MY MOVIE SHELF: Signs

The Task: Watch and write about every movie on my shelf, in order (Blu-rays are sorted after DVDs), by June 10, 2015.  Remaining movies: 189  Days to go: 133

Movie #249:  Signs

I’ll talk about The Sixth Sense a few posts from now, but I think it’s safe to say the expectations people had for M. Night Shyamalan after that success were unreasonable at best and impossible, in practice, to meet. I don’t deny that the man’s work definitely went off the rails after a bit, but his Unbreakable was a decent concept executed poorly (and before, apparently, the public was ready for a dark comic book story), and Signs is actually an interesting treatise on faith wrapped up in standard sci-fi tropes. And, really, if you look at The Sixth Sense as a sci-fi story about a kid with paranormal abilities rather than a ghost story which a shocking twist — which is a hindsight evaluation in and of itself — then basic sci-fi is all M. Night Shyamalan has ever done, so it’s kind of unfair for the public to bitch at him about it when they remember how much they look down on run-of-the-mill sci-fi for not being high art or whatever.

Signs takes the very commonly discussed phenomenon of crop circles and simply postulates that they are, in fact, caused by aliens. What if aliens have come to Earth, and what if they are not friendly. Really basic B-movie sci-fi stuff, right there. What Shyamalan does that’s interesting, though, is instead of making this your standard War of the Worlds global alien invasion story, he sets his tale on a small Pennsylvanian farm, in the house of former reverend and recent widower Graham (Mel Gibson), his brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix), his little boy Morgan (Rory Culkin) and his very young daughter Bo (Abigail Breslin). And they learn of the worldwide alien invasion the way most of us would — by watching television — even as they come face to face with their own unwelcome visitor.

That’s the long and the short of it, really, as far as the sci-fi goes. It’s not groundbreaking; it’s not even all that original. The aliens have a very silly and almost obvious weakness by which they are defeated, and they retreat post-haste. And most people seem to get caught up in this aspect of it, how the alien is stupid looking and the threat is both nonsensical and too easily resolved, but it’s sort of completely beside the point.

The point of Signs is that the death of Graham’s wife has left him with a crisis of faith, and the alien invasion, through various events and the last words of his wife that still haunt him, restores that faith. That’s all. There’s a reason for Morgan’s asthma, there’s a reason for Bo’s water obsession, and there’s a reason Merrill always felt right swinging his baseball bat. Shyamalan is saying that there’s a reason for everything, that there’s a greater purpose, that there’s some force out there looking out for us. Or looking out for this family, at least. It’s a movie about the existence of miracles instead of luck. It just happens to be wrapped up in some low-caliber sci-fi.

Mel Gibson was supposed to be the big name of this piece, but literally every other featured player is more interesting, including Cherry Jones as Officer Paski and Merritt Weaver in a tiny little role as the pharmacist. But it’s Graham’s family that really draws focus. Even little Abigail Breslin, as a tiny girl of six, exhibits an enormous amount of that talent and star quality she would come to be known for a few years later. And this is probably one of the last things Phoenix did before he really started getting weird. It has its merits.

I don’t really think Signs is a great movie, but it is an interesting movie in its way. For M. Night Shyamalan, at this point, that’s got to feel like a win. Right?

MY MOVIE SHELF: Erin Brockovich

The Task: Watch and write about every movie on my shelf, in order (Blu-rays are sorted after DVDs), by June 10, 2015.  Remaining movies: 279  Days to go: 270

Movie #98: Erin Brockovich

Really fun Soderbergh retrospective, but it really bugs me when "Erin Brockovich" gets so casually dismissed. http://t.co/d16xqfzw7l

— Joe Reid (@joereid) August 10, 2014

As if note-perfect star vehicles are so easy to make.

— Joe Reid (@joereid) August 10, 2014

That was Joe Reid, the Entertainment Editor for The Wire, tweeting truth about Erin Brockovich — one of Steven Soderbergh’s most successful, yet least revered, films. (And before you go noting that Soderbergh was nominated for a Best Director Oscar for Erin Brockovich the same year he won for directing Traffic, I’ll point out that politics and popularity come into play concerning Oscar nominations and wins a lot more than AMPAS would like you to believe, and that Soderbergh managed not to split votes with himself and lose out to Ang Lee (probably the most deserving nominee, for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) or Ridley Scott (for Best Picture winner Gladiator) in part because, given the choice, nobody would vote for Soderbergh’s direction of Erin Brockovich over his work on Traffic. It just wasn’t going to happen. Ever.) Erin Brockovich is — a lot like its title character — outspoken and flip and not overly artful, but, man, does it get the job done.

