s release, the surviving members of Don Shirley’s family went to the press, and vehemently claimed that they were never consulted or interviewed as part of the writers’ research. The writers (one of whom is the real Vallelonga’s son), and Mahershala Ali himself, have apologised and claimed that they had no idea there were family members still out there. This seems a farfetched counter-argument. Modern technology makes it pretty easy to track someone down these days, so the implication is that the writers just didn’t bother. Shirley’s family have made further claims that events have been misrepresented, namely that Shirley was not as distant from his family as Green Book makes out, and that the relationship between Shirley and Vallelonga was not nearly as close. Of course, all period dramas are going to obfuscate real history to some extent, but Green Book claims to be a true story, and loses a lot of integrity because the makers evidently didn’t do enough research.
The other issue is around the presentation of racism, and there have been many articles dissecting this since last year. The arguments against Green Book are that it suggests that racism is a thing of the past, and only existed in the Southern states, and that it’s yet another “white saviour” film showing wonderful, heroic white people protecting people of colour from evil racists. Both of these are pertinent points to be explored, but my main issue with Green Book is how simplistically it depicts racism (an issue that 2005’s winner, Crash, suffered from to a much greater extent). Throughout Green Book, Shirley is subjected to both acts of violence, and acts of injustice. At one venue, he is greeted as an honoured guest with a parking spot right by the front door, but is forced to use a disgusting outdoor privy rather than the main toilets. At another, he is again greeted as an honoured guest but is not allowed to dine there. When Vallelonga gets arrested for punching a policeman, Shirley is also arrested even though he has done nothing. These are, indeed, all acts of racism that probably did happen and sadly still do. But if you were to watch Spike Lee’s BlacKkKlansman, you’ll find that Lee had much bigger, more groundbreaking things to say about why people are racist, the effects of racism, the important difference between the movements behind “Black Lives Matter” and “White Lives Matter”, and even connects it up to the Nazi riots in Charlottesville in 2016.
Lee goes to great pains to show us that racist oppression is not a thing of the past, and there is still much work to be done. Green Book makes no such effort and while it’s an interesting tale, and has some things to say about how to cope with confrontation and oppression, it feels more like a vanity project for Vallelonga’s son. It’s nowhere near as incisive and surprising as Spike Lee’s work, and doesn’t develop the international dialogue around racism when, quite frankly, it could have done.
Highlight
The scene in which Shirley helps Vallelonga to write a more poetic letter home to his wife is charming and funny. For all the film’s faults, you do end up liking these characters very much.
Lowlight
The lack of proper research is quite shocking, to be honest. It would not have been hard and it might have thrown up some more insightful story-telling and thoughtfulness for the writers.
Mark
4/10
We are now in the era when we saw these films in the cinema as part of this project (meta or what?!) and Green Book was an interesting one at the time. It was interesting because I heartily enjoyed the film with its seductive, chocolate-box atmosphere, satisfyingly conclusive ending and well drawn characters who learn from each other.
It was only then, as we walked away from the Brixton Ritzy and boarded the 333 back home to Streatham, that I began to wonder about some other elements of the film. Suddenly elements that had seemed cosy became troublesome. Suddenly character developments and the sweet, uplifting ending felt problematic.
It’s for this reason that I don’t think Green Book should have been made, let alone crowned with one of the jewelled headdresses of the cinematic world. It’s insiduous. Through well-plotted storytelling, compulsively enjoyable characters and beautiful cinematography, they manage to make swathes of their audience believe (even for a moment) that racism is dead and gone. It’s one of those regrettable moments where once again white men have written, directed and produced a story about black oppression.
There are tropes that I have recently learned about, including the White Saviour trope (where a white person - usually a man - swoops in to save a black person from racist attacks), and also the Magical Negro trope (where a black character acts only to provide wisdom and guidance to the main white character - think Whoopi Goldberg in Ghost - for which she also won an Oscar). Both these tropes have a history in Hollywood of being liked and rewarded with praise, awards and financial success. This is largely due, argue black critics, to the fact that the black characters are being relegated to their “rightful” place of supporting cast, while the film as a whole is lauded for upholding diversity.
Green Book isn’t as simple as these two tropes - the film is as much about Don Shirley as it is Vallelonga, although the latter has more screentime. And the two characters save each other in - I would argue - fairly equal amounts. The actors are all excellent, and Mahershala Ali’s Oscar-winning performance was justified, even if some reviewers felt he seemed a little embarrassed at collected an Oscar for what was - even by that point - felt to be a deeply problematic story about race.
What troubles me most of all about this film, with its slick storytelling (make no mistake, that the film, as factually incorrect as it is, is gripping and doesn’t drag) and saccharine ending, leaves audiences beaming as they file from the auditorium, secure in the knowledge that the fight for equal rights is all over now that Vallelonga’s family have accepted a black man to join their dinner table. Spike Lee, whose own film about race Blackkklansman was far grittier and with a darker, more urgent story, reportedly stood up and left the Oscars ceremony auditorium when the winner of Best Picture was announced. One can hardly blame him. In that instant, the Academy - comprised of some of the most important and influential people in the artistic business - chose to blind themselves to the issues that people of colour face today, and instead reward a well-made film that nicely made out that all their problems are over.
So when assessing it again, I could see the taut script, the beautiful camera work and the excellent performances with ease. But what emerged more clearly this time was the insiduous (if unintended) messaging that is damaging to a huge percentage of our population. What’s most gutting - if I’m honest - is that there are moments when this film promised to be something more intricate, articulate and ground-breaking. But those moments were never seized upon.
Highlight
One of those moments is when Shirley leaves the car while Vallelonga fixes a burst tyre. He sees black workers in the field who gaze at him in his suit and finery, and the looks they exchange of confusion, of two worlds far apart, belong to a better film, minutely examining the class struggle within Shirley’s own life.
Lowlight
The overly sweet ending which implies subtly that race struggles are now a thing of the past, and that audiences can just relax.
Mark
3/10
No comments:
Post a Comment