Review: Collateral Beauty

Love. Time. Death.

By Chris Sabga

Release Date: December 16th, 2016 – U.S.

Rating: PG-13

Genre: Drama

Running Time: 97 minutes

Director: David Frankel

Writers: Allan Loeb

Cast: Will Smith, Edward Norton, 

Kate Winslet, Michael Peña, 

Naomie Harris, Keira Knightley, 

Jacob Latimore, Ann Dowd, 

Kylie Rogers

Can there be anything worse than losing a child? "Collateral Beauty" examines the raw depths of that pain. 

Howard (Will Smith) runs a successful advertising agency. He and his methods are described as "fearless." Then his daughter dies. She was only six years old. Overwhelmed by grief, Howard becomes a shell and retreats into himself. The day-to-day details of his work no longer interest him. He still shows up to the office, but he now spends his time there building elaborate structures using dominoes – only to knock them right back down after he's finished, tile by tile by agonizing tile. Then he starts the frustrating process all over again. After years of this, business is – needless to say – suffering badly.

It's up to his overburdened and overstressed co-workers to pick up the slack. His partner and best friend, Whit (Edward Norton), is kind of a twit. He got caught with his pants down, was forced into a divorce, and had to sell 10% of his shares in the company to pay for it. Howard, he explains, did him a great favor by buying him out. But that's also why the company is currently in the predicament it's in. Because Whit is no longer a 50-50 partner, nothing can move forward without Howard – who is inadvertently holding the business hostage by not being mentally or emotionally present. He has stubbornly closed himself off from the world and refuses to talk to even his closest friends and associates. Claire (Kate Winslet) is terrified that everything they've worked a decade for will suddenly "evaporate." Simon (Michael Peña) has his own personal, private reasons for wanting the agency to get back on its feet. His family's future is at stake. Meanwhile, Whit has family problems of his own. His daughter (Kylie Rogers, "Miracles from Heaven") says she hates him because he's a "philanthropist." She means "philanderer," of course – cute!

Whit, Claire, and Simon get together and attempt to orchestrate what is essentially a hostile takeover of their friend's organization. As understandable as their motives may be, their methods seem reprehensible on the surface. This is where "Collateral Beauty" almost lost me. Almost.

They hire a private investigator (Ann Dowd) to look for the "smoking gun" that will allow them to question Howard's competency in running the firm. She breaks into a public mailbox – a federal offense – and discovers that he has been writing angry letters. But they're not addressed to people. Without revealing too much, it isn't long before he receives a personal response to his heated messages – from Death (Helen Mirren), Love (Keira Knightley), and Time (Jacob Latimore). All of them, he rages, conspired to take his daughter away from him.

Would you believe it if Death, for example, visited you in the form of an elderly white woman? Howard does, and that's enough to motivate him to finally attend a grief counseling session. It's led by Madeleine (Naomie Harris), who noticed him standing outside and staring into the window during previous meetings. He is very reluctant to open up but responds positively to her patience and kindness. She lost a child too, so she understands. After her daughter died, she was approached in the hospital and advised to recognize the collateral beauty all around her. It took her a long time before she comprehended the meaning of those words, and he certainly isn't ready to hear that message yet.

"Collateral Beauty" is the kind of movie that you will either love or hate – there is no middle ground. It's getting ugly reviews by critics. Part of me can understand why. The trailer misleadingly depicts the movie as light and whimsical when it's actually anything but. Will Smith's character is maddeningly obstinate, his co-workers come across initially as unlikeable and opportunistic, and even Death, Love, and Time aren't given clear motivations at first. I spent the early portion of the film angered by its apparent bait-and-switch and dark, depressing, unexpectedly all-too-realistic tone.

But then, slowly but surely, the story sucked me in and the incredible cast won me over. After all, losing a child isn't supposed to be fluffy and full of rainbows. If the film had depicted a tragedy of that magnitude as airily and marshmallowy as the preview did, reactions would be even more negative than they already are. So much could have gone wrong with this concept logically, but the screenplay does a fairly decent job of explaining and adhering to all of the "rules" it sets up.

Whether you will be moved by the movie's message, I suppose, depends on how cynical you are. This, I think, requires a certain soft spot in your heart. It ultimately worked for me, even though it did take a while for me to warm up to it.  

The film is simultaneously ugly and beautiful, anger-inducing and serenely moving, heartbreaking and heartwarming – much like collateral beauty itself.

Side Note from Silver Screen Sister:

"This is the best movie I've ever seen!" she gushed. Then again, she says that after every movie. Clearly, she doesn't go to too many, but her picks are always top-notch ("Chef," "Steve Jobs," "Boyhood." The less said about watching "Black Swan" with her, the better.)

"Edward Norton was great," she praised. "Has he done anything else? He now has a new fan!"

"What else has Helen Mirren been in?"

I'm sure these two up-and-coming youngsters will greatly appreciate her support.

