Skip to main content

Disclosure Day is Spielberg's Doctrine for Truth and Profession of Faith

For a director who has often been associated with extra-terrestrials (to the point one of his most famous movies is named after the subject), Steven Spielberg hasn’t actually made many movies about aliens -really just four out of thirty-five. But he is a filmmaker known for spectacle and the alien movies he has made are each very interesting, reflecting his own intense curiosity with the subject of UFOs. In 1977, he related that compulsion very brazenly for the first time in Close Encounters of the Third Kind.  Nearly fifty years later, he does so again in Disclosure Day, which in some respect feels like a spiritual follow-up -the 2020s equivalent one might say.
His last alien movie before this, 2005’s War of the Worlds, is also the last time he has made a movie set in and about contemporary times -having preferred historical settings for the bulk of his work in the last two decades. And like that film, Disclosure Day has the opportunity to be a commentary on the world it is made in, where the tensions of geopolitical strife, advancing technology, misinformation, and a wider than ever gap between the public and institutions is a harrowing melting pot to throw the discovery of a mass alien cover-up into. Spielberg makes some of those connections, but more than anything he would rather make his point.
The story opens in the midst of a conspiracy breaking and with all of the major characters in place. Daniel Kellner (Josh O’Connor) is a mathematics genius and cybersecurity whistleblower on the run with his girlfriend Jane (Eve Hewson) from a covert government agency called the Wardex corporation after stealing a mass amount of classified files revealing the extents of secretive government encounters with extraterrestrial beings that Daniel intends to reveal to the world. At the same time, a meteorologist in Kansas City, Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt) begins to show a series of strange behaviours, including unconsciously speaking in languages she’s never learned before and instantaneously identifying and empathizing with everyone she comes into contact with. Soon she is being pursued by Wardex as well, its CEO Noah Scanlon (Colin Firth) going to drastic lengths to ensure this alien information remains hidden from the public.
As in each of Spielberg’s other movies on this subject (save for E.T.), the otherworldly visitors -which are indeed confirmed to have been the Roswell aliens- do not feature into the movie very much, save for scant appearances in archive footage, until the last act. But there is no effort to really draw suspense out of their appearance, which we get a sense of early on. It’s their general aura and effect that is a more powerful mystique. Their mere existence is their power, and not surprisingly Spielberg is quite apt at relating that.
What it means for the world is another matter. Spielberg and his writer David Koepp make the choice to not entertain that subject very much, despite it being the supposed key motivating factor for the villain. There is a great conversation between Daniel and Jane about the consequences of humanity knowing the truth, but humanity knowing the truth is all that matters to Daniel as well as his handler Hugo (Colman Domingo) head of a small but resourceful unit of Wardex defectors. And that clearly is Spielberg’s position as well, which is fascinating. A kind of pure democracy of information. Yet while Daniel and Hugo are challenged on this, it is with minimal nuance, as the repercussions of full disclosure -which are generally a lot more interesting a thing to dissect than merely the dissemination of the information itself- are merely allusions. By the movie’s ending, Spielberg clearly acknowledges the intensity of public awareness of a secret this enormous in scale, but the necessity of it is paramount. It’s not an easy take to agree with, and it is not entertained with the complexity it deserves, but it is also fitting for a movie that is intentionally ambiguous in its tone and message.
There is a caveat though present in the film’s tone not being beset with bleakness -indeed it is tinged with the curious wonder that so often comes in Spielberg’s movies -Spielberg himself is sentimental towards the aliens, framing them as mysterious, perhaps unknowable, but implicitly benevolent. They are equated in this mixture of awe and veneration very starkly to God. The movie engages in a surprising theological reading already in some open discussions on matters of faith in highly fearful and consequential times, Spielberg reckoning perhaps with his own relationship to religion in the notion raised by a nun identifying people rather than God whom believers lose faith in. Yet this links to a pronounced divinity towards the aliens and the exposure as a major matter of evangelism -the people need to be brought into the light. There’s a reference to stigmata, and a lot of symbolism in how both Daniel and Margaret are ‘chosen’ by the aliens -the latter has a very clever Burning Bush moment. And a great humility in how Hugo talks about the aliens, and by contrast a kind of sacrilege in Scanlon abusing their sacred relics -reverse-engineering technology to severe personal harm in order to track down his targets. His ultimate choice in the face of disclosure is very fascinating indeed. Especially as the metaphor reads literal in several places, the faith Spielberg articulates true to itself and not often stand-in for any one real religion.
Everybody on the film is on this same page in their approach to this material. The whole cast is excellent, O'Connor continuing a sharp streak as he plays another well-mannered but ideologically diametrical figure to his priest of Wake Up Dead Man. His conviction is endearing, as is that of Hewson -central to some of the movie's more complex beats. Firth is a decent corporate villain, while Domingo, Elizabeth Marvel, and Wyatt Russell -playing Margaret's comic relief boyfriend- get standout moments. But Blunt is the most remarkable, delivering intensely a complicated performance of great emotional power, both emanating from Margaret herself and the empathic abilities she is imbued with. She is the heart of the movie, walking a fine line of relatable and enigmatic the deeper her link to the extraterrestrials and importance as a mouthpiece is revealed to be. It should also be acknowledged the vital late-film performance of Courtney Grace as a news reporter tasked with supporting the crux of the film's weight and doing an exemplary job.
Spielberg's other collaborators rise to the occasion too. Janusz Kamiñski's cinematography is exquisite. And John Williams's score brings appropriate heft to the movie's most emotional moments. But it is Spielberg himself who carries a lot of the movie through his skillful direction and distinct cinematic eye. His action scenes are both vigorous and methodical, clean and dynamic yet visually compelling. The tense old-school espionage thriller pacing is effective and interesting. There are a few of his trademark oners and largely appropriate uses of lens flares, as well as some push-ins evocative of his best subtle stylistic instincts. Beautiful uses of soft lighting enrich important dialogue scenes, especially and shrewdly those with the most notable spiritual connotations. It is a filmmaking that is very graceful, enjoyably so as Spielberg's inner youthful exuberance with aliens and conspiracies shines through.
That does supersede cohesion at times. Particularly where things concern the almost prophetic significance of Margaret and Daniel (she can speak their language unwittingly, he can understand it as translated mathematics), things can get quite convoluted. The conspiracy element falls by the wayside at times, which alongside the vagueness with which the impending third World War is discussed appears motivated by an attempt by Spielberg and Koepp to remain largely apolitical (despite Spielberg having no problem with other relevant political commentaries in the likes of War of the Worlds and Munich). There is a little bit of shallowness in that. And of course the movie only functions in a reality in which A.I. doesn't exist. But that one crucial political point remains strong, and the presentation of Spielberg's fascination with his material does matter. Disclosure Day is unexpected in some of its avenues, but fully fitting in others, and engaging all around. It does not feel like Spielberg merely returning to the sci-fi blockbuster space for the sake of it (like Ready Player One); there is rationale there, and genuinely interesting ideas worth exploring, which Spielberg does with panache, and an attitude of uncertain curiosity -peppered perhaps with a cautious optimism and moving faith in humanity.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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....
1 comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more