web
counter
 

The Beaver Review: Can You Write An Entire Film Review Without Mentioning the Lead Actor's Name?

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (33)



Mel-Gibson-in-The-Beaver-007.jpg

The Beaver is not a very good film, and I’d love nothing more than to lay the blame at the foot of the middle-aged white man who plays Walter Black, the depressed individual at the center of the movie. That performance is outstanding, maybe the best of the actor’s career, but it doesn’t save The Beaver from its pat predictability, its trite sentimentality, and the narrative cheats that director Jodie Foster takes. There is a good script at play here, and one hell of a remarkable lead performance, but Foster slaughters the film, turning what should’ve been a biting black comedy into a simpering family drama.

Walter Black, the CEO of his late father’s struggling toy company, is suffering from depression. He can’t get out of bed. His eldest son, Porter (Anton Yelchin), loathes him. His wife, Meredith (Jodie Foster) loves him, but doesn’t want Walter’s dark presence around their children anymore. When she kicks him out, Walter checks into a hotel. After a failed suicide attempt, Walter finds new life in an aggressively charming Beaver puppet with a cockney accent and a dominating personality. The Beaver takes over Walter, expressing for him the emotions and feelings he could not express as himself. On the flip side, The Beaver also shuts Walter out of his own life, burying him deeper into his depression.

The performance is remarkable; The Beaver feels like its own separate entity, distinct from Walter, so much so that there are moments when you forget that the Beaver is attached another man’s hand, that he’s being voiced by the soul-dead Walter. Walter is full of anguish, reserved, and barely able to speak, tormented by alcoholism and depression. But the Beaver is alive, vibrant, and domineering. The longer Walter uses The Beaver to express his emotions, to rebuild his toy company, to remake his marriage, the more The Beaver crowds out Walter. Ultimately, Walter has to fight his own hand puppet for control of his personality. It’s there where Kyle Killen’s screenplay takes Walter’s dissociative disorder too literally, and Foster buries what could be a fascinating dark comedy beneath the beats of a maudlin melodrama. Foster doesn’t know how to control the mood of the film, and it whiplashes between clever and cloying, marred by even her own performance, which feels at times like it belongs in a different film.

Yelchin does a nice job with his parallel storyline. Porter is trying hard not to turn into his father, but as finds himself — in writing papers for other students — speaking through other people’s voices, he begins careening toward the same depression that afflicts Walter. Jennifer Lawrence plays his love interest here, but she’s not given much to work with besides another rip-up-your-prepared-remarks speech straight out of the screenplay handbook. It’s a cringing doozy.

For all its similarities to Lars and the Real Girl, however, there’s a lot of interesting ideas about personality disorder, mental disease, and alcohol addiction buried beneath the wacked-out chronology, the poor editing, the awkward narrative leaps (at one point, I questioned whether a reel had been skipped in the middle of the film) and the ham-fisted melodrama. A better director could’ve worked wonders; the script would’ve fit snugly into the tone and feel of Ben Stiller’s Cable Guy, for instance. A few heavy-handed moments could’ve easily been salvaged with a dose of levity. Unfortunately, Foster runs it through the Lifetime-movie wringer, and the only thing that doesn’t get flattened is an exceptional, anguished, and uncompromising performance from the guy from the Mad Max movies. It’s the best reason to see The Beaver, but he’s also the biggest reason why you shouldn’t.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The Seven Affable And Sane-Seeming Celebrity Couples Least Likely To Name Their Kid "Velvet Tuning Fork Jolie-Pitt" | Everyone In The Pool: A Guide To Surviving Memorial Day Weekend









Comments

The Beaver has a name?

Posted by: Three-nineteen at May 25, 2011 3:29 PM

Well because I'm a curious person, I now want to see this movie where before I did not. Just to see for myself everything you described.

Posted by: Sarah at May 25, 2011 3:34 PM

Before I even read this review, I've gotta say that getting old is a bitch. The nameless one was one of the most beautiful men I had ever seen way back in the 80s. Look at him now, he looks at least 10 years older than his actual age of 55. Call me superficial, but it's hard to look at the ruin he's made of himself.

