The Descendants (Alexander Payne)

[Watashi]

5vu6qUglcGo

It's nice to see Alexander Payne back doing what he does best.

[DavidSeven]

Being "back doing what he does best" would entail Payne making something that looks like Election. This does not look like Election. This looks kind of insufferable. It will probably get great reviews and be up for a bunch of awards.

[chrisnu]

Very 'meh' reaction to the trailer. I'll still see it.

Robert Forster!

[Watashi]

Being "back doing what he does best" would entail Payne making something that looks like Election. This does not look like Election. This looks kind of insufferable. It will probably get great reviews and be up for a bunch of awards.

But Election is not even his best film. :confused:

[DavidSeven]

But Election is not even his best film. :confused:

It's a lot better than Sideways, which is the only other Payne I've seen.

[Boner M]

I guarantee this trailer is very misleading.

[Pop Trash]

Alexander Payne rules so hard. Ya'll better recognize. Noah Baumbach too. Grouchy Middle Aged American White Guy Directors FTW!!!

[Raiders]

But Election is not even his best film. :confused:

It most certainly is.

This looks as I predicted it would. I'll see it, that's for sure.

[Winston*]

But Election is not even his best film. :confused:
Citizen Ruth?

[Watashi]

Citizen Ruth?
Sideways is my favorite.

[Boner M]

Still haven't seen CR, but Election is so much better than his subsequent two that it's ridiculous. One of the best comedies of all time.

[MadMan]

The only one of his I've seen is About Schmidt, which I liked a lot. This looks merely decent, but that's partly because of the overall cast involved.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Election is miles ahead of Payne's other films, though Citizen Ruth is very good as well. This looks awful. Really, really awful. Even if it is misleading, it's still more Sideways than Election, and I kind of hated Sideways.

[Boner M]

I kind of hated Sideways.
:pritch:

[Irish]

It's difficult to tell discern quality from that trailer, but I breathed a sigh of relief seeing that Payne is adapting another novel instead of his own work.

The upshot is this has a strong cast, and might be a strong dramatic vehicle for Clooney (finally).

[Watashi]

Sideways is terrific, you idiots.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Sideways is terrific, you idiots.

Election is better than Sideways, you dickweed.

[Morris Schæffer]

It would appear that a situation has arisen that dictates me giving Watashi rep. And so it shall be done.

Love both About Schmidt and Sideways, merely like Election, but I've never been big on flicks with a satirical angle.

EDIT: Lol. Love how Robert Forster seems to come out of absolutely nowhere just for the sake of being badass.

[baby doll]

About Schmidt and Sideways were both mediocre and forgettable. Election was somewhat better because it had an edgier script, but even for a literary director, the utter lack of any stylistic finesse whatsofuckingever is pretty shocking. It's like he just doesn't give a shit. I mean, seriously, screw this guy.

[Raiders]

Sideways is terrific, you idiots.

It's damn good, but Election just happens to be better.

Fans of Election should definitely check out Citizen Ruth.

[Wryan]

I like Sideways, Election and About Schmidt.

[B-side]

I'll watch it.

[Pop Trash]

I like Sideways, Election and About Schmidt.

OMFG! Such hyperbole!

[Wryan]

OMFG! Such hyperbole!

There is volcanic passion roiling in my bowels.

[Pop Trash]

Off topic, but that last paragraph of your Zodiac review is terrible Baby Doll.

[Sxottlan]

I forget that I shared a brief car ride with Alexander Payne about 11 years ago.

I really don't remember what we talked about.

[baby doll]

Off topic, but that last paragraph of your Zodiac review is terrible Baby Doll.Only the last paragraph? (Thanks for reading, by the way.)

[eternity]

This looks like Sideways Payne, which I'm sure doesn't bother anyone.

If this movie lets me take Shailene Woodley seriously, than it will have succeeded.

[Pop Trash]

I like Sideways, Election and About Schmidt.

