|
Film > Reviews > Gabriele Muccino > The Pursuit of Happyness ![]() The Pursuit of HappynessDirector: Gabriele MuccinoCast: Will Smith, Thandie Newton, Jaden Smith, Brian Howe, James Karen, Dan Castellaneta(Columbia Pictures, 2006) Rated: PG-13 US theatrical release date: 15 December 2006 (General release) By Cynthia FuchsPopMatters Film and TV Editor Running Man
Of the many sad scenes in The Pursuit of Happyness, the saddest might be when Captain America is left behind. Christopher (Jaden Christopher Syre Smith) has been hanging on by threads to his five-year-old dignity and hope. But though he wants badly to trust his father, to believe that their current homelessness is just temporary, it’s getting harder by the day. And then one afternoon while running for the bus, he drops his favorite toy. Dad won’t let him stop or go back. Christopher doesn’t make a fuss, but his smooshed up little face reveals his despair. The shot cuts to Captain America on the pavement, receding into smallness as the bus pulls away. It’s so sad. Pursuit of Happyness indulges in such sentimental moments more than a few times. And while its great big heart is surely in the right place, and it spends just enough time contemplating little Smith’s perfectly poignant expressions, the movie has a hard time recovering from these moments—especially when it pairs them with its other favorite shots, in which Christopher’s dad Chris (Jaden’s dad Will) is running down a sidewalk full speed. The action images suggest the weak hold Chris has on his life, as he’s always late for wherever he needs to be, and the looming cost of that lateness is always more than he can bear. But they also indicate his drive and strength. He’s a movie hero, after all. Set in 1981 San Francisco, Pursuit begins as Chris and his wife Linda (Thandie Newton) are having trouble. She works double shifts doing hotel laundry; he’s trying to sell bone density scanners (specialty medical machines that, as Chris admits in voiceover, are too expensive for most doctors to buy). Ronald Reagan speaks on a background television as they argue: “The federal budget is out of control and we face runaway deficits,” intones the president as Linda wonders when Chris will pay the taxes. Lining up Chris’ situation with that of Reagan’s “nation” is deceptive here, given that Chris is a black man without a job, and the administration’s economic policies were notoriously injurious to working- and underclass black men. At the same time, though, the context is fitting, as Chris is a great believer in the “American Dream.” Linda is demonized repeatedly, by her mad face, her cigarette-smoking, and her dismissal of Chris’ latest efforts with a grim “Whatever.” By time she abandons the family, Chris is looking pathetic but also so dedicated and noble that her agreement to leave Christopher with his unemployed father seems more inevitable than shocking. Her departure is precipitated by Chris’ announcement that he has taken an unpaid internship with Dean Witter: “Salesman to intern’s backwards,” she observes, angrily. Yes, but. Having seen brokers descend the stairs from their office in thrilling slow motion, Chris is convinced that they’re all “damn happy,” an idea for which he provides no specific definition but apparently, for him it has everything to do with money. He’s smart and good with numbers, he figures, having proved that much by solving a Rubik’s cube in front of a Dean Witter broker who then becomes his champion. As he studies and scrapes by, barely earning enough each week to pay for meals, Chris tells himself he will soon be walking in slow motion and smiling, along with all those white people he saw on the Dean Witter stairs. You know he’ll get there, because Pursuit is “inspired by” the story of the real Chris Gardner, who not only ended up with his own brokerage firm, which he eventually sold for millions, but also wrote a book and told his story on Oprah. En route to his riches, however, Chris puts cute Christopher through something of a wringer: evicted from their apartment, they scale down to a motel, until Chris can’t make that rent either, and they’re sleeping in homeless shelters or, on one occasion, a subway station bathroom. This sad scene features alternating shots of Chris’ tear-streaked face and Christopher’s deep-sleeping form, as someone pounds on the door, Chris’ foot extended to keep the intruder at bay. While he’s the protective father here, he’s also particularly abject: if his gamble had not paid off, he might have eventually been cited for child endangerment. Chris’ tears signal his understanding of the plight he’s made for Christopher, as well as his resolve to tough this out. His reactions to Christopher’s tears run a gamut from anger to horror to despair: when the child pouts after dad tells him he’ll never be a pro basketball player or cries at being locked out of their motel room, dad looks aptly abject, apologizes immediately, and assuages his son’s fears. “Don’t ever let someone tell you you can’t do something,” he instructs. “People gotta dream. You gotta protect it.” The boy looks up, aware of his dad’s inconsistencies (later he sees dad lying to a potential client, manipulating an invitation to a 49ers game, and his quizzical look suggests he’s learning another sort of lesson). Repeatedly, Chris solicits his son’s approval. “Do you trust me?” he asks, and the boy invariably says, “Yes, I trust you,” granting Chris another day to pursue his happiness. This concept of trust is central to Chris’ self-image. His voiceover ponders unironically what he sees as the great American meritocracy, by way of Thomas Jefferson’s phrasing for the Declaration of Independence. He’s especially impressed that the founding father was wise enough to see the “pursuit” was all that might be deemed a right, at least for those considered entire people at the time (as opposed to, say, those considered 3/5ths people). It’s useful for Chris’ rather Reaganite worldview that the film doesn’t deal with racism, on institutional or individual levels. Here again, Chris’ repeated races through crowded streets to make appointments externalize his perpetual internal crisis. At one point, he’s actually hit by a car, slammed hard and thumping onto the hood, arriving at his office with a bruises and a limp and without a shoe, the predictable jibes from the white interns annoying but also telling: he’s not one of them, he has to run for the bus. And yet, the running man shots also evoke other Will Smiths—the one who trained in snowy streets as Ali, or whose shirt popped open as he chased criminals in Bad Boys. Their physicality was a show of power, as opposed to an indication of class. In Pursuit, class can be overcome, of course. Insisting that all opportunities are available to everyone, the movie has Chris running to catch something, to triumph over adversity and prove that the system works, at least for those who are, as Smith says, “rich with faith.” It’s pretty to think so. As quick and resolute as Chris may be, he’s still caught up in the fiction around him, The Pursuit of Happyness, which is not nearly so smart. 15 December 2006The Pursuit of Happyness - Trailer Related Articles
Seven PoundsBy Cynthia Fuchs19.Dec.08 Equally afflicted by an old-school weepies affect and new-agey self-righteousness, Seven Pounds is by turns clumsy and overbearing.