Posted by: snapnhiss at May 25, 2011 3:35 PM

"Ultimately, Walter has to fight his own hand puppet for control of his personality."

I cannot imagine paying anything to see that.
Unless the beaver wins.

Posted by: ChickaBoom! at May 25, 2011 3:48 PM

The real question is can I read this review without giggling. (BTW, the answer is a resounding no.)

Posted by: Socrates_Johnson at May 25, 2011 3:57 PM

i just saw it:Mel Gibson saves the movie and does the movie more than watchable

Posted by: carrie at May 25, 2011 4:00 PM

So we welcome the convicted child rapist and the nazi with open arms, but God forbid we have a doddering old anti-Semite's name on this site.

Posted by: Blake Shrapnel at May 25, 2011 4:02 PM

Mel Gibson is an actor. It's his job to pretend on screen. In real life he seems to have become a misogynist anti-Semite racist alcoholic. While that is reprehensible it has no bearing on his ability as an actor. He used to be near the top of my "Dudes it would be cool to have a beer with." list, now not so much. That doesn't mean he somehow stops being a good actor. It hasn't lessened my enjoyment of Lethal Weapon. Most celebrities (movies, tv, music, politics, business, what have you) are horrible human beings that are so used to getting and doing whatever they want that they have forgotten how to function in society. Some just get caught in the open. I'm not saying I'm going to buy tickets to his next movie, but this whole "We won't say the bad man's name." thing is kinda hypocritical. I don't remember the same stance taken with The Ghost Writer and that was roundly praised and deservedly so. It's a damn good movie that happens to have been directed by a horrible person.

Regardless, The Beaver looks like a depressing mess.

Posted by: TylerDFC at May 25, 2011 4:24 PM

"Ultimately, Walter has to fight his own hand puppet for control of his personality."

I cannot imagine paying anything to see that.
Unless the beaver wins."


-"I am Walter's left hand of rage."

Posted by: bleujayone at May 25, 2011 4:39 PM

I thought the not mentioning Mel Gibson's name was more of a gag since everyone and their mama knows that this is his first movie since he got outed as being one of the racist, sexist, batshittiest, craziest assholes out there.

As for the movie itself, not surprised. In a way, it is disappointing that Jodie Foster may have wasted Gibson's last possible great performance in her mess of a film but we don't know that he would have given it to anyone but a friend.

Posted by: Fredo at May 25, 2011 4:47 PM

QUIT SAYING HIS NAME!

You're jinxing the review.

Posted by: Jerry at May 25, 2011 5:02 PM

We won't say the bad man's name." thing is kinda hypocritical

I took the no name thing as a way to avoid the Gibson stigma and review the movie without bringing that into it.

(This. -- DR)

Posted by: Paultera at May 25, 2011 5:12 PM

I hate that he's an asshole, 'cause he's very charming on film. YES, I LIKED HIM IN WHAT WOMEN WANT.

Posted by: Sofia at May 25, 2011 5:59 PM

Voldemort.

Posted by: superasente at May 25, 2011 6:18 PM

@tylerdfc I agree, but for this:

"It's a damn good movie that happens to have been directed by a horrible person."

Unless you dislike Jodie, You mean STARRING a horrible person.

Posted by: maxwell edison at May 25, 2011 6:50 PM

He has a Jesus complex. Of course he would give the performance of a lifetime after we have all been so mean to him.

Posted by: Magsie at May 25, 2011 6:55 PM

the question still remains...

CAN I MAKE THE BAD MAN FLY NOW?!?


oh God, why am I like this?

Posted by: beet salad at May 25, 2011 7:25 PM

I paid for a ticket to Tambien la Lluvia and then snuck into the Beaver, so that I wouldn't have to technically give any money to that guy.

