James Spader Archives - chimesfreedom

The odds are pretty good that you might have missed even hearing about a movie last year directed by and starring Tommy Lee Jones that also featured Hillary Swank, Meryl Streep, John Lithgow, James Spader, Tim Blake Nelson, Hailee Steinfeld, and several other stellar actors. But through the miracle of DVDs, you may now catch up on the odd but fascinating movie The Homesman (2014).

The movie is based on a book by Glendon Swarthout, who wrote several books that have been made into movies, including Bless the Beasts and the Children and The Shootist. Although the actors and crew argue about whether or not The Homesman is a Western, the film is set in the 1850s of what was the West at the time, the Nebraska Territory (although much of it is filmed in northern New Mexico). And, like many Westerns, the film features beautiful images of the open landscape with wonderful cinematography (by Rodrigo Prieto).

Much of The Homesman centers on Mary Bee Cuddy (Swank), a resourceful, intelligent, and lonely woman living on the frontier. In several disturbing scenes, the movie shows us how harsh conditions and tragedies affect the mental health of three women who live near Cuddy. As a result of their deterioration, the townspeople select Cuddy to take the mentally ill women back to civilization. As she prepares for her journey, Cuddy encounters George Briggs, who through some odd circumstances she recruits as the “homesman” of the title, a term for someone who takes immigrants back home.

Threads of mental illness, loneliness, and the harsh landscape run throughout the movie, which features haunting images throughout. Few movies present such scenes of oddness that touch on the fact that the Old West must have contained many disturbed characters, although we see flashes of it in somewhat odd movies like Missouri Breaks (1976) (with Marlon Brando in an odd portrayal of a character talking to his horse) and Dwight Yoakam’s interesting but messy South of Heaven, West of Hell (2000). Similarly, there is a standout strange scene in Dances With Wolves where Costner encounters a soldier driven crazy by his time on the frontier.

Homesman is made up of many such images but ties them together in a fascinating story that seems real and honest. None of the characters are perfect and they all have their own demons and weaknesses. Because of that, the movie strays from the traditional Western format that focuses on heroes who save the day. The movie is not predictable, and while not perfect, you will not soon forget it. Tommy Lee Jones continues to show a unique directing eye as he did in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005) and The Sunset Limited (2011).

Conclusion? If you have a taste for an unpredictable honest raw movie about unusual but real characters, and if you enjoy beautiful shots of the desolate Western United States, you might enjoy The Homesman. While it is not a great classic, it is a memorable unusual film that generally received good reviews and is worth your time.

{Missed Movies is our continuing series on good films you might have missed because they did not receive the recognition they deserved when released.}

What did you think of Homesman? Leave your two cents in the comments.

Nicolas Cage Shines In Modest But Surprising “Pig” (Short Review)

“Lincoln” As Both Icon and Human Being (Short Review)

Missed Movies Roundup: Contrasting East vs. West Edition

Missed Movies: Project Nim (short review)

Elvis Presley’s Funny Take on “Are You Lonesome Tonight” in Omaha in 1977

Times Like These by The Live Lounge All-Stars

(Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

I recall hearing a story how after Director John Ford approached Henry Fonda to play Abraham Lincoln in Young Mr. Lincoln (1939), Fonda declined the role because he could not imagine filling the shoes of the great president. But Ford explained that he was not asking Fonda to play the Great Emancipator, he was asking him to play a young country lawyer. With that assurance, Fonda agreed to the part.

Director Steven Spielberg could not make such an assurance to Daniel Day-Lewis, who also was reluctant to take on the part of one of America’s biggest icons, because Spielberg’s film focuses on Lincoln during a key moment of his presidency as the president pushed for Congress to pass the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery. Although Spielberg’s Lincoln (2012) follows the president as a war leader and politician, Day-Lewis, like Henry Fonda, found in the character’s core the country lawyer with a great mind and great compassion.

In a screenplay by Tony Kushner based in part on a book by Doris Kearns Goodwin, Lincoln focuses on a short time period in Lincoln’s life, allowing Day-Lewis and Spielberg to delve into the man’s character and tell a story while avoiding the pitfalls of some historical dramas that suffer by trying to cover too much. One might argue Lincoln falls into this trap at the end when it speeds forward to show us the end of the Civil War and Lincoln’s death, but I doubt the movie could have ended earlier when audiences already know the end of the story and want to see the resolution.

Lincoln is a glorious film with a great story, great drama, and great acting. Day-Lewis chose to portray the president in a voice that probably sounded more like Lincoln than the traditional deep-voiced portrayals. The choice to use the high pitched twangy voice, similar to what was used by Lincoln co-star Hal Holbrook in his own 1974 portrayal of the president, seems to have freed him to search for the human qualities of the icon as the character relays his humorous tales to anyone who will listen. I suspect that the voice of Lincoln in Lincoln will forever change our perception of how Lincoln is portrayed in future films.

While the movie cannot completely escape Lincoln-as-bigger-than-life, Spielberg probably does the best one could do by choosing a lesser known story from Lincoln’s presidency. Additionally, audiences may be able to feel some human connection to Lincoln’s struggles with Congress if they think of current political struggles in Washington in our own time.

The acting is uniformly good with several excellent actors appearing in the film. Sally Field, who had to convince Spielberg she was right for the part despite her age, humanizes Mary Todd Lincoln, helping show the good qualities and the faults of both the First Lady and her husband. David Strathairn is great as William Seward. Tommy Lee Jones plays the abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens, who is faced with a difficult choice. James Spader adds some comic relief as someone working behind the scenes to help Lincoln get the Congressional votes he needs. Jackie Earle Haley, who always makes me recall Breaking Away (1979), is perfect as Confederate Vice-President Alexander Stephens. And the list goes on.

Conclusion? There is something enjoyable about spending a few hours with one of the greatest figures in American history, and Spielberg and Day-Lewis do an excellent job of bringing Abraham Lincoln alive. Although Lincoln is 149 minutes long, it did not seem long and I hated for the film to end. If you do not mind that the film focuses on political negotiating and is not a war film, you will find Lincoln completely engaging.

Bonus Reviews Because Why Should You Trust Me?: Rotten Tomatoes currently gives Lincoln a 90% critics rating and an 83% audience rating, perhaps reflecting some audience disappointment that the film is about politics. Kimberley Jones of The Austin Chronicle loved the film, writing, “Master shape-shifter Daniel Day-Lewis delivers a monumental portrayal of a man so firmly monumented in our nation’s history.” Austin Kennedy at Film Geek Central was disappointed, noting, “I expect spectacular things from Spielberg, so when he delivers something that’s just average, it’s a bit of a letdown.”

What did you think of “Lincoln”? Leave your two cents in the comments.