The
International Writers Magazine: DVD review
George
Washington
Directed by David Gordon Green
Dan Schnieder review
'Down this twisted
road, please watch over my soul and lift me up so gently so as
not to touch the ground'.
George
Washington was the first feature film ever made by indy wunderkind
director David Gordon Green. It was released in 2000, to generally
favorable reviews, and it truly deserved them. It has been recently
released on an invaluable Criterion Collection DVD which I recently
purchased.
|
|
Most critics erred
and went in for a facile comparison to filmmaker Terrence Malick, but
this film has several things that Malicks films do not have. Yes,
like Malick, Green is fond of lingering poetic shots of seemingly everyday
things, but Greens film is far more concerned with individuals
than any of Malicks four feature films are. Malicks 1978
Days Of Heaven does have its reach, though, as the black and white still
photographs at the end of George Washington homage the black and white
stills of that film, just as a young girls narration echoes the
young female characters in Days Of Heaven. But, the characters
in George Washington are mostly poor North Carolina preteens of an eternal
present, not historic artifacts, and they convey a sense of self that
is absent in Malicks films, which mostly deal with issues, not
people.
That said, this film is not really a narrative, more of a simple series
of linked vignettes that trace a several week period over a summer,
which opens with a dreamy panoramic and poetic monologue spoken by a
young girl named Nasia (Candace Evanofski), that weaves poetry out of
the banal snippets that drift in and out of even the most prosaic minds,
such as, I like to go to beautiful places where theres waterfalls
and empty fields. This is not immanently poetic, but juxtaposed
with the camera work it takes on a heightened, almost ecstatic, state.
Some criticize the film by stating real children do not speak that way,
but, a) Ive known them, and a read of Anne Of Green Gables shows
theyve always been around, and b) the poesy is not of the character,
but what the character says in relation to her station on life.
The main thread of the film follows the life of George Richardson (Donald
Holden), a young black boy born with a genetic condition that renders
his skull soft, making him vulnerable to death if hit in the head. Thus,
he has to wear an old football helmet for protection. He has recently
become the boyfriend of pretty Nasia, who dumped Georges smaller
bespectacled friend Buddy (Curtis Cotton III) for him, because Buddy
was too immature, while George is a dreamer she feels can go places
and do great things. The other two main characters are a pretty blond
girl with an attitude, named Sonya (Rachael Handy), and Vernon (Damian
Jewan Lee), the oldest and largest of the kids. Sonya and Vernon dream
of better places, and getting there as car thieves. Later in the film,
they actually do steal a car, but in driving it away almost get themselves
killed. Buddy is even unluckier. After he has found out that George
has stolen Nasia from him, Buddy resents George, and while
playing in the bathroom of an abandoned park, pushes George against
the wall. Buddy is hurt, emotionally, but George almost hurts his head
against the wall, and in retaliation, pushes the smaller Buddy down
to the floor. Buddy falls, but hits his head on a ceramic sink, gets
up, then bleeds, suffers, and soon dies while banging a stick against
a metal bathroom stall, until the noise of his death rattle stops. Poesy
emerges from the prosaic, yet again.
Buddys death is clearly an accident, but in a moment reminiscent
of another more recent indy film, Mean Creek, the three others- George,
Sonya, and Vernon, decide to keep Buddys death a secret, and hide
the body, yet they do so in a much less affected, and far more realistic
way of making the decision than Mean Creeks teens do. Now, in
most films, this act would be the defining moment of the film. Not in
this one. There is too much else going on, and reality plods onward,
or at least this films reality within reality. There are the railroad
workers the kids have always hung out with, led by Rico Rice (Paul Schneider),
who befriends them all. There are the familial situations that are sketched,
including Georges own uncle Damascus (Eddie Rouse), a man who
hates dogs and spends his life seemingly doing nothing but chopping
wood. Yes, there is an investigation into the death of Buddy, after
hes presumed missing (Nasia thinks he ran away because she rejected
him- another naturalistic assumption from a child), and his body is
eventually found, but none of the kids are charged with the death. George,
however, reinvents himself as a superhero, replete with cape, and saves
an eight year old boy from drowning in the local public swimming pool,
putting his own health- due to his cranial condition, at risk. Then,
after a few more scenes that sketch Georges life, the film ends.