Outside of the horrible first half hour (lengthy omniscient narrator, wacky, overbearing music, and a suicide attempt that IS PLAYED FOR LAFFS), it actually hits its stride and becomes, in my opinion, a pretty good movie. There are a few bad beats, like the aforementioned graduation speech and a scene involving spraypaint that had the same condescending "Me man! Me help woo-man!" vibe as the breakfast scene in Bridesmaids was, but overall, I think it is totally worth the ticket price.

As long as the ticket is for Tambien la Lluvia.

Posted by: Skyler Durden at May 25, 2011 7:36 PM

Honestly if Mel wasn't starring would this movie with it's ridiculous premise be getting ANY attention?

Posted by: logan at May 25, 2011 8:08 PM

So here's the thing: Artist, separate from work, mistakes etc. I just can't. I watched The Ghostwriter and almost managed to disassociate the work from what Polanksi did, but if I couldn't do it for a truly great director, I am sure as heck not even going to try for a middling movie.

I am not equating Whooseypoofy here and Polanksi, but this is not a contest of degrees of horrifying behaviour. (Or a test of my empathy, compassion or forgiveness.) After a certain point, say 2 steps past "rude thoughtless little pig", all of the reprehensible behaviour equals out and I have enough of a range from disdain to repugnance to meet the needs of each occasion.

And since someone always asks, the answer is "yes" the same applies to Woody Allen and Morgan Freeman.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 25, 2011 8:25 PM

And since someone always asks, the answer is "yes" the same applies to Woody Allen and Morgan Freeman.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 25, 2011 8:25 PM

I know Woody Allen knocked up his stepdaughter, but what did Freeman ever do?

Posted by: Devil Child at May 25, 2011 9:28 PM

I know Woody Allen knocked up his stepdaughter, but what did Freeman ever do?

Rumor is, his recent divorce occured because his wife found out that he has been sleeping with her granddaughter (his step granddaughter) for years. Haven't heard it confirmed, but that's the gossip.

I paid for a ticket to Tambien la Lluvia and then snuck into the Beaver, so that I wouldn't have to technically give any money to that guy.

WIN!

Posted by: Kristen from MA at May 25, 2011 10:28 PM

My, what a bunch of holier-than-thou, judgemental little twits we have here! So Mel has a very public flameout and makes a glorious ass of himself, and now you can't even bring yourselves to use his name? Newsflash for all of you-I'd be willing to bet that there are plenty of people you admire and respect who have behaved every bit as repugnantly and despicably behind closed doors as Mel Gibson (oops!), sorry, that slipped out. I know plenty of people who have behaved appallingly when booze or drugs, mixed with other pressures, got the better of them. It doesn't make them monsters, to be shunned in perpetuity by polite society-it makes them human. As for the ludicrous comparisons with Roman Polanski, at least Mel didn't drug and anally rape a thirteen year old girl, and then run away to France rather than face the music. On the bell curve of human behaviour, Roman is way farther to the lower left than Mel will ever be.

Posted by: MarkM at May 26, 2011 12:35 AM

Logan, would the performance be getting any real attention if it weren't by The Nameless One?

Great job on the review, DR. I wanted to know what the movie was like, and it seems that every other review out there has to spend three paragraphs ranting against You Know Who, when we all know what's happened.

Posted by: Figgy at May 26, 2011 12:53 AM

It never ceases to amaze me how many people step up to defend whatever celebrity is being maligned in an article or review. Seriously, MarkM? We can't pretend that Mel Gibson's name is distasteful to say for a (small) laugh? If we dare disrespect the esteemed lead actor from Bird On A Wire we are "holier than thou, judgemental little twits?"

I have enough latitude in my "People Who Are Assholes" list to fit both child-rapists like Polanski and misogynistic racists. If someone who has shown such a persistent pattern of distasteful behavior cannot be shunned then how are people to respond? You can't lock a guy up and throw away the key for being a racist asshole, but you can and should treat him like a pile of shit whenever the opportunity arises. It would be nice to be able to shun people without having valiant idiots swarming to their defense by explaining that the asshole in question is not as bad as a child-rapist.