Julia Roberts is phenomenal as Brockovich — a tough, uncultured woman fighting to get by who elbows her way into a job, stumbles across some shady dealings between Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and the town of Hinkley, CA, and by sheer force of personality and will, helps bring about “the largest settlement every paid in a direct-action lawsuit in U.S. history.” Say what you will, not every actress can play bold and brash the way Roberts can. Just as she did in Pretty Woman, she manages to portray someone who stands out and rubs everyone the wrong way and makes people uncomfortable, but who wins people over and clearly has a huge, loving, generous heart. That’s a difficult balance to achieve. And it’s right in Roberts’s wheelhouse.

Of course, Hollywood loves true stories like this, the little guy beating out the big, bad corporation, and the film is definitely engineered to be a crowd-pleaser. But what I love about it is how honestly it portrays the struggle of a single mother. Single mothers get put on pedestals when their child grows up to be a famous athlete or something, but a lot of times they’re vilified — never overtly, but politically and societally. Erin Brockovich’s story isn’t all that different from a lot of women’s: She got married and had a baby when she was young, her husband leaves her with a couple of kids and she has no education or work experience to get herself a job — not one that’s going to pay her enough to cover her bills, at least. She can’t afford insurance or child care, and she has no benefits. So how is a woman like that supposed to survive? The movie sets her up as someone to be admired for her perseverance and gumption and “bootstrap” mentality, but in the real world very few employers will give you a chance based on your word, and even fewer will see your value to a company when you don’t necessarily play by the same social rules as everyone else, even if you get more work done, and do it better, than anyone else on the team. People make their assumptions about you, and it’s really hard to change them. Even Ed (Albert Finney) tells Erin in the film, “Look, I’m sorry but you were gone for a week. I assumed you were off having fun.” She responds, “Oh, and why the hell would you assume that?” Unfortunately, we don’t always get to challenge someone else’s assumptions about us.

The movie doesn’t just deal with how hard it is to get and keep a job, though, it also addresses how hard it is to find and keep a relationship, and all the stigmas attached with it. Because Erin’s been divorced not once but twice, she’s clearly perceived by those around her as some sort of low-class floozy, as if she chose for her husbands to leave her. And when she meets George (Aaron Eckhart), he initially bucks the trend of men in her life by embracing her work and her kids, but when the pressures of the PG&E case take too much of a toll on her time and her health and her state of mind, he caves. He scolds her for her attitude and tries multiple times to guilt her into quitting, and when she asks him to stay to prove he’s not like the others, he leaves anyway. So not only is she at fault when she can’t provide for her family, she’s also at fault when the job that allows her to provide for them keeps her away from them too long. It’s a no-win game for her — for lots of women — but she’s forced to play it regardless.

Of course there are lots of references to her looks or her using them to her advantage, but whether you buy into that or not — whether you find her brazenness distasteful or not — you can’t argue with the passion with which she fought for her clients (featuring some nice work in small roles by Marg Helgenberger and Cherry Jones) and her obvious sacrifices in order to do right by them. Roberts never lets you forget that. “That’s my work, my sweat, my time away from my kids! If that’s not personal, then I don’t know what is!”

If I had to guess, I would say a lot of people remember Erin Brockovich for the lines. “They’re called boobs, Ed.” “That’s all you got, lady. Two wrong feet in fucking ugly shoes.” “Do they teach beauty queens to apologize? Because you suck at it.” There are some great ones, as well as quite a few powerful monologues, but the truth of the matter is there’s a lot more to it than that. This is Julia’s movie, through and through, and she owns every single scene with defiance and audaciousness and fierce commitment. No other Oscar nominee put that much vitality and magnetism into her role that year, which is why she won. Plus, she wore that gorgeous vintage Valentino with the pleated train. High class or less so, the woman knows how to own it.