Undoubtably there are some well executed dramatic set pieces in the movie that are perfectly directed and acted by Robert Zemeckis and Denzel Washington respectively. But throughout the movie I couldn't help myself from questioning the central character's relationship with the audience.
Gatins has successfully set up a character full of irony, being a brilliant pilot and hero, but in his personal life he is a metaphorical plane crash. As a writer I can appreciate this and it is very well appointed. Though if we as an audience are supposed to see ourselves up on the screen reflected back at us (albeit via a special mirror), there is nothing in Whip Whitman that I believe can be connected with emotionally.
He lies and he cheats to try and cover up his addictions, but at some points it just seems like the character is just going through the motions to make us thoroughly despise him. In the end what is created is a character who is frustrating and (in my opinion) I didn't really care if he managed to hide his deceit or was crucified. In the end the lack of emotional connection to the character acted as a beta blocker to the supposed catharsis at the climax of the movie.
In conclusion the movie is a great character study on the nature of addiction and the narrative of lies that are created to surround it, but (in my opinion) the unsympathetic lead character inhibits us from getting too close to Whit.
The only counter-arguement I can put forward for the unsympathetic nature of Whit Whitaker is that this was a conscious decision made by Gatins/Zemeckis. That in doing so it created an alienation effect that would allow the audience to see Whit's actions in an objective way and form an objective decision about his actions.
(This of course is only my opinion and I welcome any discussion and discourse regarding this post or anything else in the world of Film, TV or Radio scriptwriting.)
No comments:
Post a Comment