PROTIP: If you have to compare a person to a child-rapist to make them the good guy, the person is an asshole.

Posted by: Douchebag McGee at May 26, 2011 5:47 AM

I agree with Douchebag McGee - your Asshole List criteria must be flexible enough to fit racist anti-Semites, child rapists, Nazi sympathizers, and even misogynist politicians.

But the yummy, yummy transference of it all. Walter manages to take the best of himself and plug it into The Beev, leaving him with nothing but his own angst. Wasn't this partly the plot of a movie starring Anthony Hopkins, who played a ventriloquist who was being dominated and teroreized by his dummy?

And the plot reminds me of two things:

1. Mr. Garrison's relationship with Mr. Hat, and

2. "If you can't get help at Charter, get help somewhere."

Posted by: The Wanderer at May 26, 2011 6:44 AM

*terrorized.

Sorry, it's early.

Posted by: The Apologetic Wanderer at May 26, 2011 6:45 AM

There is a good script at play here, and one hell of a remarkable lead performance, but Foster slaughters the film, turning what should’ve been a biting black comedy into a simpering family drama.

Little Man Tate & Home for the Holidays aren't great films, but they're not bad. The film editor, Lynzee Kling, is an industry veteran and worked with Foster on the aforementioned projects, as well as War of the Roses and Man on the Moon. And there isn't a great case for studio interference in the film (shitty marketing of an obvious dog aside).

So it's definitely Foster's dog? Too bad. I like Foster, but it just seems that she's not a good director.

Posted by: idiosynchronic at May 26, 2011 11:32 AM

You know I really don't give a flying fuck about Mel Gibsons off screen antics. I don't care if he's antisemitic, a racisist, sexists, alcoholic asshole. He's not my role model, my hero, or my idol. The question is can he act as the character on the screen. If he can't than the movie sucks. If can then fine. If you can't get past the rest that's your metal issue.

Posted by: clancys_daddy at May 26, 2011 9:49 PM

Anyone who holds Gibson's personal demons against him and acts as though he's the worst person in Hollywood is an idiot. The movie industry is filled with degenerates, drug addicts, abusive egomaniacs, and has it's fair share of criminals. Alec Baldwin calls his daughter a thoughtless pig and we heap praise on 30 Rock. Mel Gibson verbally assaults a woman in his life and we should avoid his movies?

Shut up.

Posted by: ingres at May 28, 2011 3:39 PM

...I tried! I really did! Couldn't get past it! Not because he's 'the worst person in Hollywood' or an Anti-Semite, or verbally abusive misogynist--it's more of a Tom Cruise thing, where he seems to be nuts on a couple different levels. You know Gibson's crazy. You can see the crazy in his eyes. At least, that's the thought that kept intruding into my mind, like a drunk aunt reeling around at wedding. And while Cruise has sort of ingeniously used the crazy for comedic purposes, it's not easy to wipe away tears of laughter for Gibson. Maybe in a few years, I'll be able to watch Lethal Weapon again without constantly wondering 'Huh. Wonder if he's really ACTING crazy, or...' Until then, let my braver, more open-minded (or more obtuse) movie-watching comrades bear the Gibson torch by paying to see his films (and thus paying this heroic cretin to make more movies). Carry on, friends, and ignore all detracors! Condemnant quod intellegunt!

Posted by: keikoreo at May 30, 2011 6:37 AM

Who let the retards in?

Guys, you're dribbling shit everywhere. Stop defending an overpaid antisemite from imaginary attacks and get off the carpet!

Posted by: Ender at May 31, 2011 9:11 AM

no, but seriously. we do all know that Hollywood is controlled by the Jews don't we? Gay Jews. And what they don't control is controlled by the Scientologists. The Gay Scientologists. And what they don't control is controlled by the non-Jew/non-Scientologist Gays.

Mel was right: they're everywhere. OPEN your eyes people!

Posted by: Nick at June 3, 2011 2:41 AM