In all seriousness, this is the correct answer. Am I the only one who likes About Schmidt the best? So alone. :|

[Mara]

I'm waiting for someone from MC to see this and tell me if it is good. I trust no one else.

[Rowland]

Online film critic Jaime Christley posted here four times, and he loved it. Does that count?

I was ambivalent before, but the response has been positive enough even within the more refined crowds that I'm getting pretty excited about this.

[Ezee E]

It's great.

[Pop Trash]

Imma try and see it this week. I'll report back (of course).

[MadMan]

Having seen more footage, I'd say this looks a lot funnier and better than I previously thought.

[Sxottlan]

Good, not great, like a lot of Payne.

There's a lot of exposition covered in awkward narration that then disappears once we're brought up to speed. The subplot about the land was both a little confusing and not really connected with the main story. It almost felt worse however when the movie ties the two together. I would have liked a little more with the family history (and who did not see Matt's decision coming miles away?).

Still, performances were convincing and I liked the setting with characters who actually live in Hawaii instead of characters who just vacation there. I would have liked even more details like how everyone takes flip-flops off before entering a home and how everyone flies between the islands pretty routinely.

The presence of Children's Hospital's Rob Huebel was a bit of a distraction in what was a dramatic story. Usually this is the kind of story he'd be making fun of on that show. At the same time, it's nice to see him getting such high profile work. Remember him as Inconsiderate Cell Phone Man?

fu9Q5pzTBvE

[Dillard]

The descendants is great. Payne shows great affection for his characters here. Even characters that could be played up as "bad guys" in other films, such as Brian Speer and Cousin Hugh, are played with an attention to detail and an attention to their humanity. Payne's casting and work with his actors is a highlight here. Beau bridges as cousin Hugh plays a calculating and desperate man, but he still comes across as a guy you'd want to hang out with down at the bar. Matthew Lillard shines in his role as adulterer, Brian Speer. Though Payne could have used Brian for laughs at the characters expense when King confronts him, instead the scene reveals a family man with an integrity that cannot be ignored despite his irresponsible and selfish actions. It's all in lillards facial expressions in the scene. Over and over Payne and his actors imbue their characters with that something more than is needed in the standard indie dramedy.

Perhaps Sid, the doofy "boyfriend" is the best example. Payne uses the character to subvert our expectations from first impressions. At first the character is a much needed source of humor, making light in idiotic fashion of the kings' situation. For much of the first part of the film we are led to see Sid as the comic relief, sometimes laughing at Sid as much as at his jokes. Yet the reveal of a deeper something occurs when Matt King discovers the real reason Alex likes to having Sid around; Sid is deeply hurting, himself. Alex and Sid provide comfort to one another through their companionship. Sid is revealed to have a story that fleshes out his character. No longer just comic relief, Sid's presence takes on new meaning.

With the film playing out in episodic fashion, the film could easily be pigeon-holed as a sitcom. Yet the depth of character and generosity of performance suggest a richer universe. Additionally, the acoustic hawaiian music adds immensely to our experience of the universe, playing over beautiful images of the Kings' plot of land and working as the connectice tissue of these episodes. The music allows for a reflective breathing space from the tumult of the kings' lives.

I've already seen the film twice (a rare occurrence for me); it is a universe that feels very alive in the interconnectedness of its characters. Although the subject matter is frequently sad, reflecting the brokenness of relationship and human intention, there is a gentle joy conveyed in the reconfiguration of the king family. There is new life in death. Having worked in a hospital last summer as a chaplain, I can say that the intense, conflicted emotions the kings display in front of their dying mother and wife rang especially true to me.

This is Payne's best film so far.

[Pop Trash]

I liked it this maybe slightly less than the last three Payne films, but I still admire Payne's terrific sense of both place and people. He is great with casting and with actors. I can imagine him thinking "I need a Beau Bridges type for this role...oh wait...I need a Matthew Lillard type for this guy, but more middle aged...oh wait..."