It just sort of fades out as life continues on. In this sense it is
reminiscent of realistic dramas like the novel A Tree Grows In Brooklyn.
What separates this film from others is how it realistically depicts
poverty, especially semi-rural poverty. Its scenes of dilapidated buildings
and rusty junkyards reminded me of my own urban youth in the Brooklyn
and Queens of the late 1960s and early 1970s, although with less people
and less violence. About the only other work I can think of that showed
such a life was, believe it or not, the old Bill Cosby tv show, Fat
Albert & The Cosby Kids. This isnt Hollywoods glamorous,
drug-induced, hip hop poverty chic, and there is very little swearing
in the film. It moves languidly along, dropping in and out of real peoples
lives, for all but a few of the actors in the film were amateurs, and
improvisation was key to its making. The concerns of the preteens are
realistic, as well their dreams. There is a moment, late in the film,
where Sonya questions her own goodness to Vernon, stating that she was
emotionless when Buddy died. Only in a film like this would you see
a child, one who is average in all ways, be so self-aware. Yet, we know
that spark is doomed to be extinguished in her. Why? Not because of
poverty, but because of boredom. The town is a rusting hulk, and the
grownups are clueless. This is the world of the teenager, and has always
been. This film captures that fact like no other. Yet, the real poesy
of the film surfaces in the crannies between the spoken words. In another
scene, after Buddys death, George visits his father in prison.
He tells him he loves him and finally believes him. We know that there
must have been a murder the father committed, but of whom? Georges
mother? Now that he has become an accidental killer he understands more
of the complexities of the adult world. It also lets us understand his
living with his aunt and uncle. But, all of this seeps in osmotically,
never directly. His father, behind bars, never even acknowledges his
sons presence nor shriving of him, but it is a moment that will
always be with George. This is naturalism, but naturalism made poesy.
And there are many more scenes as good as these two.
The title of the film comes from Georges worship of the President
of the United States, Damascuss ax wielding (think cherry tree),
and the play off the idea of not telling a lie, which bubbles under
the surface of the film. The commentary by Green, cinematographer Tim
Orr, and actor Paul Schneider has some moments, but even more interesting
are the trailer, a Charlie Rose PBS interview with Green, a deleted
scene, and an interview with the cast members, recorded by Green, exclusively
for The Criterion Collection. Even better are two of Greens student
films, said to be forerunners of this film- Pleasant Grove (with
commentary) and Physical Pinball. But the best feature of all
is a 1969 short film from cult character actor Clu Gulager, called A
Day With The Boys. It is a superb, poetic, and gruesome film, and
although Green derives some obvious visual influence from it, thankfully
thats all he took from it.
This film is not a great film, but it shows great potential, just as
Malicks first film, Badlands, showed great potential, but
not accomplishment. But it is a special film because it makes its specialness
from what is remembered by all people, from their youth. As they go
on with life, George and Nasia will likely drift apart, but both will
have their own reasons for remembering that long ago summer the film
charts, and we viewers will understand why. Green has released several
films since this one, and his next two projects, adaptations of two
really bad recent books- Brad Lands ridiculously bad college sodomy
memoir Goat, and Sue Monk Kidds mystical Negroes novel
The Secret Lives Of Bees- hopefully do not augur his descent into the
Lowest Common Denominator, for this films deeply resonant take
on real poverty shows an artist of sublime potential. In short: Dont
go Hollywood, Kiddo!
© Dan Schnieder
April 2006
http://www.Cosmoetica.com
Once
upon a time in the West
- Sergio Leone
A Dan Schnieder review
Joyce
Carol Oates
A Dan Schneider critique
The New World
Dan Schnieder
Disgrace
Dan Schnieder
A
Very Long Engagement
A Dan Schnieder review
Why
We Fight
A Dan Schnieder review
More DVD reviews
Home
©
Hackwriters 1999-2006
all rights reserved - all comments are the writers' own responsibiltiy
- no liability accepted by hackwriters.com or affiliates.