Directed By Steven Spielberg

Starring – Michelle Williams, Paul Dano, Gabrielle LaBelle

The Plot – Loosely based on Spielberg’s own childhood growing up in post-World War II era Arizona, from age seven to eighteen, a young man named Sammy Fabelman (LaBelle) discovers a shattering family secret and explores how the power of movies help us see the truth about each other and ourselves.

Rated PG-13 for some strong adult language, thematic elements, brief violence and drug use

The Fabelmans | Official Trailer [HD] – YouTube

POSITIVES

If the greatest stories do in fact stem from real life, Spielberg has delivered on his most intimately revealing project to date, a part memoir, part love letter to cinema, with as much passion in his direction as anything he’s ever elicited. What’s commendable here is the devil in the details, with everything from timely set design to picturesque lighting versatility, to the movements of the lens itself conveying an intimate accessibility on the first act of the director’s prestigious career, bringing with it the evidential depiction of film itself providing the greatest means of escapism from a home life that isn’t half as controlled and maintaining as the films he grew up adoring. It’s also Spielberg’s first writing credit in over twenty years, but one he uses to dissect the colorful personalities of those most responsible for his newfound inspiration, emitting a deteriorating marriage and coming of age narrative for Sammy with its own varying tonal plausibility’s zeroing in on the many spontaneities of life. Because of such, “The Fabelman’s” is a slice of life movie, but not necessarily one with a permeating obviousness in the avenues of exploration in its framing device, instead alluding a consistency in structure within its nearly two and a half hour run time that feels as experimental as a Richard Linklater film. In addition to the legend himself, the film is equally intriguing as a result of its talented ensemble, but particularly Williams and Dano eliciting two of the most morally and psychologically complex characters as you will see this year. Williams is once again a spectacle, tapping into Mitzi’s free-spirited expressionism and internal longing in ways that make her a wild card to watch without being distracting on the integrity of the film, and when combined with Dano’s reserved squareness, provides a uniquely interesting dynamic between them that makes it feel like the stirring of combustible elements that could easily blow at any moment. Finally, while I previously commended Spielberg’s depiction of film and what it did to ignite his passion, what it did for my experience with the film is equally, if not exceedingly commendable. Aside from it being a means of escapism, I also loved how it’s framed as the bridge to resolving conflicts, the meticulous nature of how it shapes a particular narrative with what it chooses to leave in or omit out, and especially the showmanship that goes into scenes and sequences that we often take for granted. Because Spielberg values what’s taking shape behind the lens as much as he does what’s in front of it, we’re treated to an emphasis on craft that I truly appreciated being conveyed, all the while finding a way to naturally imbed it to the many relationships and conflicts surrounding it, as a means of vital impact to a colorless world without it.

NEGATIVES

While I was never bored in my experience of Spielberg’s spirited love letter to cinema, I can easily say at two and a half hours there’s a bit too much excess, primarily during the convoluted second act, to omit from its finished product. During this area of the film, its focus is not only obscured from playing cohesively into the perspective of the aforementioned dual narrative, but it also spends too much time inside of some of these scenes and sequences that hinder the flowing aspect of much of the movie’s pacing. When it finally does get to the third act, the storytelling is much improved, but at that point it feels like the movie could end at any given moment, based entirely on the long-winded overindulgence of its previous third, leaving it an occasionally exhausting experience that doesn’t flow as naturally or effectively as some of the director’s best work. In addition to this, while I also appreciated the eclectic nature of the movie’s many tonal shifts, the transitions themselves fall a bit jarring between certain thematic intentions neighboring others. It’s never that the film doesn’t handle the themes poorly, as the dissection of bullying, family, and filmmaking are expressed terrifically in the confines of the narrative, just that the lack of development from one to the other leaves it feeling a bit abrupt and consequential to the integrity of its materializing, leaving these abrupt moments of impact from what could easily be a tear-jerking scene one second, then followed up with sitcom level comedy of the most predictable variety. Last but not least, while I can appreciate the intention of honoring the craft of your passion, the dialogue and framing of such occasionally feels like the kind of cynical Oscar bait that we’ve come to expect at least once a year from the academy. For this instance, phoniness occasionally overwhelms the many engagements and interactions of the movie’s reserved moments, creating a melodramatic uneasiness with the material, despite the dialogue heavily conveying otherwise. When Sammy complains early on that a sequence in his film doesn’t look too real or believable, it’s followed up with 16mm camera documentation that is played back with modern technology too clear and concise to be coming from that kind of film. Likewise, when characters are involved in a tornado chasing sequence, it’s adorned with hollow greenscreen work of the least influential variety. And finally, the dialogue itself is so meandering and heavily intentioned at times for Oscar montages that it rarely feels natural stemming from the mouths and personalities of the characters it disperses from, leaving heartfelt moments of warmth unintentionally plagued by laughs that I couldn’t suppress in a completely quiet auditorium.

OVERALL
“The Fabelman’s” is far from the apex of Spielberg installments, but it is an intimately poignant and passionately insightful depiction of the spark that ignited his once adventurous ambition. Though the film is too long at two and a half meandering hours, and the execution of the technique often doesn’t mirror what’s being depicted, the movie is still a profoundly rich love letter to the vital importance of cinema, with perhaps its most imaginative prophet delivering the sermon

My Grade: 7/10 or C+