Cinematography and music is gorgeous too. Not sure why that's not being mentioned more.

Yes, the v.o. in the first half-hour is an exposition dump, but it's a minor quibble. Plus, I'm not sure if there is a better way to explain Clooney's complex land issues.

[Fezzik]

I really, really liked this. I didn't even mind the info dump at the beginning, but I think that had more to do with Clooney's natural narrative style than anything.

The performances were great across the board. Woodley surprised the hell out of me, mostly because I know her from that awful ABC Family show about teenagers. She's skilled, that's for sure.

This is Clooney at his most vulnerable and his most relate-able despite his character's financial station.

Payne's use of Sid was wonderful. I really wasn't expecting anything but a token dumb boyfriend out of him. Color me shocked.

Like Sideways, this film has a sense of humor that sneaks up on you and hits you when you don't expect it. I appreciate it when a movie does that.

I also like that Woodley's character acted like a real teenager - she wasn't turned up to 100% brat-bitch like so many teenage girl characters are nowadays.

I'd see it again and I'll probably end up buying it.

[Morris Schæffer]

I'm just glad you've updated your signature. About goddamn time! :P

[Fezzik]

I'm just glad you've updated your signature. About goddamn time! :P

Ha..yeah. I've actually seen a fair amount of films in there, but I was too lazy to change it :p

[Grouchy]

Watched this last Wednesday. Like every other Payne film I've seen, I liked it but don't think there's anything in it that I haven't completely absorbed on a first viewing. His films are solid but I forget them pretty easily. As expected the actors are all excellent. I kept expecting Sheriff Truman from "Twin Peaks" to have a bigger role than just a silent cousin because in my head he's a huge star. I didn't realize until the ending that this was just in my head.

[Yxklyx]

I liked this a lot - probably my favorite Payne film.

Grouchy: According to Ontkean's imdb bio, he lives in Hawaii which is probably how he got the part.

[Morris Schæffer]

I liked this a lot - probably my favorite Payne film.

Grouchy: According to Ontkean's imdb bio, he lives in Hawaii which is probably how he got the part.

Sounds like the place to be if you wanna break into movies. :)

[Irish]

I didn't connect with this at all. Separately, I loved all the elements here, the actors, the photography, the music, the setting, the premise. But somehow when it all comes together it misses the mark.

I didnt believe anybody in this film was descendants of Hawaiian royalty.

I didn't believe any of the performances outside the kids; Clooney is punching above his weight, and Forrester, Bridges, and Lilliard are basically distracting cameos.

I thought the set up and premise were grand, and I liked how the decision about the land sale tied in thematically with the main plot, but every decision feels inconsequential.

If Clooney finds the realtor, his wife is still in a coma. He tells the guy off or he doesn't. He punches the guy or he doesn't. He invites the guy to say goodbye or he doesn't. Nothing changes and there's not much at stake for him in the journey.

If he sells the land or fights to keep it, who cares? In real life, that'd be a helluva decision. In movie terms, it's trivial and meaningless. This dude is already wealthy and hell, he looks like George Clooney! Either way, he wins. He becomes the much wealthier or the savior of the islands.

The kids are great. Originally I thought this would be more of an ensemble piece, because each of these characters are given a careful setup and it seems like they're going to have their own lives and stories. But thirty minutes in, the big reveal, and each of them becomes background furniture and fodder for Clooney driven dialogue scenes.

I don't think they milked the material for all it was worth. Great set up, mediocre follow through. It felt like a lot of this was resting on the crutch of the inherent sadness of Coma Mom, a character we never get to know.

