Post by SnoBorderZero on Aug 3, 2017 23:20:14 GMT -5
Alexander Payne has been one of the most interesting filmmakers over the last two decades. He writes and directs his own material and has struck a chord with very specific demographics while mostly focusing his stories on lovable losers and nostalgia hungry cynics while being very funny in the process. I've liked all of his films, and while each are certainly different from one another in their plots and main characters, they certainly feel as if they exist in the same general, grounded universe of middle class America. His latest film, which doesn't release until this December, is a definite departure from his grounded approach while still focusing on the issues of white, middle-aged, middle class Americans but doing so in a science fiction setting. My reaction to Downsizing was that I was fascinated at times by Payne's ideas and daring approach outside of his normal fare, but I also felt a bit underwhelmed by his bland protagonist and not taking the concept in nearly as interesting an approach as I would have hoped for. Still, Alexander Payne remains a filmmaker that has yet to make anything less than a good film in my eyes, and Downsizing continues his trend of compelling and quirky dramas.
Downsizing revolves around a process discovered by scientists that by shrinking people significantly down that we would save the planet by conserving resources and doing less ecological damage. Why would people forcefully agree to be shrunk down when knowing you're doing your part isn't enough? Because it's been incentivized where by doing so, you'll be able to afford all of the luxuries that you couldn't as a "normal person". Your funds are now worth ten times that when shrunken down since the costs of parts and labor is nothing. What costs $100 now costs less than $1. Families living in dumpy apartments now can live in near mansions and enjoy all the amenities that until now only the upper class could indulge in. Fast forward to ten years or so later when this process has developed and 3% of the world's population has gone small where we meet our protagonist, Paul (Matt Damon). Paul is a nice guy living in Omaha, Nebraska who scrapes by as an occupational therapist. Paul is fascinated by the shrinking process, and more than being enticed by living a life of luxury feels emboldened to do his part in saving the planet and undergoing the process. Paul and his wife Audrey (Kristen Wiig) agree to undergo the procedure, and Paul finds himself thrust into a whole new world. From here the plot unfolds in ways that certainly aren't conventional or obvious, and he meets a fun cast of characters throughout his journey, most notably his playboy neighbor Duchene, played by the venerable Christoph Waltz. While the story is never less than intriguing, I felt a little disappointed that Payne didn't take things further. There's not much finger wagging here and I don't think you can accuse Payne of making a blatant environmental statement with the film which is nice, but given the concept it's difficult not to feel that it all feels a little bit safe.
Perhaps my feelings in that regard mostly stem from Paul being a pretty dull character overall. Payne's plots have always been interesting, but there's no denying that where they truly gain their spark from is generated through his colorful protagonists. Election works because Matthew Broderick is an underachieving nice guy who is angered as Reese Witherspoon's character always winning and cheating to do so, causing him to attempt to rig the election. In The Descendants, George Clooney plays a likable guy who's completely oblivious about his wife's affair and also realizes he doesn't have much of a relationship with his daughters. Paul Giamatti in Sideways is a self-loathing, deathly cynical author who despite being immersed in the beauty of Napa is content to drink himself to agony over his divorce and failed attempts at writing. These characters all have great flaws and exposition that move them towards these plot decisions, and as an audience we cringe at their failures and root for these hapless guys to get it together. Paul on the other hand is just simply a good guy that really never amounted to much. Not for a lack of trying or brains or ambition, but simply because his mom got sick and that's pretty much it. Paul essentially just goes along with everything in the film, and instead of him leading the viewer through this world, the world is leading Paul and it's not nearly as compelling. Everything seems to come together too easily because Paul is so charmingly content to go along with the grand plan. There are so many unanswered questions, and even holes in logic and possibilities in Payne's world building, that Paul doesn't stop to ask. He explores things simply by going with it, and for me it wasn't enough to justify the smart concepts swirling around him. Payne has delivered much better in both characters and plots before, so it's too bad that in his most ambitious film yet he delivers his weakest effort in what is normally his greatest traits.
Despite Downsizing being my least favorite film by Alexander Payne, it's still an interesting watch that's filled with the oddball characters, humor, and insight into American life that he's become a name for. It's a long film that doesn't flesh out its concepts as well I would have hoped for, but even the worst Alexander Payne is a compelling watch especially coupled with him dipping his toe into the science fiction genre.
7/10
Downsizing revolves around a process discovered by scientists that by shrinking people significantly down that we would save the planet by conserving resources and doing less ecological damage. Why would people forcefully agree to be shrunk down when knowing you're doing your part isn't enough? Because it's been incentivized where by doing so, you'll be able to afford all of the luxuries that you couldn't as a "normal person". Your funds are now worth ten times that when shrunken down since the costs of parts and labor is nothing. What costs $100 now costs less than $1. Families living in dumpy apartments now can live in near mansions and enjoy all the amenities that until now only the upper class could indulge in. Fast forward to ten years or so later when this process has developed and 3% of the world's population has gone small where we meet our protagonist, Paul (Matt Damon). Paul is a nice guy living in Omaha, Nebraska who scrapes by as an occupational therapist. Paul is fascinated by the shrinking process, and more than being enticed by living a life of luxury feels emboldened to do his part in saving the planet and undergoing the process. Paul and his wife Audrey (Kristen Wiig) agree to undergo the procedure, and Paul finds himself thrust into a whole new world. From here the plot unfolds in ways that certainly aren't conventional or obvious, and he meets a fun cast of characters throughout his journey, most notably his playboy neighbor Duchene, played by the venerable Christoph Waltz. While the story is never less than intriguing, I felt a little disappointed that Payne didn't take things further. There's not much finger wagging here and I don't think you can accuse Payne of making a blatant environmental statement with the film which is nice, but given the concept it's difficult not to feel that it all feels a little bit safe.
Perhaps my feelings in that regard mostly stem from Paul being a pretty dull character overall. Payne's plots have always been interesting, but there's no denying that where they truly gain their spark from is generated through his colorful protagonists. Election works because Matthew Broderick is an underachieving nice guy who is angered as Reese Witherspoon's character always winning and cheating to do so, causing him to attempt to rig the election. In The Descendants, George Clooney plays a likable guy who's completely oblivious about his wife's affair and also realizes he doesn't have much of a relationship with his daughters. Paul Giamatti in Sideways is a self-loathing, deathly cynical author who despite being immersed in the beauty of Napa is content to drink himself to agony over his divorce and failed attempts at writing. These characters all have great flaws and exposition that move them towards these plot decisions, and as an audience we cringe at their failures and root for these hapless guys to get it together. Paul on the other hand is just simply a good guy that really never amounted to much. Not for a lack of trying or brains or ambition, but simply because his mom got sick and that's pretty much it. Paul essentially just goes along with everything in the film, and instead of him leading the viewer through this world, the world is leading Paul and it's not nearly as compelling. Everything seems to come together too easily because Paul is so charmingly content to go along with the grand plan. There are so many unanswered questions, and even holes in logic and possibilities in Payne's world building, that Paul doesn't stop to ask. He explores things simply by going with it, and for me it wasn't enough to justify the smart concepts swirling around him. Payne has delivered much better in both characters and plots before, so it's too bad that in his most ambitious film yet he delivers his weakest effort in what is normally his greatest traits.
Despite Downsizing being my least favorite film by Alexander Payne, it's still an interesting watch that's filled with the oddball characters, humor, and insight into American life that he's become a name for. It's a long film that doesn't flesh out its concepts as well I would have hoped for, but even the worst Alexander Payne is a compelling watch especially coupled with him dipping his toe into the science fiction genre.
7/10
