Skip to main content

The Emotional Journey of Manchester by the Sea


          Manchester by the Sea, the Massachusetts-set moving character drama from director Kenneth Lonergan is 2016’s best film you’ll see only once. And I mean that as a compliment. It’s a really great film but a tough watch, heavy with brutal emotional honesty.
          An antisocial and depressed Lee Chandler (Casey Affleck) is working as a janitor in Boston when he hears about the death of his older brother Joe (Kyle Chandler) from heart failure. He travels back to his home-town, the lakeside Manchester-by-the-Sea where he discovers that in Joe’s will he made Lee the legal guardian of his teenage son Patrick (Lucas Hedges). So Lee must try and fill in as Patrick’s father figure as through flashbacks we learn why he is the way he is; and why because of a traumatic incident from when he lived in the town with his then wife Randi (Michelle Williams), he doesn’t want to move back. 
          This movie isn’t the inspiring bonding story the premise would have you believe. It is a bonding story, but not the kind you’d expect. Lee and Patrick’s relationship doesn’t start off particularly strained nor does it lead to a drastically different place. It’s the underlying circumstances that make the situation difficult as well as the personalities of both characters. I love how the film doesn’t give you a lot at the start; we see Lee’s life in Boston, what kind of a character he is, a loner yet one with pent-up rage, and it’s only over time through flashbacks to his life in Manchester that we understand and tremendously sympathize. The major reveal that answers for his present behaviour is really impactful and heart-wrenching. There is a degree of optimism in this film and lighter fare mostly concerning Patrick, but even then it’s undercut by the obvious fact he’s repressing his fathers’ death. And all of this is presented in an abundantly realistic context, it doesn’t try anything superficial. An overarching theme of the movie seems to be ‘sometimes life sucks’ and the characters act and interact like real small-town people dealing with grief. In addition to this, we’re privy to real conversations with the expected detours and tangents, and real discussions relating to tedium and the future.
          Lucas Hedges is pretty superb. For an actor his age, he gives a strong nuanced performance of a teenager trying to cope with frustration and loss in a nonchalant way. There’s a real sadness behind his eyes and like many real teenagers, he presents himself as grown-up as he can, but still maintaining an immaturity. Michelle Williams doesn’t have as big a part as she should, but she makes the most of it. One scene of raw emotion on her part is really powerful. Kyle Chandler as Joe is pretty good and Gretchen Mol plays his wife, Patrick’s mother, a former alcoholic who Joe and Lee are determined to keep away from her son. But it’s no secret who dominates the acting in this film.Though we’ve already seen superb leading performances of 2016 from Ryan Gosling, Dev Patel, Ben Foster and Chris Pine, and Andrew Garfield twice, this is Casey Affleck’s year. Affleck is a revelation in this movie with a really deep portrayal of a disturbed and broken person. Yet he also plays well the guy trying to half-heartedly get by in life while not overtly tipping off the audience to exactly what happened to transform him. It’s a very hard task to get across this complex a character naturally, and I’m incredibly impressed Affleck managed it so well. It’s great too because for years it’s seemed Casey’s been acting in the shadow of his older brother Ben, but Manchester by the Sea really proves he’s probably the better performer of the two.
          The problems with this movie are minimal, but worth pointing out. Though the cuts between past and present are generally done well there are a few moments where it’s distracting. This is especially so with regards to a series of brief flashes to his past during one silent scene in an office. Other than that it’s just the tone itself that can be off-putting, though completely intentional. This is a bleak story and it’s not going to leave anyone happy, that is its’ purpose. If you understand that you’ll be able to take it in better, but otherwise even with the picturesque locale, small town charm and all, you may find it too downtrodden.
          Manchester by the Sea is not an enjoyable movie, it’s in no way fun, but it is emphatically good. It’s devotion to hard truth and realism can be tough to take at times and is liable to emotionally move you; however I feel it deals with loss, how people respond to and are irrevocably effected by it, in a way that it puts the horrendous Collateral Beauty to shame. Boasting a number of the best, most entrancing performances of the past year, some skilful direction and good writing, this is a film that’s definitely worth that one viewing you can bear.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...