Looking for a FEELGOOD FILM?
Well, this sad saga from The Devil Wears Prada director isn’t it! But with an all-star cast on top form, it’s ideal, thoughtful New Year viewing
It’s not often I suggest you rush to see a film, particularly when I know Collateral Beauty won’t be to everybody’s taste. But if you’re halfway inclined and like a bit of Will Smith or Keira Knightley now and again, read on because this is the sort of film that is close to perfect for this slightly strange, in-between time of year.
It’s intelligent, reflective, thought-provoking and very nicely acted by a star-studded ensemble cast that, in addition to the above, also includes Helen Mirren, Kate Winslet, Edward Norton, Michael Peña and Naomie Harris.
It is also, I feel I should warn you at this early stage, pretty sad, although not relentlessly so. New Year, after all, is a time for new beginnings and it would be foolish for distributors to release a film now that did not, at least, partially acknowledge that.
If we didn’t know that Howard (Smith), once a luminary of the New York advertising scene, was now a broken man, we could probably guess. This is a man who spends five days assembling a massive domino cascade in his office only to walk out without a backwards glance the moment he knocks the first one over. Yes, it’s a far-from-subtle metaphor for a life in collapse but I love a good domino cascade – and this is a good one – so was inclined to forgive.
I was less forgiving about the cycling the wrong way down one-way streets but, by then, we know what’s wrong. Howard’s six-year-old daughter has died and, although two years have passed, he’s never got over it. His marriage has collapsed and he’s withdrawn from the world, which is bad news for his self-centred colleagues, who would quite like to sell their agency but need his consent – he’s its biggest shareholder – to do so. The plan they come up with is farfetched and cruel and, although Allan Loeb’s screenplay eventually offers at least two explanations for the latter, I can see this plot device being too off-putting for some. For when Whit (Norton), Claire (Winslet) and Simon (Peña) discover poor, traumatised Howard has been writing letters addressed to ‘Love’, ‘Time’ and ‘Death’, they decide, as Dickens might have, that Love, Time and Death aren’t going to write back, they’re going to visit Howard in person. How convenient, then, that Whit soon stumbles across a three-strong theatre group, comprising a pretty one (Knightley), an older and slightly eccentric one (Mirren), and an aggressive, live wire one (Jacob Latimore). Put like that, Collateral Beauty sounds borderline ridiculous but with Mirren and Knightley on particularly winning form and Smith and Norton gamely giving it their all, I found it watchable and interesting, although my doubts about the cruelty involved never
‘It panders to America’s addiction to therapy but also addresses the big stuff ’
really dissipated. Until about 24 hours afterwards, that is, when the festive mental fug briefly lifted and I suddenly worked out one of the possible explanations for myself. Oh, I thought, that’s clever. And I think it is. Could it be that Howard is not the only one in need of healing?
The film is directed by David Frankel, who is best known for The Devil Wears Prada but also made Hope Springs, with Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones playing a long-married couple attending a week-long counselling course. Collateral Beauty occupies similar ground, ground that screenwriter Loeb also explored with one of his early films, Things We Lost In The Fire. Adam Sandler’s Reign Over Me – one of his better films – springs to mind, too.
Yes, it all slightly panders to America’s addiction to therapy but also addresses the big stuff – the time, love and death stuff – that most of us prefer to ignore. Except, perhaps, at this time of year, when we spend as much time looking backward as we do forward, quietly hoping that we can do better. And, yes, I am thinking slightly bigger than a ‘Dry January’.
Collateral Beauty hit the spot with me – I was in the mood to hear serious things discussed, albeit in a watchable, not terribly profound and occasionally even slightly clunky kind of way. My only quibble stems from the title itself, which refers to the beauty that can apparently be seen even in the wake of the most terrible tragedies. It’s a lovely idea – perhaps what the dying Dennis Potter was talking about when he spoke about his last spring blossom as ‘the blossomest blossom there could ever be’ – but I wish I understood it more. Maybe that’s my challenge for 2017.