[Lucky]

I was disappointed by this. Missed the emotional mark for me. Good performances across the board, well-written dialogue, but poor supporting characterization and little dramatic weight. Sid and Julie are awkwardly developed and ultimately pointless. It's also difficult to sympathize with this woman's condition when we are never allowed to know her and the bulk of what we hear about her is negative. The island buyout offered very little drama and a resolution I could have predicted within the first ten minutes. Made the whole movie feel a bit paint-by-numbers and inconsequential. The last shot was very accurate to how I felt while watching the entire movie.

Blase fare.

[Morris Schæffer]

I was disappointed by this. Missed the emotional mark for me. Good performances across the board, well-written dialogue, but poor supporting characterization and little dramatic weight. Sid and Julie are awkwardly developed and ultimately pointless. It's also difficult to sympathize with this woman's condition when we are never allowed to know her and the bulk of what we hear about her is negative. The island buyout offered very little drama and a resolution I could have predicted within the first ten minutes. Made the whole movie feel a bit paint-by-numbers and inconsequential. The last shot was very accurate to how I felt while watching the entire movie.

Blase fare.

Yeah, I too got the feeling this rather tragic premise didn't quite get the respect that it deserved. And when Clooney eventually broke down at the end, it was a little too late. Still, absolutely watchable.

[Raiders]

Do we really need to know anything about his comatose wife? We aren't in an way meant to feel sorry for her particular plight. The film is strictly about the way in which Matt is forced to deal and reconcile with his feelings about her following the accident. It is in many ways a film about perception, very explicitly in the way it shows Forster's blind love and devotion coupled with what is the actual reality. "Family" for Matt was a lot of grief and confusion and he treated it a lot like business, or so we get the impression, but the finale shows him embracing the idea of family, spawned I think by his viewing Forster's tenderness as well as a pivotal moment that I think gets overlooked, when his youngest daughter declares she never got to go camping on the land and there is that pregnant pause that kind of lingers. It is definitely the least schematic film Payne has made since Election, more specific and personal. It doesn't hit any big notes, but it felt much more genuine than probably any film Payne has made.

[Irish]

Do we really need to know anything about his comatose wife? We aren't in an way meant to feel sorry for her particular plight.

Given the setup, though, that expectation for empathy still exists in the audience.

Emotionally, it didn't feel like there was anything to relate to in this movie, anything to sort of "hang my hat" on.

[B-side]

It's just a thoroughly middlebrow indie drama. Everything about it is boilerplate and vanilla. I'm a big Clooney fan, and even he did nothing for me in this. I can't say I outright disliked it, because I didn't, but nothing about it strikes any deeper chords. I don't even agree that the photography or the premise were worth much.

[Pop Trash]

Once again, Raiders is the adult in the room.

I will concede that I'm a bit tired of Clooney's 'King Hollywood' shtick and that's probably why I liked this one a bit less than the other Paynes.

[soitgoes...]

I was disappointed by this. Missed the emotional mark for me. Good performances across the board, well-written dialogue, but poor supporting characterization and little dramatic weight. Sid and Julie are awkwardly developed and ultimately pointless. It's also difficult to sympathize with this woman's condition when we are never allowed to know her and the bulk of what we hear about her is negative. The island buyout offered very little drama and a resolution I could have predicted within the first ten minutes. Made the whole movie feel a bit paint-by-numbers and inconsequential. The last shot was very accurate to how I felt while watching the entire movie.

Blase fare.You're not suppose to sympathize with Elizabeth. You're suppose to sympathize with the people she connected to in life. How she was as a person matters less then how the people she left perceived her. That's why the scenes with her parents are so important. They give us another view of how she affected those around her. Also for what it's worth, Sid might be the best character in the film.

EDIT: Or what Raiders said.

[Lucky]

You're not suppose to sympathize with Elizabeth. You're suppose to sympathize with the people she connected to in life. How she was as a person matters less then how the people she left perceived her. That's why the scenes with her parents are so important. They give us another view of how she affected those around her. Also for what it's worth, Sid might be the best character in the film.

EDIT: Or what Raiders said.