Review: Steve Jobs

Hello Again

By Chris Sabga

Release Date: October 23, 2015 – U.S.

Rating: R

Genre: Biography, Drama

Running Time: 122 minutes

Director: Danny Boyle

Writers: Aaron Sorkin (screenplay), 

Walter Isaacson (book)

Cast: Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet, 

Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels, Michael Stuhlbarg, 

Katherine Waterston, Perla Haney-Jardine, 

Ripley Sobo, Makenzie Moss, Sarah Snook, 

John Ortiz 

"Steve Jobs" is the second movie in two years about the founder of Apple. Add a 600+ page book to the equation (by Walter Isaacson, which this is based on), and it's hard to blame anyone for being sick of Jobs by now. But this is far from a retread of the previous material.

The first film – 2013's "Jobs" – raced through its subject's "insanely great" history. "Steve Jobs" is narrower in focus: it takes place almost entirely during three product launches – the Macintosh in 1984, the NeXT Computer ("the cube") in 1988, and the iMac in 1998 – with a few other short flashbacks as needed.

The big surprise here: While Jobs (Michael Fassbender) may be an asshole, he's portrayed here as a benevolent one capable of recognizing his own flaws and compromising on (some) points. Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen), meanwhile, comes across as somewhat of a bitter, petulant, slightly unhinged man-child. It's a dramatic shift from the nice and loveable but kooky guy he's usually portrayed as. Yet, the real Woz has nothing but praise for this movie, which seems strange to me given his less-than-flattering characterization in this version of the story. But, hey, who am I to argue with the creator of the Apple II?

Before each product launch, Jobs interacts with several important figures from his life: former Pepsi CEO John Sculley (Jeff Daniels, superb as always), infamous for "firing" Jobs from his own company; Andy Hertzfeld (Michael Stuhlbarg, "Hugo"), the designer in charge of making the Mac say "hello"; and Chrisann Brennan (Katherine Waterston), with whom Steve had a daughter. Chrisann is underwritten though. As justified as her emotions are, the writing or acting (or both) dismisses her as a nagging shrew. But her presence is a simply a means to an end to establish the relationship between Jobs and Lisa (portrayed by three different actresses – Makenzie Moss, Ripley Sobo, and Perla Haney-Jardine – from ages 5 to 19). The struggles between father and daughter – and the irony of a man "abandoned" by his birth parents later doing the same to his own child – end up being one of the major themes of the film.

In the foreground during all of this is Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet). Winslet dominates every scene she's in as Steve's tough-talking, no-nonsense, take-no-shit assistant. It's one of the film's biggest treats to behold. If Fassbender is in contention for an Oscar nomination, Winslet better be right by his side. The best supporting roles make you want to see a movie about them. Just as Tommy Lee Jones accomplished that as Thaddeus Stevens in "Lincoln," so does Winslet as Joanna Hoffman in "Steve Jobs."

It is a glaring fact that Michael Fassbinder doesn't much look like the man he's playing. But after five minutes on-screen, that doesn't really matter. Hair, clothing, and a dash of makeup are more than enough to maintain some semblance of an illusion for the audience. All of that, however, would be for naught without the great writing by Aaron Sorkin and the fantastic acting by Fassbender and his co-stars as they bring those words to life.

For a film that essentially consists of nonstop dialogue and people walking into different rooms, it is subtly stylish. The three time periods are each filmed differently: 1984 is grainy with a dark and drab color scheme, 1988 feels more open with a richer palette but retains a traditional film look, and 2008 is shot digitally and looks clear and bright. There are also other visual flourishes, such as a nighttime board meeting with rain pouring behind a glass window – a dazzling backdrop.

One of the best aspects of Sorkin's script: Something from 1984 may affect what happens in 1998. There are instances of that all over "Steve Jobs." One example: Lisa's Sony Walkman (a music tape player, for those of you too young to remember them) portends the coming of the iPod.

Of course, not everything really happened as depicted in "Steve Jobs." For one thing, people generally don't speak like great screenwriters and argue using only catchy soundbites and quips. Also, I don't think anyone is really expected to believe that all of the central figures in Steve Jobs's life would show up and confront him mere minutes before an important press conference – three times! If that actually happened, it would be a sign of collective mental illness. After all, don't these people have anything better to do? Obviously, it's a purposeful plot device designed to tell the story a specific way – and it works on that level. In Sorkin's own words, "this a painting and not a photograph."

It is tempting to analyze and contrast "Steve Jobs" with the earlier "Jobs," but it really is like comparing – forgive me – apples and oranges. Ashton Kutcher did an incredible job in 2013, but Michael Fassbender puts his own unique stamp on this version. Ditto for Josh Gad and Seth Rogen, respectively, as Woz. "Jobs" tells a more complete story, but the writing in "Steve Jobs" is superior. Both films have a reason to exist, and that's something I wasn't expecting.

• Review: The other Steve Jobs movie – 2013's "Jobs"