Fruitvale
Station is a modest, largely low key film about the last day of Oscar Grant,
a real person. Oscar is 22 years old, he plans to celebrate New Year’s, he goes
to the grocery store, he gets food for his mother’s birthday party, he argues
with his girlfriend, he struggles to avoid the life that previously led him to
prison, he picks up his daughter from day care, he charms a shop owner into
letting his girlfriend use the restroom, and he gets shot in the back and
killed while restrained or while struggling against being restrained by a BART
cop who claims to have wanted to Taser him because he appeared to be reaching
for something.
Recreated through interviews with
his family and friends, Fruitvale is
content to follow around Oscar, as played by Michael B. Jordan (who really
should have gotten a nomination), on a day that should have been prosaic and
typical. This was the intent of director Ryan Coogler—to give Oscar the weight
he lost when he became an easily reducible archetype for the 24 hour news
beast. Before Oscar Grant was young black man with a record, shot by
authorities under dubious circumstances, he was a multifaceted person, and
Coogler’s desire was to present him as such, unburdened by the narrative of him
a typical thug, or a similarly dehumanizing martyr. The focus remains on Grant,
ending not long after his death, well before the officer who killed him was
sentenced to 2 years with time served, the ensuing protests, and the hijacking
of those protests into riots, and the further context that would have distanced
us from Oscar as a person by layering on the tale of Oscar Grant, news item.
It’s, too be sure, a modest purpose.
So modest, some ask if there is any value in making a point (“This human being
was a human being”) so self-evidently true. And, the review from the AV Club
put it: “If America needs a movie to make that much clear, God help us.”
Inevitably, as I looked over Fruitvale Station’s reviews, I’d find
comments of similar theme, if varying structure, taking the film to task for
glossing over Grant’s criminal history (which, incidentally, reveals that the
commenter had not actually seen the film). The point of such comments? Generously,
to the people who make them, it’s apparently ok for someone with a record to be
executed at any time for any reason, because that record is reason enough. I
don’t much feel like extrapolating the less generous take.
That AV Club review went up on July
11, 2013. Two days later, a jury would acquit the murderer of Trayvon Martin
(another case where we “don’t know” because we “weren’t there”). I’m here,
almost exactly 8 months later, reading about Jordan Davis, who was killed
because his murderer “hates that thug music.” For something so known, our
society has a real problem
In such an environment, when murder victims
of a certain color are subjected to scrutiny and second-guesses and character
assassinations and campaigns of discrediting on the same scale sexual assault
victims are subjected to, when poor Photoshop jobs playing to racial
stereotypes traced back to Neo-Nazi groups get play on mainstream news
networks, to me, at least, the modest aims of Fruitvale Station have an obvious value.
Award season fare has a long
tradition of simplistic takes on charged racial history, with an aim toward
making white people feel good. A few people saw that tradition at work in Steve
McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave, adapted
from the memoir of Solomon Northup, played by Chiwetel Ejiofor,
northern-residing son of a freedman, who was kidnapped and sold into slavery in
the south, where he remained for 12 years (as you may have guessed). But, what’s
the big deal, when we all know that slavery is bad?
Well, there are still a few fringe
elements who’d disagree (or, at least, they’d assert it wasn’t that bad), they’re so fringe as to not
really be worth addressing, even if a lot of them hold political office.
Rather, there’s a worrying lack of intellectual rigor behind asserting 12 Years a Slave is just about how
slavery is bad.
Quite frankly, it’s absurdly
reductionist, like saying War and Peace is
just about, well, you know. It’s the sort of statement born out of the good and
evil binary sort of thinking that plenty of lesser movies have been eager to
employ for effective but ultimately cheap gravitas, and the sort of statement that
makes it easy for we modern Americans to divorce ourselves from the past. I
even unconsciously did it right there—our past, that should read. Slavery is
bad, and we know that, so we are not the obvious villains who perpetuated it.
When I say 12 Years a Slave is not binary, that is not to say it introduces
some shade of grey, or that its nuance is in ambiguity. Rather, its nuance is
in showing how thoroughly slavery’s evil had infected the environment, what its
madness had done to everyone in that society. It’s even hard to see Northup’s
northern friends, who eventually see him released, as particularly noble as
they leave uncounted others behind. While historically accurate, it still feels
deliberate and pointed that Solomon’s best white ally is Canadian—he earlier
confided in a former overseer, forced by poverty into field work, and
traumatized by past actions as an overseer, who still betrays Solomon.
While the deranged, cruel,
booze-swilling rapist slave owner Epps, played by Michael Fassbender, is the
most fearsome and threatening to Solomon Northup, sitting in the film-bathed
darkness, he was easy for me to dismiss—he was, after all, a type I’d seen
plenty. The bad guy. Slavery is bad, and there was the bad guy profiting from
its perpetuation. No, the figure who frightened me was Ford, the one played by
Benedict Cumberbatch, who speaks openly of slavery’s wrongness and the human
dignity of its victims even as he profits from its practice. While in his memoir
Northup would write admiringly of Ford, it’s tough with modern eyes to see
authentic benevolence or respect from someone who claims ownership rights over
other human beings. Ford may not whip or beat his slaves, and he even may not
allow others to do so either, but he seems no better for that. He seems
dangerously foolish, deluded, and hypocritical. It’s easy to separate from the
snarling, beastly monsters, but the monster who just doesn’t swim against the
tide it tough to shake.
No comments:
Post a Comment