Maybe not, but if I don't find her a sympathetic character it's difficult to care about the situation her family members are in. Aside from the younger daughter, it makes me happy that they are moving on.

Sid sucks all reality that the script tries to build. I found it difficult enough to accept that he was allowed to come along to the grandparents' house to break the news. Then, after he makes that remark to Matt in the car on the way home and barely gets scolded was enough for me. That kid should have been kicked to the curb. No man in this situation would stand for that from a child he didn't even know in the first place. He had no realistic place in this film.

[Raiders]

Maybe not, but if I don't find her a sympathetic character it's difficult to care about the situation her family members are in. Aside from the younger daughter, it makes me happy that they are moving on.

I'm not sure I can understand this, but fair enough. I think the ideas of loss, of moving on, of dealing with family, and finding closure are universal enough that it isn't necessary to actually make his wife a full-fledged character. She is the impetus, not the story.


Sid sucks all reality that the script tries to build. I found it difficult enough to accept that he was allowed to come along to the grandparents' house to break the news. Then, after he makes that remark to Matt in the car on the way home and barely gets scolded was enough for me. That kid should have been kicked to the curb. No man in this situation would stand for that from a child he didn't even know in the first place. He had no realistic place in this film.

Matt has no real authority, and he knows it, so sure, it all makes sense within the film's context which is all I would ever judge it on. Him finally exerting himself at the family gathering for the fate of the land is important in part because he stands up for himself.

[Lucky]

I'm not sure I can understand this, but fair enough. I think the ideas of loss, of moving on, of dealing with family, and finding closure are universal enough that it isn't necessary to actually make his wife a full-fledged character. She is the impetus, not the story.

I actually agree with you somewhat here. I didn't explain myself properly, chalk that up to posting while buzzed last night. The aspect that translates to this particular film that doesn't work are the emotional outburst scenes with a character one-on-one with her. Matt's breakdown at the end falls flat, Julie's outburst is awkward, and even the burial scene all fail to elicit an emotional response since we have no ties to her as an audience. The one moment that does work well is when the older daughter expressed her anger, but only because her father is in the room and it strengthens their relationship.

[Lucky]

I mean, compare this movie to something like the Buffy episode "The Body" and I think you'll get what I'm trying to say. The moments with the actual lifeless corpse are effective since the character means something to us. Even in that episode it doesn't completely rely on previous history when it uses the stark flashback to the Thanksgiving dinner scene during the opening act. You get an idea of the character and the relationships before the tie is cut. I think that's pivotal if you expect an audience to connect with the situation.

[eternity]

I mean, compare this movie to something like the Buffy episode "The Body" and I think you'll get what I'm trying to say. The moments with the actual lifeless corpse are effective since the character means something to us. Even in that episode it doesn't completely rely on previous history when it uses the stark flashback to the Thanksgiving dinner scene during the opening act. You get an idea of the character and the relationships before the tie is cut. I think that's pivotal if you expect an audience to connect with the situation.

They WANT us to be distant from the comatose character, like the characters grieving over her already were. She had a bad relationship with her daughters and a failing marriage with her husband. A lot of the movie hinges on these characters not only having to cope with the loss of a mother and a wife, but also coming to terms with the fact that already shoved her out or were shoved out before that.

[Lucky]

I'm not trying to argue the movie's intention, that's why I partially agree with Raider's post. I'm trying to explain why I didn't have an emotional connection with the movie and found it weak. The film still intends for those scenes to hit hard, and I tried to explain why they didn't.

[Irish]

I'm with Lucky (although saying so probably hurts his position, haha).

Raider's and eternity's comments are entirely valid, and while I see those insights in the film, I don't think they're as well supported by the material as they could have been.

The biggest stumbling blocks are the supporting cast, who are pretty much relegated to set-dressing status after the first act, and Clooney's performance. I didnt believe him, and didn't feel he pulled off the movie's emotional crescendoes.