Exquisite AgonyBy Chris Barsanti18.Dec.08 This holiday season, Mickey Rourke (in The Wrestler) and Will Smith (Seven Pounds) suffer for all us sinners. |
|
Comments
Too bad your review was not as thoughtful as the movie. With your attempts to find fault with the movie for not being racist enough, you miss the point. This is based on a true-to-life story of success—Winning over the adversity. If you continue to view the world as a race struggle, you will always miss the potential success that is available to all who lay aside the impossible to grasp it.
Comment by David from Salt Lake City, UT — December 15, 2006 @ 3:52 pm
Re: “Lining up Chris’ situation with that of Reagan’s ‘nation’ is deceptive here, given that Chris is a black man without a job, and the administration’s economic policies were notoriously injurious to working- and underclass black men.”
What a shame that Ms. Fuchs can’t seem to throttle back her obvious hatred of President Reagan long enough to write a review about a movie that isn’t even about politics. To make matters worse, she states her misguided policical opinions as fact - which they certainly are not.
Comment by David — December 15, 2006 @ 10:37 pm
This movie is one of the best examples of one man’s triumph in the face of frustration, self-doubt, and adverse circumstances. As I watched I felt a real kinship with “Chris” - as can any one who has felt they are not understood, appreciated, or face unfairness. One of the best movies I have ever seen…
As for Ms. Fuch’s review, it is a partisan hack job - with no appreciation to the unique opportunities given to Americans through our constitution. Ms. Fuch’s critique can only be the rantings of a cynic of America and freedom.
Comment by Mike Johnson from Omaha, Nebraska — December 17, 2006 @ 4:33 pm
I thought your analysis of the movie was very accurate. Thank you for your critical assessment.
Comment by Fallon Wilson — January 1, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
Having just moved away from San Francisco last summer, this movie’s ragged jaunt around the city really brought back nostalgia, especially because of how closely it mimicked my own experience there. I remember when I got a part time weekend job in San Rafael, and had moved prematurely to San Francisco, where I was effectively living out of my 1993 Accord, spending nights in a hostel. One day I got into a drunken accident and broke my radius, and had no money to get a cast. I was making under 10 bucks an hour…in SAN FRANCISCO. A few days later I was kicked out of the hostel for some childish indiscretions. I found myself driving aimlessly around the city, trying to find a hostel that was cheap enough for me to stay at. I had no savings. I had nothing. My car had problems. I was scared. I soon started cleaning rooms at this new hostel, in the SOMA, a dodgey area to be sure. I tried various jobs, like working at Starbuck’s, but I could find nothing that would pay enough to get me out of the toilet cleaning I had been doing for MONTHS at the hostel. Finally, just before I was to move in with a friend, I got a temp agency job, at an imaging clinic in Oakland, where I made 16 bucks an hour…enough to live on, even in the uber-expensive city of San Francisco. Every day, I did a 90 minute commute from western San Francisco (near Sea Cliff) to the Rock Ridge BART station at the border of Berkeley and Oakland. I did it both ways. I can’t even count the times I stood there waiting for what seemed like ages for my train, or a bus. I can’t even begin to count the times I was “running”...running to catch that bus, so I could make it to work on time, or make a new job interview and get a better job. I finally got a job making just under 20 bucks an hour for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. But even then, with bad credit, my apartment options were limited. For awhile I was stuck in an extremely noisy, damp and moldy shack of a studio apartment on south Mission Street. Only after months of dealing with this hellishness did I finally make it completely “out”, and into a nice cozy place near Dolores Park.
Everything about this movie is palpable for me. I feel disgusted by this author’s slanted piece, mocking its optimism and the endless opportunities to be found for the hard working. Contrary to myth, what any smart businessman cares about isn’t the color of man’s skin, but the color of the money he brings in for the company - and that’s exactly the spirit of Smith’s business associates in this film. This author believes that Reagan was responsible for “harming” blacks by making the market more free. Let me tell you, as someone who has grown up in poverty in rural Kansas, and endured foster care, group homes, physical abuse, alcoholic parents, and every kind of hardship imaginable (in this prosperous country, at least) if you are hard working and decent, you can make something of yourself here without having to take from others. We don’t need government to tell land lords how much they can charge for rent (like they did my former landlord in SF), or to tell business owners how much they must pay their employees. What we need is freedom, hope, and common decency, as embodied by Will Smith’s riveting portrayal of this emblem of America’s promise.
And beyond any message, perhaps that’s the most brilliant thing about this movie. Smith is on fire. He lives and breathes this part. This role finally propels him to a point of unquestionable stand-out talent. He’s an actor’s actor. Not a lot of movies make me cry, but this one did. I just wanted to hug Smith’s character, and exchange that knowing gaze. I know what it’s like to question your very existence, and make it from the point of street life and questioning your own sanity, to having PTO and health insurance, and drinking at office parties. I’m no genius. I’m just an ordinary American.
Comment by Clay Shentrup from Seattle, WA — January 30, 2007 @ 6:21 pm