The Oscar winner for the year I was born has a dearth of hand washing. Hand washing is very important!! Both the kid and Dustin Hoffman pee when they first wake up after the wife has left—no hand washing (this happens at least twice!). Hoffman smears raw eggs all over his hands when he’s screwing up French toast—no hand washing—he then attempts to make coffee, gets some OJ out of the fridge—no hand washing even though he's still got raw eggs all over his hands. That’s no good at all. Giving the kid e-coli will certainly win the mother custody.
But, the plot: Meryl Streep is Joanna Kramer who decides her marriage to Ted (Hoffman) is not so hot. She leaves him and their 6 year old son Billy to find herself. I sound a little flippant because we're brought in on the story as she's leaving so we don't see any of her misery. Left alone, Ted has to learn to navigate fatherhood and a full-time job. But for quite a bit of the movie, it's more like Kramer v. Mini-Kramer or Three Men and a Baby but with just one man and a six year old. Mrs. Kramer doesn't resurface until 55 minutes in (well, for the first time it's a little more than five minutes before that but that time is just a brief glimpse of her) after she leaves in the first five minutes and then it is to initiate the court case from which the movie takes its title.
There are quite a few really sweet scenes between father and son as they get to know each other. They get into their morning routine sharing a box of doughnuts for breakfast while each settles into his own reading material at the table. And at one point Ted has to write out all of the pros and cons of keeping custody of Billy. As he is writing a huge list of cons (finances, etc) he's sitting under a wall newly filled with Billy's artwork. I was horrified at the doctor putting stitches in that child's face with him completely awake and aware of what's going on (but we know I have issues with needles and my face).
The movie is a bit one-sided, though. The audience is obviously cheering for Ted in the whole court situation because Joanne abandoned her son but I think it would have made it a much more complicated and true story if we had seen Joanna's side. I know the movie can only be so long and blah blah blah. But if the guy was a bastard or emotionally stunted during his marriage and/or was a partially or wholly absent father, she has more of a case than was presented in the movie. But, his case is stronger if she's just a flighty selfish whore as is sort-of suggested at one point by the lawyer. Meanwhile if they are both competent parents (aside from her leaving) the situation is much more complicated than presented. As it is, it is a sweet story about a guy finally bonding with his son and realizing that there's more to life than work and it does a great job at that story. It also does a great job at presenting the whole "fathers can be mothers, too" movement by showing the complications Ted faces when trying to care for his son while dealing with his boss who suggests he send Billy to live with relatives. So, for those reasons, good movie. In terms of confronting the reality of motherhood and Joanna's side of the marriage and the whole "mothers can be professionals too" idea, it's more than a bit skittish.
No comments:
Post a Comment