+ another review of Keeping the Faith by Josh Jones
Short on Faith
The directorial debut of actor Edward Norton, Keeping the Faith
wastes his considerable talents and those of his co-stars on a
script that cannot hold many surprises for anyone who has been to
the movies in the last quarter-century.
Jake (Ben Stiller), Brian (Norton), and Anna (Jenna Elfman) are
chums in junior high school, three musketeers separated only when
Anna's family moves from New York to California. Several years
later, Jake's a Rabbi, Brian's a priest, and Anna's a workaholic
businesswoman who looks them up during an extended trip back to
the city. Sparks begin flying between Jake and Anna, but (yawn),
he's afraid that both his mother, Ruth (Anne Bancroft), and his
congregation will condemn him for dating a non-Jew. He and Brian
are known as "young rebels" of their faiths, so he's already
somewhat in trouble with the more conservative congregation
members. Meanwhile (stretch), Brian confronts for the first time
the temptation to break his vows, with Anna, unaware of the
affair she has begun with Jake.
If, right now, you're thinking you can predict every beat of this
romantic comedy, I assure you, you're correct. Ironically, a key
point in the film focuses on Anna's chiding Jake that he should
have more faith in his congregation's ability to accept his
unorthodox choices. After leaving the theater, I couldn't help
thinking someone should have told the filmmakers to have faith in
their audience to accept characters who spill out over cookie-cutter outlines. But the film instead keeps everyone in his or
her place, fretting over misunderstandings that would be resolved
if the characters would sit down and talk to each other honestly
and intelligently. And yet, for all the fretting, these
misunderstandings are eventually reduced to nothing by the ease
with which they're resolved, which means that the story and
characters are likewise reduced. We want to see these people
struggle with decisions; we want to know they're important. If
they're not, why tell us this story?
The film misses multiple opportunities to show these struggles.
At one point, Jake mentions an important conversation he
apparently had with Rabbi Lewis (Eli Wallach), a sympathetic
elder in his synagogue, as having helped him make a decision. If
it's so important, why haven't we seen it? The same question
applies to a scene between Anna and Ruth, which takes place off
camera. Since we don't see this discussion, a later change of
mind by one of the women appears (temporarily) unmotivated.
Omitting this exchange keeps something Anna is keeping from the
two men a secret from the audience as well. But when the secret
is revealed, you might think this is something that she has no
reason to conceal (and a pretty obvious reason to disclose).
This whole subplot-line is yet another instance where the film
sacrifices logic to make its characters misunderstand one
another.
Or, take the "boy is stupid-boy loses girl temporarily" scene
(please). This scene is filmed so that Jake and Anna rarely
appear in the same shot (when a film's storytelling works, you
might be carried away by it and less apt to notice curious
technical choices like that.). Here the fight, which would be
painful and emotional if we had been made to care about the two
lovers, merely reminds us that no connection between them has
been believably established. If we don't feel their anguish at
parting, there's no reason to worry whether or not they will get
back together again (of course, as noted, there also isn't a
whole lot of suspense about that).
Stiller (of whom, I confess, I've grown really tired lately, and
who should stay away from love triangles after this movie and
Reality Bites) and Elfman do not convincingly convey anything
more complex than generic conventions. They fall in love, have a
crisis, and make their way toward a happy ending for no other
reason than because the film is a romantic comedy. Norton is
actor enough that he could take Brian to the places he needs to
go in communicating his spiritual and career crisis, but he is
denied a visa by Stuart Blumberg's screenplay. Now, it may be
argued that because Keeping the Faith is a comedy, I shouldn't
expect it to grapple with the issues of life. But if the movie is
going to raise topics about which most people have strong beliefs
one way or another, and on top of that, ask them to care about
characters' decisions concerning these topics, then it has an
obligation to deal with such topics truthfully.
A young and supposedly hip Rabbi, Jake is still under his
mother's thumb and those of his congregation. Another of the
many questions the film never answers is, if he is to be a
spiritual leader, why don't we see more qualities of spirituality
or leadership in him? Jake seems to be a fine youth counselor
he has some nice moments helping a boy prepare for his bar
mitzvah but his sermons, like Brian's, have more of stand-up
comedy routine in them than any real moral authority. Also never
dealt with is the fact that he is distressingly ready to enter
into a "relationship" with Anna when she claims all she wants is
his friendship and as she puts it, to "jump" him once in a while.
And he is just as quickly ready to reject her when she wants
something more. Another actor might be able to play against the
actions of his character, to show us that Jake's head and heart
are at war. Stiller never does, and Jake never gains my sympathy
as a result.
Brian is equally volatile, or so it seems. He's a Catholic
priest who is suddenly ready to renounce his vows, willing to
give up the faith to which he has devoted his life for a woman.
This might be a fine idea for a dramatic or comedic predicament:
we might identify with Brian, who is asking Anna for love, and
so, risking a lot (as a priest much more than the average
person). Now add that Anna rejects him in favor of his best
friend, and that Brian realizes that this best friend and Anna
who happens to be his other best friend have been keeping a
secret from him. There's a lot of stuff to deal with there. But
the movie tries to wipe away the pain such revelations would have
to cause like a bead of sweat. This trivializes the characters.
The most serious question Brian faces is his faith weak if he
is so easily tempted? is raised but never resolved, not even
as unsatisfactorily as the Jake-and-Anna storyline.
So, the film fails both in its potential for drama and for
comedy. Virtually every scene is predictable, down to some of
the specific jokes. A running gag concerns Jake and Brian's
frustration with Anna's ever-present cell-phone. When she and
Jake are walking down the street and it rings, it takes but a
moment's thought on your part to register the mailbox on the
corner and know that he is going to pluck it from her hand and
toss it inside. I admit I laughed in some places one inspired
moment has Rabbi Jake bringing a Harlem gospel choir to liven up
his services but the laughs came with no affection.
There's nothing wrong with treating people of any faith, or
treating their faith itself, with irreverence: Radio Days and
Oh, God! are perfectly wonderful examples of films that do so.
But if a film asks me to believe that its protagonists are men
whose religion is so important to them that they've devoted their
lives to it and that abandoning (or even reevaluating it) is a
matter of some concern for them, then that movie had better give
me a few moments showing how and why that faith is so important
to them. You see, I'm not going to take it on faith.