#WTW Glance: Birdman

#WhatThomWatched Glance*:

Birdman

(Alejandro González Iñárritu, 2014; In theaters)

Recommended for: Anyone, really; see the 230-word sentence below for details.

There are several clear entry points into Birdman and probably at least one for every moviegoer on the planet; most obviously, fans of the superhero genre that’s (again) fomenting a complete takeover of screens of all sizes and seemingly all available flat surfaces; fans of the mighty trio of Mexican directors that includes Iñárritu (Amores perros, 21 Grams, Babel, Biutiful) along with Alfonso Cuarón and Guillermo del Toro (no stranger to superhero films); fans of stunt cinema where artists set impossible restrictions on themselves, in this case a script which drives forward with almost no evident camera cuts for the entire length of the film, evoking the building pressures that torment the main character; fans of the varied work of Pittsburgh native Michael Keaton (who, yes, deserves full respect for a mostly impeccable resumé despite — well, no indictment here); fans of any of the other superb actors including Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Naomi Watts, Zack Galifianakis, Amy Ryan . . . but one fanbase perhaps least remarked on by the (rave) reviews are the backstage fans: viewers with some theater experience, on-stage or off-, for whom the story beats and the personalities connected to the late rehearsals, last-minute accidents, preview audiences, narrow corridors and stairways, semi-private dressing rooms, talk of backers and finances and legal issues — and of critics and box office — hits some bittersweet spot deep in the psyche. The movie clearly sets up the battle between Hollywood and Broadway, West Coast and East Coast, movie star and Great White Hope, blockbuster and opening night triumph, “popular” (actor, work or art) and “true” (actor et al.) — and characters make points on all sides and from many perspectives. But it’s interesting to consider it from the non-popcorn-movie perspective: What is Birdman saying about the increasingly rarefied world of classical theater in the U.S.? The high-minded critic and the purist rival actor are satirically played, and our sympathies are mostly with Keaton’s self-doubting actor and his wish to prove himself a capital-“a” Artist. But the movie itself is arguably a faithful representation of pure stage theater, with all of the difficulties for an audience that come with it: watch the prologue with that in mind, with its insistent percussion, literary quote, surrealist images — and then the film proper, which is constructed as a play, mostly as a series of short conversations and (Keaton) soliloquies, often in a just-slightly elevated style — recognizable to a theatergoer, but a bit much for the movies. Birdman is not just about Hollywood vs. Broadway; it takes Broadway in and breathes it out as a Hollywood movie — an art movie, but a full-blooded production just the same.

Reminds me of:

Well, the form reminds me of little else -- sure, Hitchcock’s Rope and Sokurov’s Russian Ark are single-shot (simulated and actual, respectively), but the single-shot conceit is used to different ends in all three films, and Birdman is much more likely to focus on Keaton's and other actors' faces, arguing intimately or (in Keaton’s case) being harangued by his alter-ego. But as far as the business of theater and theater personalities goes, I think of Marcel Carné’s Les enfants du paradis, the ultimate backstage movie (not to mention the key to understanding the French’s respect for mime).

But also — the guilt!

Entirely apart from movies -- I walked out of Birdman wistfully remembering my past as a season subscription holder for multiple theaters, an entirely worthwhile expense that’s just a bit too rich for me these days. Post-kids-in-college, perhaps, this will rise again.

Pitch:

There are a myriad of memorable details throughout Birdman, but for a representative combination of visual and aural punch: the moments when the frantic drum-only score (a stellar work by Antonio Sanchez) is literalized by a street performer (Nate Smith standing in) — who, at one point, is passed by the never-resting camera inside the theater. The unconventional score alone is worth experiencing (a score which, incidentally, the Academy has just ruled as ineligible for an Oscar nomination, due to its being interrupted regularly by other “found” music. Boo.)

*For movies and shows which are current -- in theaters or streaming -- I'm posting a short, less-spoilery take on #WhatThomWatched (and generally only when something really strikes me as worth passing on).
These shorter essays are labeled Glance.

<< The Killing (-) Youth of the Beast >>